saluney
New member
imported post
The event is run by the City of Suffolk Annually.I usually CC as i haven't seen any Ocers there yet.
The event is run by the City of Suffolk Annually.I usually CC as i haven't seen any Ocers there yet.
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Peanut Fest At Suffolk this weekend
- Thread starter saluney
- Start date
SaltH2OHokie
Regular Member
imported post
2A Luney wrote:
2A Luney wrote:
You walk in ahead of me and see how it goes and I'll make my CC/OC carry decision based on your level of success :lol:
curtiswr
Regular Member
imported post
It should be okay to OC there. Public festival on public property isn't it? If they (City of Suffolk) were to say no guns allowed then that would be breaking the state's preemption law, I think.
It should be okay to OC there. Public festival on public property isn't it? If they (City of Suffolk) were to say no guns allowed then that would be breaking the state's preemption law, I think.
SaltH2OHokie
Regular Member
imported post
From the website:
"Suffolk Festivals, Inc.
A 501(3)(c) Organization
The Annual Suffolk Peanut Fest is managed by Suffolk Festivals, Inc., a non-profit organization operating a 50-acre festival site adjacent to the Suffolk Executive Airport."
Sounds like it's separate from the city...
From the website:
"Suffolk Festivals, Inc.
A 501(3)(c) Organization
The Annual Suffolk Peanut Fest is managed by Suffolk Festivals, Inc., a non-profit organization operating a 50-acre festival site adjacent to the Suffolk Executive Airport."
Sounds like it's separate from the city...
imported post
Sponsered/promoted by the city, maybe on city property, invite everybody - but deny you your rights under the 2nd Amendment.
This is where I disagree with "property rights."
If you invite the general public onto your private property or private event, you IMO become quasi-public and should be allowed only those restrictions otherwise permitted to public entities = state preemption.
There is an interesting case in California wherein the question of OCing is suggested as being a 1st Amendment right - not unlike carrying a sign. Can't find the link right now but it is on OCDO.
Don't really want to spark a debate on this here - just expressing my frustration.
Yata hey
Sponsered/promoted by the city, maybe on city property, invite everybody - but deny you your rights under the 2nd Amendment.
This is where I disagree with "property rights."
If you invite the general public onto your private property or private event, you IMO become quasi-public and should be allowed only those restrictions otherwise permitted to public entities = state preemption.
There is an interesting case in California wherein the question of OCing is suggested as being a 1st Amendment right - not unlike carrying a sign. Can't find the link right now but it is on OCDO.
Don't really want to spark a debate on this here - just expressing my frustration.
Yata hey
SaltH2OHokie
Regular Member
imported post
I can't fully agree here...being there is a privledge, not a right. If I hosted a party, and put out an open invitation, I could (and would) still kick someone out if they did something I didn't like. That would be my perogative as a party "host" just as it would be the Peanut Fest's (if it is indeed privately run) to do the same.
I might not agree with their rules, but I don't disagree with their ability to make them (again, running on the hypothetical assumption that it is not put on by the city on city property...which it very well may be.)
I can't fully agree here...being there is a privledge, not a right. If I hosted a party, and put out an open invitation, I could (and would) still kick someone out if they did something I didn't like. That would be my perogative as a party "host" just as it would be the Peanut Fest's (if it is indeed privately run) to do the same.
I might not agree with their rules, but I don't disagree with their ability to make them (again, running on the hypothetical assumption that it is not put on by the city on city property...which it very well may be.)
ed
Founder's Club Member - Moderator
imported post
SaltH2OHokie wrote:
SaltH2OHokie wrote:
or had received ANY public funding
DocV
Regular Member
imported post
Just got back from the Peanut Fest. Had a great time with the wifely woman and my kids. Didn't see any signs posted. It was on the airport proper or at least within the security fences of the airport.
DocV
Just got back from the Peanut Fest. Had a great time with the wifely woman and my kids. Didn't see any signs posted. It was on the airport proper or at least within the security fences of the airport.
DocV
imported post
SaltH2OHokie wrote:
2nd Amendment praticing people are not a "protected class" but we are as a group regularly discriminated against - not a legal but personal opinion.
You as a private individual may "discriminate" anyway you chose in your home or in the selection of your friends but not as a business or in/on a public entity. The latter should IMHO be the same for quasi-public. Example: The dress code has so evolved that shopping centers, restaurants etc. cannot and do not enforce the standards of 30 years ago, even though they are private property.
I do NOT expect everyone to agree - my intent is just to cause some perhaps new thinking.
Yata hey
SaltH2OHokie wrote:
I fully understand the concept; nevertheless, You (I) are not regularly and routinely inviting the public to a place of business of any type - you are not in the business of dealing with/inviting the public. You, as a private individual, can handle the question "by invitation only."
2nd Amendment praticing people are not a "protected class" but we are as a group regularly discriminated against - not a legal but personal opinion.
You as a private individual may "discriminate" anyway you chose in your home or in the selection of your friends but not as a business or in/on a public entity. The latter should IMHO be the same for quasi-public. Example: The dress code has so evolved that shopping centers, restaurants etc. cannot and do not enforce the standards of 30 years ago, even though they are private property.
I do NOT expect everyone to agree - my intent is just to cause some perhaps new thinking.
Yata hey