Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: State Preemption and NVRPA

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Chantilly, VA, ,
    Posts
    73

    Post imported post

    I am getting married in the summer at Algonkian Regional Park in Sterling. Since we are having a really fancy photographer, I figured what better way to display my 2A views than by having some fun OC pictures with the groomsmen on the golf course.

    Of course we are keeping this classy with tuxes. (I'm thinking my SS 1911...)

    If I understand the VA state preemption correctly, since the venue is under the Northern Virginia Regional Park Authority we can not be asked to leave simply because we are OC-ing.

    Thoughts?

  2. #2
    Lone Star Veteran DrMark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Hampton Roads, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,553

    Post imported post

    I don't really have any insight to add, but I did want to say...

    CONGRATS!!
    :celebrate


  3. #3
    Regular Member 2a4all's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Newport News, VA, ,
    Posts
    1,586

    Post imported post

    wchiang wrote:
    I am getting married in the summer at Algonkian Regional Park in Sterling. Since we are having a really fancy photographer, I figured what better way to display my 2A views than by having some fun OC pictures with the groomsmen on the golf course.

    Of course we are keeping this classy with tuxes. (I'm thinking my SS 1911...)

    If I understand the VA state preemption correctly, since the venue is under the Northern Virginia Regional Park Authority we can not be asked to leave simply because we are OC-ing.

    Thoughts?
    You could invite user to OC at your wedding.

    Let me add my congrats, as well.
    A law-abiding citizen should be able to carry his personal protection firearm anywhere that an armed criminal might go.

    Member VCDL, NRA

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Virginia USA, ,
    Posts
    1,688

    Post imported post

    let me be the voice of reason here



    RUN WHILE YOU STILL CAN!!





  5. #5
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Spotsylvania County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    700

    Post imported post

    NRVPA was created by the Park Authorities Act. Therefore, it is subject to § 15.2-915 (aka firearms preemption).
    ---

  6. #6
    Regular Member Neplusultra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Christiansburg, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,228

    Post imported post

    wchiang wrote:
    I am getting married in the summer at Algonkian Regional Park in Sterling. Since we are having a really fancy photographer, I figured what better way to display my 2A views than by having some fun OC pictures with the groomsmen on the golf course.

    Of course we are keeping this classy with tuxes. (I'm thinking my SS 1911...)

    If I understand the VA state preemption correctly, since the venue is under the Northern Virginia Regional Park Authority we can not be asked to leave simply because we are OC-ing.

    Thoughts?
    Call the park up. I don't see how they could exclude you.

  7. #7
    Regular Member paramedic70002's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Franklin, VA, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,448

    Post imported post

    When I got engaged, all the married guys told me not to do it. I thought they were kidding.
    "Each worker carried his sword strapped to his side." Nehemiah 4:18

    Guns Save Lives. Paramedics Save Lives. But...
    Paramedics With Guns Scare People!

  8. #8
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Post imported post

    Your situation does present an interesting coincidence of circumstances.

    1. Usually, no good can come from asking if you may carry. It puts you on the defensive, and if they say no, are you going to stand there and argue with them?

    2. Considering the unique, one-time opportunity nature of your planned event, and the difficulty in changing plans at the last minute, you do assume a fair amount of risk to the success of your plans, should some over-eager ranger type fellow come along with his chest sticking out.

    Perhaps the best solution would be to ask without really asking. Drop them a letter, and ask for their photography policy, and while you're asking that, toss in a sentence to the effect of "it appears that the park belongs to the NVRPA, so does that mean that you are subject to all the normal state park rules and regs.... etc, etc, come up with some nice words that don't have "gun" or "firearms" but that you can take with you on that day, along with a copy of the Preemption law, to give johnny ranger a short, quick and sweet education.

    If they reply with a list of rules, or point you to a web site, etc, that says no firearms, then you'll have to address that specific situation with them, but this would hopefully be in time to resolve before the day in question.

    JMHO, and IANAL.

    TFred


  9. #9
    Regular Member possumboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Dumfries, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,090

    Post imported post

    I've been through this before...

    http://www.nvrpa.org/html/index.php?pg=aboutnvrpa.html

    NVRPA does not own the parks. The parks are "Through your regional parks..."

    "Today's Regional Park Authority represents three counties and three cities --Arlington County, Fairfax County, Loudoun County, the City of Alexandria, the City of Falls Church and the City of Fairfax. Regional Park Authority staff, volunteer board members appointed from each jurisdiction and many friends of the regional parks working together have preserved more than 10,000 acres of the rolling and wooded Virginia countryside for you and created a priceless legacy for future generations."

    NVRPA does not own the parks. The parks still receive monies from the local government and are owned by the public.

    As for the photo, I've been there and done that. I had a long conversation with a park's director and after they did some checking they were forced to agree that I did not need to get everyone's permission to take video and photo on public property.

    They were trying to tell me I could not come in a take photos of something my kids were doing because the other parents did not sign permission for me to take photos.

    This is a little OT:

    The reasoning behind the photo ban was to "protect the children". Later in the conversation, after a lot of "I'm not saying you can't, I'm just asking why" setup they asked why I carry a gun. I told them it was to protect my children. Someone thinking about taking a child will look twice before taking one from an armed parent. Most likely they will move on to another child.

    They said "Well that doesn't seem fair!"

    NO, really, that is what they said. Like my child should be in as much danger as other children because their parents choose not to take every step available to protect them.

    The problem with the "not fair" statement is that it was not the first time I had heard it.

  10. #10
    Regular Member possumboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Dumfries, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,090

    Post imported post

    I also fount this about FFX County from a 2006 thread:

    http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/view_to...mp;forum_id=54

    WOW, have I been on here for that long? I'm enjoying being back.

  11. #11
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Post imported post

    possumboy wrote:
    The reasoning behind the photo ban was to "protect the children". Later in the conversation, after a lot of "I'm not saying you can't, I'm just asking why" setup they asked why I carry a gun. I told them it was to protect my children. Someone thinking about taking a child will look twice before taking one from an armed parent. Most likely they will move on to another child.

    They said "Well that doesn't seem fair!"

    NO, really, that is what they said. Like my child should be in as much danger as other children because their parents choose not to take every step available to protect them.

    The problem with the "not fair" statement is that it was not the first time I had heard it.
    And that pretty much sums up the problem with government today. You were violating the all but written rule: 'you must be a victim', so 'we can be the nanny'.

    One of those times when you wish you had thought of the perfect response, something along the lines of "Quite to the contrary, it's perfectly fair, that is what the Second Amendment is all about!"

    TFred

  12. #12
    Regular Member possumboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Dumfries, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,090

    Post imported post

    TFred wrote:
    And that pretty much sums up the problem with government today. You were violating the all but written rule: 'you must be a victim', so 'we can be the nanny'.

    One of those times when you wish you had thought of the perfect response, something along the lines of "Quite to the contrary, it's perfectly fair, that is what the Second Amendment is all about!"

    TFred
    My reply was:

    They have the same choice I do, if they don't love and care for their children as much as I do, then I feel sorry for those children. I will take every available option I have to protect my children. I will also not tell others how to protect theirs.

    That bristled a few feathers. Especially the ones that thought I was endangering the children with my gun.

  13. #13
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Post imported post

    possumboy wrote:
    TFred wrote:
    And that pretty much sums up the problem with government today. You were violating the all but written rule: 'you must be a victim', so 'we can be the nanny'.

    One of those times when you wish you had thought of the perfect response, something along the lines of "Quite to the contrary, it's perfectly fair, that is what the Second Amendment is all about!"

    TFred
    My reply was:

    They have the same choice I do, if they don't love and care for their children as much as I do, then I feel sorry for those children. I will take every available option I have to protect my children. I will also not tell others how to protect theirs.

    That bristled a few feathers. Especially the ones that thought I was endangering the children with my gun.
    You could have been the Virginia version of Meleanie Hain!

    TFred

  14. #14
    Accomplished Advocate user's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Northern Piedmont of Virginia
    Posts
    2,373

    Post imported post

    rlh2005 wrote:
    NRVPA was created by the Park Authorities Act.* Therefore, it is subject to § 15.2-915 (aka firearms preemption).
    Right. That code section basically says that only the Commonwealth can enact restrictions on the ownership, possession, and use of guns. The statute creating the powers of the park authority, cited in the quotation, includes this statement of powers, "17. To adopt such rules and regulations from time to time, not in conflict with the laws of this Commonwealth, concerning the use of properties under its control as will tend to the protection of such property and the public thereon."

    The park authority is, in effect, a municipal corporation, in the same way a town is a municipal corporation, and has no powers not specifically granted by charter or general law.

    Though here's another thing - the local jurisdiction does have the power to control hunting on parkland, and loaded weapons in relation to hunting. But that's it, as far as I can determine.
    Virginia Code § 29.1-527: Counties, cities or towns may prohibit hunting near public schools and county, city, town or regional parks. — The governing body of any county, city or town may prohibit by ordinance, shooting or hunting with a firearm, or prohibit hunters from traversing an area while in possession of a loaded firearm, within 100 yards of any property line of a public school or a county, city, town or regional park. The governing body may, in such ordinance, provide that any violation thereof shall be a Class 4 misdemeanor. Nothing in this section shall give any county, city or town the authority to enforce such an ordinance on lands within a national or state park or forest, or wildlife management area. (1985, c. 485, § 29-144.5:1; 1987, c. 488.)
    Daniel L. Hawes - 540 347 2430 - HTTP://www.VirginiaLegalDefense.com

    By the way, nothing I say on this website as "user" should be taken as either advertising for attorney services or legal advice, merely personal opinion. Everyone having a question regarding the application of law to the facts of their situation should seek the advice of an attorney competent in the subject matter of the issues presented and licensed to practice in the relevant state.

  15. #15
    Accomplished Advocate user's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Northern Piedmont of Virginia
    Posts
    2,373

    Post imported post

    2a4all wrote:
    wchiang wrote:
    I am getting married in the summer at Algonkian Regional Park in Sterling. Since we are having a really fancy photographer, I figured what better way to display my 2A views than by having some fun OC pictures with the groomsmen on the golf course.

    Of course we are keeping this classy with tuxes. (I'm thinking my SS 1911...)

    If I understand the VA state preemption correctly, since the venue is under the Northern Virginia Regional Park Authority we can not be asked to leave simply because we are OC-ing.

    Thoughts?
    You could invite user to OC at your wedding.

    Let me add my congrats, as well.
    Hey, that might be fun! I never pass up a free meal.
    Daniel L. Hawes - 540 347 2430 - HTTP://www.VirginiaLegalDefense.com

    By the way, nothing I say on this website as "user" should be taken as either advertising for attorney services or legal advice, merely personal opinion. Everyone having a question regarding the application of law to the facts of their situation should seek the advice of an attorney competent in the subject matter of the issues presented and licensed to practice in the relevant state.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    Regional park authorites may not ban the carry of weapons for self-defense. If you see a sign that says otherwise, write a polite letter and tell them they lack such authority and need to removethe sign. Quote the state code. Meantime, go about your business and enjoy the park.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •