• 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.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • 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.

Okay, need some help with a festival.

altajava

altajava

Newbie
Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Messages
228
Location
Occupied Virginia, USA
imported post

attachment.php


WOOHOO! Another event I don't have to wear pants to.:shock:

I would like to join you in protest at the Red Cross thing but it leaves me a little concerned as lawyers fees are not in my budget right now.
 
skidmark

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
imported post

So it seems that the Red Cross is going for the Neuremburg Defense (sorry about Godwinning the thread) - the City told me it was OK to do this (infringe on rights by violating preemption).

Beginning with IANAL and certainly not Ed's attorney, it is a matter of law that you need standing to get into court. You have toshow thatthere was a right or privilege existing, and then allege that it was denied or abridged. As the written (and presumably posted at the entrances) policy states no weapons the Red Cross is on firm ground (so far) when it refuses to sellEd an admission based on Ed's "violation" of the posted policy. Ed would have to get documentation that the Red cRoss refused to sell him an admission, then assert some right or privelege that was violated or abridged by refusing to sell him an admission.

Ed might have some room to go for that, as the Red Cross has a federal charter that IIRC prohibits discrimination based on the usual classes (race, sex, national origin, etc.). Ed could try for discrimination based on national origin using the 14th Amendment, claiming to be a citizen of the USA and therefore having a right under the 2nd Amendment to bear arms, and admission was refused because he was discriminated against as an American citizen. He could also try under the Virginia Constitution for a simultaneous but separate state claim.

The other possibility is, as Ed mentioned, to knowingly violate the policy by entering concealed, then change to open carry and get ejected under the posted policy. This opens up the argument that the City had no authority to abrogate preemption by allowing the lessee (Red Cross) to create rules that violate state law. Simultaneously he gets a state Constitutional claim that there is only one government and the City's actions created a separate government outside the legally constituted Commonwealth.

If I were a betting man, I'd bet that option #2 has a somewhat better chance. It more closely follows the line of reasoning that was used in the Norfolk Waterside case, without having to go into the discovery of whether or not the City park is public or private. Also, the "privacy" of city property as was dealt with in the Richmond public housing cases is pretty much mooted if the City allows the Red Cross to sell admission to persons other than City residents.

My biggest hangup is deciding how to overcome the City's policy statement that they can rent out City property for the exclusive use of a private entity for fundraising purposes if those fundraising activities could benefit the City. I'd need someone to find out if the money raised remains for exclusive use within the City, or if the Red Cross uses any of the money raised for outside-the-city activities. (Like that would be difficult, considering it is the Red Cross we are dealing with.)

Ed - do you know a lawyer who will go down the road I've pointed out? Do you have the money to pay him to go there?

stay safe.

skidmark
 
Thundar

Thundar

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
4,946
Location
Newport News, Virginia, USA
imported post

altajava wrote:
attachment.php


WOOHOO! Another event I don't have to wear pants to.:shock:

I would like to join you in protest at the Red Cross thing but it leaves me a little concerned as lawyers fees are not in my budget right now.
Click to expand...

&^%$ it! No laser pointers... what about my crimson laser grips. ...no recording devices....what about my voice recorder?

Man I hate rules.
 
R

RedKnightt

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2007
Messages
336
Location
Herndon, Virginia, USA
imported post

I forwarded the e-mails I sent and received to Philip van Cleave (the VCDL President). I believe Ed was keeping him in the loop, also. His response:

This is an issue we will have to address - the leasing of public property with a gun ban. Right now this is a gray area and will probably have to be litigated, just not sure when we will take it up.
Click to expand...
 
TFred

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
imported post

ed wrote:
They have updated their web site now. I still think they are breaking the law.
Click to expand...
That is somewhat amusing, they are clearly feeling the heat.

And of course, the very point of the entire issue at hand is that that they have not "legally established" "rules of admission".

I don't think anyone has a problem with following "legally established rules of admission". It's the "illegally established" rules that are the problem.

TFred
 
user

user

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,516
Location
Northern Piedmont
imported post

Va. Code sxn 18.2-308 ... "O. The granting of a concealed handgun permit shall not thereby authorize the possession of any handgun or other weapon on property or in places where such possession is otherwise prohibited by law or is prohibited by the owner of private property." ...
That rule is from the concealed carry statute, but I am of the opinion that it merely restates what was already the law relating to real property.  A person who wants to enter the property of another is a "licensee" who must comply with any conditions the owner wishes to establish for the purpose of granting the license (i.e., to permit entry).
The Red Cross is not acquiring an interest in real property by having rented the facility for that event.  The short-term rental is an interest in personal property (i.e., the lease contract) not the real property.  They are thus, not a "landowner" with the power to prohibit possession of a firearm as a condition of permitting entry on that basis.
It appears to me, though, that they take the position that they have obtained an exclusive right to use the facility, and can permit entry to their "private" event only to those whom they have selected.  That would be ok if that's what they're really doing.  But in fact, they're operating a public event, open to the public, and it's clearly not limited to their employees, members, contributors, or any other identifiable private group.  
At the same time, I think that if you show up at the gate openly carrying a firearm, they can simply not let you in, not sell you a ticket, or whatnot.  If, on the other hand, one were carrying concealed pursuant to a permit, there's not much they could do about it.
What bothers me more is the suggestion that they can go through one's bags, purse, etc.   
I generally vote with my dollars, and I can tell you that an organization that says it is promoting safety by interfering with an individual's ability to defend himself and other innocent persons is out to lunch.  They're never going to get another nickel from me, and I'm not going to contribute to any organization that supports the Red Cross.
 
ed

ed

Founder's Club Member - Moderator
Joined
Mar 8, 2008
Messages
4,841
Location
Loudoun County - Dulles Airport, Virginia, USA
imported post

user wrote:
If, on the other hand, one were carrying concealed pursuant to a permit, there's not much they could do about it.
Click to expand...
What if THAT person or person(s), paid.. went in.. had a hot dog.. looked around and it got too warm for them and they took off their jacket and now were no longer carrying concealed. Could they be ejected from the public lands? or arresed for not following the RCR (Red Cross Rules)?
 
TFred

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
imported post

ed wrote:
user wrote:
If, on the other hand, one were carrying concealed pursuant to a permit, there's not much they could do about it.
Click to expand...
What if THAT person or person(s), paid.. went in.. had a hot dog.. looked around and it got too warm for them and they took off their jacket and now were no longer carrying concealed. Could they be ejected from the public lands? or arresed for not following the RCR (Red Cross Rules)?
Click to expand...
And that is the $64,000 question, perhaps literally... Seems to me that this scenario would closely mimic the Danbus incident at Waterside. I suspect they would ask the local LEOs to eject you for "trespassing", which is what got Norfolk in trouble with the Danbus incident, and would be the issue here since there would be no legal reason for you not to be there.

TFred
 
user

user

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,516
Location
Northern Piedmont
imported post

My point in an earlier post, which I now see was not stated clearly, is that there couldn't be a trespassing charge, because the city can't forbid guns on that property, and the red cross is not a landowner.

So if I were going to do it, I'd carry concealed and open up after entry.  But I wouldn't do it.  It would be considered a possibly inflammatory act, and one can always be arrested for made up charges.  Alexandria's police department went downhill, I think after Chief Russell A. Hawes retired.  He had that department set up as one of the most professional in the country, because he was an uncompromising sort of guy, and he founded the Virginia Association of Chiefs of Police and participated in the founding of the International Association.  But that was long ago and far away.
 
TFred

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
imported post

user wrote:
My point in an earlier post, which I now see was not stated clearly, is that there couldn't be a trespassing charge, because the city can't forbid guns on that property, and the red cross is not a landowner.

So if I were going to do it, I'd carry concealed and open up after entry. But I wouldn't do it. It would be considered a possibly inflammatory act, and one can always be arrested for made up charges. Alexandria's police department went downhill, I think after Chief Russell A. Hawes retired. He had that department set up as one of the most professional in the country, because he was an uncompromising sort of guy, and he founded the Virginia Association of Chiefs of Police and participated in the founding of the International Association. But that was long ago and far away.
Click to expand...
Well now don't leave us hanging like that! ;) How would you recommend the situation be resolved? They are obviously not listening to sound reason, and there is a wrong that needs to be righted.

TFred
 
user

user

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,516
Location
Northern Piedmont
imported post

TFred wrote:
user wrote:
My point in an earlier post, which I now see was not stated clearly, is that there couldn't be a trespassing charge, because the city can't forbid guns on that property, and the red cross is not a landowner.



So if I were going to do it, I'd carry concealed and open up after entry.  But I wouldn't do it.  It would be considered a possibly inflammatory act, and one can always be arrested for made up charges.  Alexandria's police department went downhill, I think after Chief Russell A. Hawes retired.  He had that department set up as one of the most professional in the country, because he was an uncompromising sort of guy, and he founded the Virginia Association of Chiefs of Police and participated in the founding of the International Association.  But that was long ago and far away.
Click to expand...

Well now don't leave us hanging like that!  ;)  How would you recommend the situation be resolved?  They are obviously not listening to sound reason, and there is a wrong that needs to be righted.



TFred
Click to expand...
Well, one may think that he has certain rights that ought to be protected.  And I'm willing to defend those rights to his last nickel!  Seriously, some fights just aren't worth the powder and shot.  I think that the most effective thing one could do is to file suit in the Alexandria Circuit Court to enjoin the Red Cross from interfering with people's right to defend themselves or in the alternative to prohibit them from staging the event, though it's a little late for this particular event.  Going there and getting one's self arrested isn't going to do anything for "the cause", ultimately, and though one might have a valid defense at trial, it would be best not to have been arrested.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top