Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 42

Thread: Richmond Convention Center

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    418

    Post imported post

    I tied a search for this and came up donuts. Is anyone aware of any gun-buster signs or anti-gun policies posted at the center?

    I looked at the web site and couldn't find anything.

    http://www.richmondcenter.com/about-us.html

    It would appear this is another private-public partnership, similar to the Waterside debaucle. Anyone have experience or thoughts with this convention center.

    Apparently, I have been invited to attend a girls vollyball tournament this weekend and just wanted to check my status and get my ducks in a row.

    Thanx -



  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    418

    Post imported post

    Ahh.. never mind. I found the offending paragraph on page 19 of their "rules and regulations."

    Weapons and Concealed Handguns

    It is the policy of the Greater Richmond Convention Center that handguns and other weapons are prohibited in Greater Richmond Convention Center. This prohibition applies to all persons including concealed handgun Licensees, with the exception of licensed law enforcement officers.



  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA, ,
    Posts
    439

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    418

    Post imported post


  5. #5
    Regular Member dbc3804's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Henrico, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    79

    Post imported post


    Greater Richmond Convention Center Authority


    The Greater Richmond Convention Center was built as a result of regional cooperation between the City of Richmond and the surrounding counties of Henrico, Chesterfield and Hanover. The Greater Richmond Convention Center is owned by the Greater Richmond Convention Center Authority, which is composed of these governmental entities and the Retail Merchants Association of Greater Richmond.


    If they are "owned" by three government entities how can they do this?


  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Norfolk, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,000

    Post imported post

    dbc3804 wrote:
    Greater Richmond Convention Center Authority


    The Greater Richmond Convention Center was built as a result of regional cooperation between the City of Richmond and the surrounding counties of Henrico, Chesterfield and Hanover. The Greater Richmond Convention Center is owned by the Greater Richmond Convention Center Authority, which is composed of these governmental entities and the Retail Merchants Association of Greater Richmond.


    If they are "owned" by three government entities how can they do this?
    The correct answer is... They cannot. This was shown to be true when Danbus was in court. A government agency owned facility must respect the law regardless of how many layers of government sit between the government owner and the facility.

    Preemption prevents them from enforcing such a restriction.

  7. #7
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Virginia, , USA
    Posts
    311

    Post imported post

    darthmord wrote:
    dbc3804 wrote:
    Greater Richmond Convention Center Authority


    The Greater Richmond Convention Center was built as a result of regional cooperation between the City of Richmond and the surrounding counties of Henrico, Chesterfield and Hanover. The Greater Richmond Convention Center is owned by the Greater Richmond Convention Center Authority, which is composed of these governmental entities and the Retail Merchants Association of Greater Richmond.


    If they are "owned" by three government entities how can they do this?
    The correct answer is... They cannot. This was shown to be true when Danbus was in court. A government agency owned facility must respect the law regardless of how many layers of government sit between the government owner and the facility.

    Preemption prevents them from enforcing such a restriction.
    They'll attempt to "enforce" it anyways and throw you behind bars.

    It has to be brought down.

  8. #8
    Campaign Veteran Dutch Uncle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,715

    Post imported post

    Dispatcher wrote:
    darthmord wrote:
    dbc3804 wrote:


    If they are "owned" by three government entities how can they do this?
    The correct answer is... They cannot. This was shown to be true when Danbus was in court. A government agency owned facility must respect the law regardless of how many layers of government sit between the government owner and the facility.

    Preemption prevents them from enforcing such a restriction.
    They'll attempt to "enforce" it anyways and throw you behind bars.

    It has to be brought down.
    I don't think anyone will be "thrown behind bars". Dan wasn't put in jail for his experience at Waterside, just given a ticket and sent on his way. Its a misdemeanor violation, (and as we know, invalid because of state pre-emption) so as long as you give ID, the cop has no justification to put you in jail. I'm assuming you wouldn't resist arrest, etc. etc. Think of it as your ticket to ride...to have the whole thing thrown out because of invalidity. Heck, Phil would probably get the city to drop everything since the Norfolk/Waterside mess is almost certainly known by the Richmond people.

  9. #9
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator ed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Loudoun County - Dulles Airport, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,848

    Post imported post

    Looks like the Richmond Coliseum has the same problem...

    http://www.richmondcoliseum.net/visitor_policies.asp
    Carry On.

    Ed

    VirginiaOpenCarry.Org (Coins, Shirts and Patches)
    - - - -
    For VA Open Carry Cards send a S.A.2S.E. to: Ed's OC cards, Box 16143, Wash DC 20041-6143 (they are free but some folks enclose a couple bucks too)

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    418

    Post imported post

    Okay, so yesterday I was on a schedule to meet some people from out of state. So I decided to go CC. I parked in the adjacent deck off of Third St., on the third floor, that has a walkway into the convention center.

    Near the walkway entrance they have some signs posted and stopped to read them. One of them has a "rules and regulations" posted, but was all about parking and activites not allowed in the parking deck. Alchohol, loitering, etc. But NO mention of weapons.

    I entered the convention center and again checked for signs. Nothing at all. On my way out I checked the first floor entance (facing my parking deck), and again - I did not see any signs prohibiting weapons.

    They did have "security" personnel posted at entrances, but they appear to be more of a tourist guide type function than actual security. They do not even carry a radio. They did not appear to be screening anyone walking in - which is good.

    I just wonder how things would have went if I were OC.

    I will follow up with the convention center / City of Richmond, next week, about their posted regs.



  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Yorktown, VA, ,
    Posts
    270

    Post imported post

    If unsure of how an operation reacts you can always ingress CC. When the event is near closing, OC, relax, and prepare to leave. If anyone says anything you are close to leaving anyway.

    Missions accomplished.

  12. #12
    Regular Member paramedic70002's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Franklin, VA, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,448

    Post imported post

    The worst thing that could happen is you get famous and get paid.
    "Each worker carried his sword strapped to his side." Nehemiah 4:18

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

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    418

    Post imported post

    Renegade wrote:
    If unsure of how an operation reacts you can always ingress CC. When the event is near closing, OC, relax, and prepare to leave. If anyone says anything you are close to leaving anyway.

    Missions accomplished.
    HA! I was wearing my piece on my ankle. I guess I could have rolled up my pant leg and walked out looking like a complete dork..

  14. #14
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,602

    Post imported post

    ed wrote:
    Looks like the Richmond Coliseum has the same problem...

    http://www.richmondcoliseum.net/visitor_policies.asp
    Firearms/Weapons
    No persons are permitted to bring weapons of any kind into the arena with the exception of local, state, and federal law enforcement officials.

    Ya right! Its spelled - P r e e m p t i o n !

    Yata hey
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    418

    Post imported post

    TO: "Michael Meyers" <mmeyers@greaterrichmondcc.com>,

    CC: "Arthur Williams" <awilliams@greaterrichmondcc.com>, "Norman Sales" <norman.sales@richmondgov.com>, "Philip Van Cleave" <philip@virginiasystems.com>,

    Subj: Convention Center - Illegal Policy Regarding Firearms

    Dear Mr. Meyers,

    It has recently come to my attention that the Richmond Convention Center maintains a policy that does not allow the legal carry of firearms. I believe this policy to be in violation of the Code of Virginia 15.2-915.

    Specifically, that the Greater Richmond Convention Center is publicly owned property, a joint project involving public tax dollars from the local jurisdictions of the City of Richmond, the County of Henrico, the County of Hanover, and the County of Chesterfield. To wit, payment must be made to the City of Richmond for use of the facility.

    State preemption law (15.2-915) specifically prohibits local jurisdictions from establishing independent ordinances or policies that further restricts the possession, carrying, or transportation of firearms, that is not consistent with state law as definedby 18.2-308.

    The offending statement can be found on page 19 of the "Rules and Regulations", which may be found here: http://www.richmondcenter.com/facility-rules.html

    I respectfully request that you remove the offending language from your posted regulations, and that you inform all of your staff of this change.

    I look forward to hearing of your progress on this issue.


    Respectfully,

    ************************************************** **************

    Michael Meyers is theGeneral Manager of the Convention Center. Arthur Williams is the Director of Security at the Conv. Center, andNormal Sales is the Richmond City Attorney. Can't wait to hear the reply....


  16. #16
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Post imported post

    "You may also find it helpful to be reminded that the 2009 General Assembly passed, and the Governor signed into law, SB 1513, which allows a court to award attorney fees, expenses and court costs to any entity that prevails in an action challenging a violation of Section 15.2-915.

    Your legal staff will certainly understand and agree that your clear violation of the law has no grounds, and will certainly not prevail, should litigation be required to prompt your action to correct the situation at hand."

    (A little more "help" to convince them to do the right thing...)

    TFred


  17. #17
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,602

    Post imported post

    TFred wrote:
    "You may also find it helpful to be reminded that the 2009 General Assembly passed, and the Governor signed into law, SB 1513, which allows a court to award attorney fees, expenses and court costs to any entity that prevails in an action challenging a violation of Section 15.2-915.

    Your legal staff will certainly understand and agree that your clear violation of the law has no grounds, and will certainly not prevail, should litigation be required to prompt your action to correct the situation at hand."

    (A little more "help" to convince them to do the right thing...)

    TFred
    I do not think that this new law takes effect until July 1st.

    Would not the date of infraction be the deciding factor as to whether it applied?

    Yata hey
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  18. #18
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Post imported post

    Grapeshot wrote:
    TFred wrote:
    "You may also find it helpful to be reminded that the 2009 General Assembly passed, and the Governor signed into law, SB 1513, which allows a court to award attorney fees, expenses and court costs to any entity that prevails in an action challenging a violation of Section 15.2-915.

    Your legal staff will certainly understand and agree that your clear violation of the law has no grounds, and will certainly not prevail, should litigation be required to prompt your action to correct the situation at hand."

    (A little more "help" to convince them to do the right thing...)

    TFred
    I do not think that this new law takes effect until July 1st.

    Would not the date of infraction be the deciding factor as to whether it applied?

    Yata hey
    July 1st is only 5 weeks and 1 day away. I don't know why it wouldn't apply any time after July 1st. It would certainly take longer than 5 weeks to even be heard in a court room.

    TFred


  19. #19
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682

    Post imported post

    TFred wrote:
    Grapeshot wrote:
    TFred wrote:
    "You may also find it helpful to be reminded that the 2009 General Assembly passed, and the Governor signed into law, SB 1513, which allows a court to award attorney fees, expenses and court costs to any entity that prevails in an action challenging a violation of Section 15.2-915.

    Your legal staff will certainly understand and agree that your clear violation of the law has no grounds, and will certainly not prevail, should litigation be required to prompt your action to correct the situation at hand."

    (A little more "help" to convince them to do the right thing...)

    TFred
    I do not think that this new law takes effect until July 1st.

    Would not the date of infraction be the deciding factor as to whether it applied?

    Yata hey
    July 1st is only 5 weeks and 1 day away. I don't know why it wouldn't apply any time after July 1st. It would certainly take longer than 5 weeks to even be heard in a court room.

    TFred
    Tess had it correct when dealing with a law that has an implementation date. Anything that happens before the new law takes effect is tried under the old law, no matter how long it takes to get into court.

    You have heard of ex post facto laws, right? Unconstitutional as all get-out. You are trying to create a pre post facto law - too confusing for even a Supreme Court Justice nominee who singlehandedly saved Major League baseball to contemplate.

    stay safe.

    skidmark
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  20. #20
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Post imported post

    skidmark wrote:
    TFred wrote:
    Grapeshot wrote:
    TFred wrote:
    "You may also find it helpful to be reminded that the 2009 General Assembly passed, and the Governor signed into law, SB 1513, which allows a court to award attorney fees, expenses and court costs to any entity that prevails in an action challenging a violation of Section 15.2-915.

    Your legal staff will certainly understand and agree that your clear violation of the law has no grounds, and will certainly not prevail, should litigation be required to prompt your action to correct the situation at hand."

    (A little more "help" to convince them to do the right thing...)

    TFred
    I do not think that this new law takes effect until July 1st.

    Would not the date of infraction be the deciding factor as to whether it applied?

    Yata hey
    July 1st is only 5 weeks and 1 day away. I don't know why it wouldn't apply any time after July 1st. It would certainly take longer than 5 weeks to even be heard in a court room.

    TFred
    Tess had it correct when dealing with a law that has an implementation date. Anything that happens before the new law takes effect is tried under the old law, no matter how long it takes to get into court.

    You have heard of ex post facto laws, right? Unconstitutional as all get-out. You are trying to create a pre post facto law - too confusing for even a Supreme Court Justice nominee who singlehandedly saved Major League baseball to contemplate.

    stay safe.

    skidmark
    Sure, but why wouldn't a court action that takes place entirely after July 1 be covered? Are you saying that any violation of preemption that exists before July 1 is exempt from the provisions provided by the new law, no matter when the court action to correct it takes place?

    That makes no sense to me at all.

    ETA: In fact, since almost universally, violations of preemption originate from old rules/laws that were never updated to reflect preemption, there will be very few cases that do not come from before July 1, 2009.

    TFred

  21. #21
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682

    Post imported post

    TFred wrote:
    skidmark wrote:
    TFred wrote:
    Grapeshot wrote:
    TFred wrote:
    "You may also find it helpful to be reminded that the 2009 General Assembly passed, and the Governor signed into law, SB 1513, which allows a court to award attorney fees, expenses and court costs to any entity that prevails in an action challenging a violation of Section 15.2-915.

    Your legal staff will certainly understand and agree that your clear violation of the law has no grounds, and will certainly not prevail, should litigation be required to prompt your action to correct the situation at hand."

    (A little more "help" to convince them to do the right thing...)

    TFred
    I do not think that this new law takes effect until July 1st.

    Would not the date of infraction be the deciding factor as to whether it applied?

    Yata hey
    July 1st is only 5 weeks and 1 day away. I don't know why it wouldn't apply any time after July 1st. It would certainly take longer than 5 weeks to even be heard in a court room.

    TFred
    Tess had it correct when dealing with a law that has an implementation date. Anything that happens before the new law takes effect is tried under the old law, no matter how long it takes to get into court.

    You have heard of ex post facto laws, right? Unconstitutional as all get-out. You are trying to create a pre post facto law - too confusing for even a Supreme Court Justice nominee who singlehandedly saved Major League baseball to contemplate.

    stay safe.

    skidmark
    Sure, but why wouldn't a court action that takes place entirely after July 1 be covered? Are you saying that any violation of preemption that exists before July 1 is exempt from the provisions provided by the new law, no matter when the court action to correct it takes place?

    That makes no sense to me at all.

    ETA: In fact, since almost universally, violations of preemption originate from old rules/laws that were never updated to reflect preemption, there will be very few cases that do not come from before July 1, 2009.

    TFred
    The court is dealing with an act that took place before the new law went into effect, regardless of when after 7/1/09 the court hearing is held. Thus, the court has to apply the law as it existed on the date the act took place.

    If the act takes place after 7/1/09 the court will apply the new law.

    It is not the existence of the rule/policy/ordinance that matters, but the date when someone applies that rule/policy/ordinance against you.

    Just to make your head swim even more, there is nothing in the law now that prevents you from asking the court to make the locality repay all your costs and expenses. And just as after 7/1/09, the court can decide to, or not to, order those costs and expenses reimbursed.

    All the new law will do is put judges and localities on notice that is is legal (permitted by an act of the General Assembly) to recover costs/expenses, whereas in some few cases before, the judge had ruled that there was no law allowing that to happen.

    Don't you just love the logic of the law? [/sarcasm]

    stay safe.

    skidmark
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    leesburg, va, ,
    Posts
    68

    Post imported post

    So the new law doesn't say that people are any more able to recover costs, it just says that cost recovery can't be denied on the basis of no legal standing to demand that recovery?

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    418

    Post imported post

    ...and the reply..(drum roll please....)

    I appreciate your concern. In your reference to Section 18.2 – 308 of the Code of Virginia, please note subsection J3 of the code which states the following:

    J3. No person shall carry a concealed handgun onto the premises of any restaurant or club as defined in § 4.1-100 for which a license to sell and serve alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption has been granted by the Virginia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board under Title 4.1 of the Code of Virginia; however, nothing herein shall prohibit any sworn law-enforcement officer from carrying a concealed handgun on the premises of such restaurant or club or any owner or event sponsor or his employees from carrying a concealed handgun while on duty at such restaurant or club if such person has a concealed handgun permit.

    You may not be aware that the premises of the Greater Richmond Convention Center are licensed under the Virginia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board to sell and serve alcoholic beverages for on-premise consumption as a mixed beverage restaurant establishment. I hope this information helps clarify our policy.

    Best Regards,
    Michael A. Meyers, General Manager
    Greater Richmond Convention Center / Global Spectrum
    403 N. 3rd Street
    Richmond, VA 23219

    804.783.7311
    804.225.0508 fax

    www.richmondcenter.com

    ************************************************** ***************

    So the open-carry arguement aside for the moment, did I not read somewhere on this board there was a physical limitation established for "food courts" in malls, where a vendor serves alcohol?

    If there were aboundary on where alcoholic beverages are not permitted beyonda certain area, doesn't that define the limit of said restriction? I'm thinking if they serve alcohol at their food court, they probably have a restriction about those drinks leaving the food court area.

    On another note - just because they have a license to serve, doesn't necessarily mean they are serving alcohol at all events. That might be something in place to facilitate a user of their facility to serve alcohol. So if alchohol isn't being served actively at an event - does this restriction still apply?

    Give me some ammo here!

  24. #24
    Founder's Club Member Tess's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Alexandria, Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    3,764

    Post imported post

    Armed wrote:
    ...and the reply..(drum roll please....)

    I appreciate your concern. In your reference to Section 18.2 – 308 of the Code of Virginia, please note subsection J3 of the code which states the following:

    J3. No person shall carry a concealed handgun onto the premises of any restaurant or club as defined in § 4.1-100 for which a license to sell and serve alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption has been granted by the Virginia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board under Title 4.1 of the Code of Virginia; however, nothing herein shall prohibit any sworn law-enforcement officer from carrying a concealed handgun on the premises of such restaurant or club or any owner or event sponsor or his employees from carrying a concealed handgun while on duty at such restaurant or club if such person has a concealed handgun permit.

    You may not be aware that the premises of the Greater Richmond Convention Center are licensed under the Virginia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board to sell and serve alcoholic beverages for on-premise consumption as a mixed beverage restaurant establishment. I hope this information helps clarify our policy.

    Best Regards,
    Michael A. Meyers, General Manager
    Greater Richmond Convention Center / Global Spectrum
    403 N. 3rd Street
    Richmond, VA 23219

    804.783.7311
    804.225.0508 fax

    http://www.richmondcenter.com

    ************************************************** ***************

    So the open-carry arguement aside for the moment, did I not read somewhere on this board there was a physical limitation established for "food courts" in malls, where a vendor serves alcohol?

    If there were aboundary on where alcoholic beverages are not permitted beyonda certain area, doesn't that define the limit of said restriction? I'm thinking if they serve alcohol at their food court, they probably have a restriction about those drinks leaving the food court area.

    On another note - just because they have a license to serve, doesn't necessarily mean they are serving alcohol at all events. That might be something in place to facilitate a user of their facility to serve alcohol. So if alchohol isn't being served actively at an event - does this restriction still apply?

    Give me some ammo here!
    1. I maintain that the Greater Richmond Convention Center is not a restaurant or club as defined in § 4.1-100. Just because ABC calls it a restaurant does not make it a restaurant under the specific definition cited (the cat may have its kittens in the oven, but that don't make 'em biscuits, dontcha know).

    2. Even if it were a restaurant, that doesn't exempt open carry, only concealed.

    3. But "What are you smoking and why aren't you sharing" is probably not the appropriate response at this point in the game.
    Laws alone can not secure freedom of expression; in order that every man present his views without penalty there must be spirit of tolerance in the entire population. -Albert Einstein

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    418

    Post imported post

    A quick search of the ABC online license registration shows the following:

    type sub-type wine & beer status mixed bev


    14380
    Greater Richmond Convention Center
    Fine Host Corp
    Restaurant
    Non-Government Property
    VoluntarySurrender
    VoluntarySurrender

    30014
    Greater Richmond Convention Center
    Aramark Sports & Entertainment Services LLC
    Restaurant
    Non-Government Property
    Active
    Active


    Does anybody know what this stuff means? How can the convention centerbe considered non-government property?

    eh... okay - so table don't display correctly. what does "voluntary surrender" mean for alcohol type? (two categories: wine and beer / mixed beverage)


Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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