• 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.

Culpeper National Cemetery posted...

Thundar

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

I think that means we must carry our antique replicas then.

Why?....

What is the definition of firearm?

Not in the regulation, but the regulation refers to 18 US Code, which makes it clear that an antique firearm or replica thereof is not a firearm.

Cap and Ball open carry of a Navy 1851 replica anyone?
 

Wolf_shadow

Activist Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
1,215
Location
Accomac, Virginia, USA
imported post

Thundar wrote:
I think that means we must carry our antique replicas then.

Why?....

What is the definition of firearm?

Not in the regulation, but the regulation refers to 18 US Code, which makes it clear that an antique firearm or replica thereof is not a firearm.

Cap and Ball open carry of a Navy 1851 replica anyone?

Would it be open carry in a 1860 army holster.

pix1446252281.jpg
 

rlh2005

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2006
Messages
699
Location
Spotsylvania County, Virginia, USA
imported post

Wolf_shadow wrote:
Would it be open carry in a 1860 army holster.

pix1446252281.jpg
Most people would wonder why you're carrying around your car's lug wrench and jack extension. A previous car of mine's lug wrench and jack extension came in a pouch that looked very similar to that holster.
 

virginiatuck

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2009
Messages
787
Location
Loudoun County, Virginia, USA
imported post

Mike wrote:
virginiatuck wrote:
You're right, the cemetery is owned by the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Are you sure? Then why did they not post the correct sign?
I'm sorry, I am not sure if that was sarcasm or not. Perhaps "owned" is not the correct word; all that matters for Title 38 CFR Sec 1.218 is "charge and control."

From the Culpeper National Cemetery web site: "On Sept. 1, 1973, in execution of the National Cemetery Act of 1973, the cemetery was transferred from the U.S. Army to the Veterans Administration’s new National Cemetery System. In 1975, the Veterans of Foreign Wars, Burton-Hammond Post 2524, donated an additional 10.5 acres for cemetery use. Another small tract was purchased in 1978 and a brick administration building was constructed on the property. The cemetery re-opened Jan. 16, 1978."

There's also this, from the wikipedia entry for US National Cemetery: "The National Cemetery Administration of the United States Department of Veterans Affairs maintains 130 of the 146 national cemeteries. The Department of the Army maintains two national cemeteries, Arlington National Cemetery and United States Soldiers' and Airmen's Home National Cemetery. The National Park Service (NPS) maintains 14 cemeteries associated with historic sites and battlefields. Additionally the American Battle Monuments Commission maintains 24 American military cemeteries overseas."

That wikipedia page provides a list of each National Cemetery and which agency maintains it.

As for why they posted the wrong sign, I'm perplexed. It's quite rare for agents of the Government to make mistakes. ;) My guess would be that the Federal Government had millions of those signs made referring to Title 18 USC 930, so they got them cheap; and nobody bothered to read that section before putting the sign up; or they never thought any visitor to the cemetery would ever bother to read that section. I.e. the sign looks "official" and that's "good enough for government work."
 

user

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

Right. "Federal Facilities" can only mean a building, as the code has defined that phrase, and then only a building in which federal employees (not contractors or concessionaires) are regularly engaged in their duties as such. And I take the position, based in part onHeller that the statutewhich generally authorizes regulations regarding orderly conduct cannot prohibit firearms as to property owned by the United States. Not only that, but the existence of one statute that is more specific overrules a more general statute, a standard canon of judicial construction.

However, the fact that the United States is a landowner in Virginia, just like all other landowners, under Virginia law, it has the power to exclude people from its property if those people are carrying firearms. The United States is not the sovereign of the soil as to that property; Virginia is.

But the CFR regulates administrative agencies, not just plain folks, unless an act of Congress declaresspecifically that a violation constitutes a crime. Then, of course, it can't beunconstitutionally vague, and it doesn't confer the power to define new crimes.

So my conclusion is that it would be an act of criminal trespass under Virginia law to show up at that cemetary with a gun.



hirundo82 wrote:


Decoligny wrote:

If it is not inside a building USC 18930 does not apply.

US Code Title 18

Paragraph 930

Section (g)
Subsection (1) The term “Federal facility” means a building or part thereof owned or leased by the Federal Government, where Federal employees are regularly present for the purpose of performing their official duties.

There may be some other section of federal law that applies to it. Post office signs only cite 18 USC 930 and say that carry is prohibited in the buildings and parking lots. If 18 USC 930 were the only applicable law parking lots would be OK, but there is a post office-specific part of the CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) that prohibits firearms anywhere on post office property.

The problem is that federal law has become so expansive that it can be tough to determine what is OK and what is not. A major contributor to this is that federal agencies are free to publish their own regulations (outside the legislative process), and these regulations have the full force of criminal law behind them.
 
Top