• 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.

So according to this law...

C

CRF250rider1000

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2008
Messages
1,440
Location
Herndon, VA & Martinsville, VA
imported post

Sec. 930. Possession of firearms and dangerous weapons in Federal facilities
  1. Except as provided in subsection (d), whoever knowingly possesses or causes to be present a firearm or other dangerous weapon in a Federal facility (other than a Federal court facility), or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both.
  2. Whoever, with intent that a firearm or other dangerous weapon be used in the commission of a crime, knowingly possesses or causes to be present such firearm or dangerous weapon in a Federal facility, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
  3. A person who kills any person in the course of a violation of subsection (a) or (b), or in the course of an attack on a Federal facility involving the use of a firearm or other dangerous weapon, or attempts or conspires to do such an act, shall be punished as provided in sections 1111, 1112, 1113, and 1117.
  4. Subsection (a) shall not apply to--
    1. the lawful performance of official duties by an officer, agent, or employee of the United States, a State, or a political subdivision thereof, who is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of any violation of law;
    2. the possession of a firearm or other dangerous weapon by a Federal official or a member of the Armed Forces if such possession is authorized by law; or
    3. the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes.
    1. Except as provided in paragraph (2), whoever knowingly possesses or causes to be present a firearm in a Federal court facility, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.
    2. Paragraph (1) shall not apply to conduct which is described in paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (d).
hmm. Interesting
 
P

Pagan

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2009
Messages
629
Location
Gloucester, Virginia, USA
imported post

If some of our legal professionals, and my fellow forum members agree, and afterI consult my own attorney that this is in fact the case, andI would not be in violation of the law, I would be highly motivated to be the test case, although with my past infraction of the law, might seem to make me, not the best test case, though I would probably be willing.

Greater men than I have risked far more for freedom,I surely would not mind doing my part for my fellow citizens. I have been arrested and done time before, so those things are not as frightful to me as it may be to others,I'm not bragging by no means, I'm just saying....

Thoughts...
 
L

livitup

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
171
Location
Culpeper, Virginia, USA
imported post

Pagan wrote:
..

Thoughts...
Click to expand...
My thought is that I wish I were half as brave as you.

This particular ban is a personal thorn in my side. If I didn't have to provide for my family I'd be much more willing to take risks to expose the farce that is our government disarming its citizens when they get too close.

If there is anything I can do to provide logistical support, please let me know.
 
P

Pagan

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2009
Messages
629
Location
Gloucester, Virginia, USA
imported post

I guess the thing to do is go to a visitor center at a national park or something, and ask to see which code they are using to prohibit firearms.
 
TFred

TFred

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

Pagan wrote:
I guess the thing to do is go to a visitor center at a national park or something, and ask to see which code they are using to prohibit firearms.
Click to expand...
You've got the right law, and in spite of what it appears to say, the NPS seems to be taking the stand that you are not allowed to carry a firearm for self-defense into one of their Federal facilities.

I suggest you read through the last two pages of the National Park Carry thread, starting here:

http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum54/38387-2.html

It might be less risky to start by asking what authorizes them to claim that carrying a holstered firearm for self defense is illegal...

TFred
 
ed

ed

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

Pagan wrote:
I guess the thing to do is go to a visitor center at a national park or something, and ask to see which code they are using to prohibit firearms.
Click to expand...

From this article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/18/AR2010021805124.html

In the Washington area, gun owners will be able to carry a firearm into the Wolf Trap National Park for the Performing Arts, but not beyond the ticketed entrances to the Filene Center, the park's amphitheater.

"Whether you sit on the lawn or under the canopy, firearms are prohibited," said Park Service regional spokesman Bill Line. Private restaurants on the grounds will also ban weapons, Line said.
 
P

Pagan

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2009
Messages
629
Location
Gloucester, Virginia, USA
imported post

TFred wrote:
Pagan wrote:
I guess the thing to do is go to a visitor center at a national park or something, and ask to see which code they are using to prohibit firearms.
Click to expand...
You've got the right law, and in spite of what it appears to say, the NPS seems to be taking the stand that you are not allowed to carry a firearm for self-defense into one of their Federal facilities.

I suggest you read through the last two pages of the National Park Carry thread, starting here:

http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum54/38387-2.html

It might be less risky to start by asking what authorizes them to claim that carrying a holstered firearm for self defense is illegal...

TFred
Click to expand...

After reading the last two pages of that thread, it seems clear to me that any Lawful reason is permitted, such as excercising my constitutional right to bear arms, completely legal . These signs on the station and post offices and such are like the NO ILLEGAL WEAPONS signs at some places, if it is used for a crime than the weapon becomes a crime in and of itself, but with out criminal intent or use than the weapon is lawful. Clear as mud.

IANAL
 
skidmark

skidmark

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

From this article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/18/AR2010021805124.html

In the Washington area, gun owners will be able to carry a firearm into the Wolf Trap National Park for the Performing Arts, but not beyond the ticketed entrances to the Filene Center, the park's amphitheater.

"Whether you sit on the lawn or under the canopy, firearms are prohibited," said Park Service regional spokesman Bill Line. Private restaurants on the grounds will also ban weapons, Line said.
Click to expand...
#1 - I'd be very interested in finding out on what basis Mr. Line believes NPS can ban firearms beyond the ticketed entrances.

#2 - I'm sure Mr. Line and his minions will have had conversations with the consessionaires (folks who bid to rent and operate restaurants,souvenirstands, etc.within NPS boundaries) about the viability of their leases should they not "decide" to post them.

This is going to take time and effort to get straightened out - not just at Wolf Trap but across the NPS system.

stay safe.

skidmark
 
TFred

TFred

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

ufcfanvt wrote:
This question has been asked before:
http://www.expertlaw.com/forums/showthread.php?t=72570

http://www.examiner.com/x-5619-Atlanta-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m10d25-Post-office-parking-lot-off-limits-to-firearms

No time to research now ...
Click to expand...
The second link is about post offices, which fly under a whole different set of rules.

The first link just briefly mentions the paragraph (d.3) exception which allows for "other lawful purposes", and then says there is no case law to determine what "other lawful purposes" really means.

IMHO, in order for the NPS ban in Federal facilities to hold up, there must be some assertion or authority that carrying a properly holstered firearm for the purpose of self-defense is an illegal act. At this point, I don't know how they could do that.

TFred
 
user

user

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

I wouldn't risk it, myself.

Off the top of my head, I don't think it qualifies as a "building", but I suspect the judges of the Eastern District of Virginia might disagree with me. And there's no telling which way a jury would go on that. I'd say it's not a "building" within the meaning of the statute, because it's not enclosed, it's reallyjust a canopy, like a car-port or picnic shelter. The statute clearly envisions buildings in which workers regularly perform work, like the State Department or Department of Transportation. Seems to me the park service even bills the thing as an outdoor experience, "under the stars", etc.

It would be really handy to find the architectural design firm that built it and have a look at the contract and drawings to see how it was characterized at the time of construction. The RFP and contract are public information at this point. An FOIA request might be in order.

But the fact is that it's a building of some sort, the statute doesn't qualify "building" in terms of regular buildings v. gazebos & picnic shelters.

Might be good for a declaratory judgment action, but I wouldn't risk a criminal charge.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top