• 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.

Open carry at The Dock at Lansdownes?

I

Icetera

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2009
Messages
156
Location
Richmond - Charlottesville, Virginia, USA
imported post

I believe I recall mention that any docks spanning out into the Potomac areconsidered to bein Maryland and as such are governed by Maryland law. Personally, I think that sounds ridiculous, but it would not suprise me one bit.



Well, ignore that as the place in question is a dock in name only.
 
peter nap

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
imported post

230therapy wrote:
I OC'd at The Dock. There were no issues, but I believe nobody noticed either.
Click to expand...
That's almost always the case. No one notices and those that do, don't think anything of it.
 
virginiatuck

virginiatuck

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

Try to wrap your heads around this one:

Appendix A of the Compact of 1785:
"And all piracies, crimes and offences, committed on the said parts of Chesapeake bay and Pocamoke river, by any citizen of the commonwealth of Virginia, or the state of Maryland, either against the other, shall be tried in the court of that state of which the offender is a citizen. The jurisdiction of each state over the river Patowmack shall be exercised in the same manner as is prescribed for the before-mentioned parts of the Chesapeake bay and Pocamoke river in every respect, except in the case of piracies, crimes and offenses, committed by persons not citizens of either state, upon persons not citizens of either state, in which case the offenders shall be tried by the court of the state to which they shall first be brought..."

This reads as though a citizen of Virginia who commits a crime or offense on the Potomac river against Maryland (or a MD citizen) would be tried in Virginia. That's where my brain gets tied in knots. Could a Court of Virginia try a person for a crime of another state, for which no comparable crime exists in Virginia (or for that matter, even if a comparable crime does exist in Virginia)? If so, has that ever happened before? If so, to whom? Or is this appendix just a fancy way of saying "citizens of Virginia shall be under the jurisdiction of Virginia; citizens of Maryland shall be under the jurisdiction of Maryland; citizens of neither committing crimes against citizens of neither shall be under the jurisdiction of the state to which they're first brought." Are these really stupid questions?

There is a related thread here.

By the way, here's the cite for the Maryland/Virginia boundary, officially determined in 1877.

Article Fourth of the Black-Jenkins Award of 1877:
Virginia is entitled not only to full dominion over the soil to low-water mark on the south shore of the Potomac, but has a right to such use of the river beyond the line of low-water mark as may be necessary to the full enjoyment of her riparian ownership, without impeding the navigation or otherwise interfering with the proper use of it by Maryland, agreeably to the compact of seventeen hundred and eighty-five.
 
ed

ed

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

virginiatuck wrote:
Try to wrap your heads around this one:

Appendix A of the Compact of 1785:
"And all piracies, crimes and offences, committed on the said parts of Chesapeake bay and Pocamoke river, by any citizen of the commonwealth of Virginia, or the state of Maryland, either against the other, shall be tried in the court of that state of which the offender is a citizen.  The jurisdiction of each state over the river Patowmack shall be exercised in the same manner as is prescribed for the before-mentioned parts of the Chesapeake bay and Pocamoke river in every respect, except in the case of piracies, crimes and offenses, committed by persons not citizens of either state, upon persons not citizens of either state, in which case the offenders shall be tried by the court of the state to which they shall first be brought..."

This reads as though a citizen of Virginia who commits a crime or offense on the Potomac river against Maryland (or a MD citizen) would be tried in Virginia.  That's where my brain gets tied in knots.  Could a Court of Virginia try a person for a crime of another state, for which no comparable crime exists in Virginia (or for that matter, even if a comparable crime does exist in Virginia)?  If so, has that ever happened before?  If so, to whom?  Or is this appendix just a fancy way of saying "citizens of Virginia shall be under the jurisdiction of Virginia; citizens of Maryland shall be under the jurisdiction of Maryland; citizens of neither committing crimes against citizens of neither shall be under the jurisdiction of the state to which they're first brought."  Are these really stupid questions?

There is a related thread here.

By the way, here's the cite for the Maryland/Virginia boundary, officially determined in 1877.

Article Fourth of the Black-Jenkins Award of 1877:
Virginia is entitled not only to full dominion over the soil to low-water mark on the south shore of the Potomac, but has a right to such use of the river beyond the line of low-water mark as may be necessary to the full enjoyment of her riparian ownership, without impeding the navigation or otherwise interfering with the proper use of it by Maryland, agreeably to the compact of seventeen hundred and eighty-five.
Click to expand...
What I can't wrap my head around is how does your post relate to THIS thread?
 
virginiatuck

virginiatuck

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

ed wrote:
virginiatuck wrote:
Try to wrap your heads around this one:

Appendix A of the Compact of 1785:
"And all piracies, crimes and offences, committed on the said parts of Chesapeake bay and Pocamoke river, by any citizen of the commonwealth of Virginia, or the state of Maryland, either against the other, shall be tried in the court of that state of which the offender is a citizen. The jurisdiction of each state over the river Patowmack shall be exercised in the same manner as is prescribed for the before-mentioned parts of the Chesapeake bay and Pocamoke river in every respect, except in the case of piracies, crimes and offenses, committed by persons not citizens of either state, upon persons not citizens of either state, in which case the offenders shall be tried by the court of the state to which they shall first be brought..."

This reads as though a citizen of Virginia who commits a crime or offense on the Potomac river against Maryland (or a MD citizen) would be tried in Virginia. That's where my brain gets tied in knots. Could a Court of Virginia try a person for a crime of another state, for which no comparable crime exists in Virginia (or for that matter, even if a comparable crime does exist in Virginia)? If so, has that ever happened before? If so, to whom? Or is this appendix just a fancy way of saying "citizens of Virginia shall be under the jurisdiction of Virginia; citizens of Maryland shall be under the jurisdiction of Maryland; citizens of neither committing crimes against citizens of neither shall be under the jurisdiction of the state to which they're first brought." Are these really stupid questions?

There is a related thread here.

By the way, here's the cite for the Maryland/Virginia boundary, officially determined in 1877.

Article Fourth of the Black-Jenkins Award of 1877:
Virginia is entitled not only to full dominion over the soil to low-water mark on the south shore of the Potomac, but has a right to such use of the river beyond the line of low-water mark as may be necessary to the full enjoyment of her riparian ownership, without impeding the navigation or otherwise interfering with the proper use of it by Maryland, agreeably to the compact of seventeen hundred and eighty-five.
Click to expand...
What I can't wrap my head around is how does your post relate to THIS thread?
Click to expand...
Icetera's post about the Maryland border.
 
Wolf_shadow

Wolf_shadow

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

zoom6zoom wrote:
G3SecurityGroup.com wrote:
Why would they put the Restaurant at the end of a dock in the Potomac River :question::cool:
Click to expand...
Well, they used to do it because it wasn't legal to gamble in Virginia, but it was in Maryland.
Click to expand...

Riverboat on the Potomac in Colonial Beach is half in VA and Half over the Potomac in Maryland. If you carry there din't cross the line.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top