Feds still desecrating balls bluff cemetery

conhntr · Mar 26, 2011

For those who havent seen the disrepectful sign looming over the graves.

As good of pics as i could get didnt want to go on the fed property as i was OC.

Backstory for those who havent heard is some moron beurocrat decided all veteran affairs property had to be posted even A 500sqft civil war cemetery! Isnt this part of why we had the war in this first place? So idiots in washington would stay out of our business. Really disgusting to have it desecrating the graves. I visit the park all the time (nvrpa is carry friendly) amd my stomach turns whenever i pass this.

Citizen · Mar 26, 2011

Bwahahahahahahahaa!!!

What a buncha idiots. Any bureaucrat with half a lick of guts could justify not wasting money signing a 500 sqft, stone-walled cemetary.

DrMark · Mar 26, 2011

Ironically, USC18s930 (as referenced on the sign) doesn't even apply as that is not a facility (i.e. building).

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.

conhntr · Mar 26, 2011

Citizen i understand how its kinda funny like seeing a 5star crash tested smartcar destroyed in a minor accident. But really it is sad/disrepectful. Even a 2 yearold knows not to walk on graves!

Citizen · Mar 26, 2011

conhntr said:
Citizen i understand how its kinda funny like seeing a 5star crash tested smartcar destroyed in a minor accident. But really it is sad/disrepectful. Even a 2 yearold knows not to walk on graves!

I understand. Let me explain.

The laughter was ridicule. The sign is beyond sad/disrespectful. It is not even ordinary ridiculous. The people behind it are so utterly...well, ridiculous, they deserve to be ridiculed.

The government doesn't care if you, I, or others are mad, or sad, or disappointed about a given subject. But, they cannot stand ridicule. It shows they are not being taken seriously. And, that is one thing very few people can endure easily.

If you want something changed fast, then ridicule the underlying premises and rationale (you have to be on solid ground with your rationale, though).

For example, the highly intrusive violations of human dignity and the 4th Amendment by TSA and their custodial searches at airports would fold up overnight if a large enough chunk of the population ridiculed the [strike]screeners[/strike] searchers to their faces. If nothing else, the searchers would quit.

Basically, the mechanism is to demonstrate the target is so absurd as to be impossible to take seriously.

HandyHamlet · Mar 26, 2011

Seems to me that sign could be made to disappear with very little effort...

End of story.

Armed · Mar 26, 2011

Remove the sign from the post, take it out to a range and use it for a target, then drive it back and remount it to the post....

ocholsteroc · Mar 26, 2011

So from what I see, is a small brick wall and inside this "brick wall" is no guns allowed?

:banghead::banghead::banghead:

Citizen · Mar 26, 2011

Armed said:
Remove the sign from the post, take it out to a range and use it for a target, then drive it back and remount it to the post....

Now, now. If toilets that flush properly and light bulbs that actually illuminate are illegal, I'm sure it is probably a capital offense to make holes in fedgov signs.

I might suggest putting "bullet hole" stickers on the sign; but even that is probably illegal or some prosecutor would twist it into threatening.

However, last I heard, reminding is not illegal. So, just post some miniature CSA flags on the four corners of the wall to remind how the graves got there.

papa bear · Mar 26, 2011

most of my primary work is done in cemeteries. i do carry, but leave my firearm in the truck because of the sand. i wonder if that is against the rule

conhntr, i actually sit on the graves and many times stood on the vault

i have never understood these no carry in funerals rule and who the hell are you worried about shooting there [the cemetery]. wonder if it applies in a zombie raising:uhoh:

marshaul · Mar 26, 2011

conhntr said:
5star crash tested smartcar

Not exactly...

paramedic70002 · Mar 27, 2011

Did I read the brass sign correctly?

About 100 interred but I only see about 20 headstones. Is that the whole thing in the picture?

conhntr · Mar 27, 2011

No it is 54 interned 1 known 53 unknown. Entire site is shown as best i could without entering fed property as i was carrying think it has 20-25 stones. I believe the history was it was a mass burial under field conditions then the stones where added as monument. Not marking each grave.

Wasnt the north's best battle either!

Btw saw in wsj va is revising its casulty count seems it will be double the 14000 comonly quoted.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...02823930087328.html?mod=WSJ_article_MoreIn_US

celticredneck · Mar 28, 2011

papa bear said:
most of my primary work is done in cemeteries. i do carry, but leave my firearm in the truck because of the sand. i wonder if that is against the rule

conhntr, i actually sit on the graves and many times stood on the vault

i have never understood these no carry in funerals rule and who the hell are you worried about shooting there [the cemetery]. wonder if it applies in a zombie raising:uhoh:

There is a large cemetery in Petersburg Virginia with graves dating back to before the revolutionary war. It is in one of the worst areas in the city. I can't say from personal knowledge, but I have heard that people have been robbed there. So, at least in that case it's not the Zombies that one has to worry about.

zoom6zoom · Mar 28, 2011

most of my primary work is done in cemeteries.

See, you've got a lot in common with Chicago community organizers.

user · Mar 28, 2011

Now I'm curious about whether Loudoun Co. has any zoning ordinances applicable to signage. No question the statement on the sign is outright nonsense. Or, to use the technical legal term, "dust in the eyes" (a statement made known to be false with the intention that other people conform their behavior to it, thinking that it's true).

TFred · Mar 28, 2011

user said:
Now I'm curious about whether Loudoun Co. has any zoning ordinances applicable to signage. No question the statement on the sign is outright nonsense. Or, to use the technical legal term, "dust in the eyes" (a statement made known to be false with the intention that other people conform their behavior to it, thinking that it's true).

Is there any legal recourse to a private entity using a "dust in the eyes" sign? I'm still carrying a grudge about a local business who has falsely posted a sign saying that carry is unlawful on their property.

TFred

MKEgal · Mar 28, 2011

DrMark said:
Ironically, USC18s930 (as referenced on the sign) doesn't even apply as that is not a facility (i.e. building).

I thought the same thing. Someone didn't research the statute, just pulled it from the sign outside his/her own building.
I might recommend poking around to find out who's in charge of that cemetery (park service probably) & writing them (with pictures & legal cites). Maybe even CC your Congresscritter.

conhntr said:
kinda funny like seeing a 5star crash tested smartcar destroyed in a minor accident.

Part of the protection afforded the passengers is that part of the car disintegrates, absorbing energy that won't be passed on to harm the passenger. And the steel egg-shaped frame is strong.

HandyHamlet said:
Seems to me that sign could be made to disappear with very little effort...

I had the same thought. Looks like it's not attached to the post very well.

TFred said:
Is there any legal recourse to a private entity using a "dust in the eyes" sign? I'm still carrying a grudge about a local business who has falsely posted a sign saying that carry is unlawful on their property.

Private property, their rules... as long as they're not telling you to get out because you're exercising anything other than the 2A. That particular civil right isn't protected like religion, speech, etc. Though I agree they should probably say 'prohibited'.

Wolf_shadow · Mar 28, 2011

MKEgal said:
I thought the same thing. Someone didn't research the statute, just pulled it from the sign outside his/her own building.
I might recommend poking around to find out who's in charge of that cemetery (park service probably) & writing them (with pictures & legal cites). Maybe even CC your Congresscritter. SNIP...

While the stone wall-enclosed cemetery itself is managed through the Culpeper National Cemetery and owned by the Department of Veterans Affairs, the balance of the 223-acre (0.90 km2) park is managed through the Northern Virginia Regional Park Authority.

It seams the Department of Veterans Affairs puts this sign every where they oversee. :banghead:

These solders died fighting for Rights they want to take away!:cuss:

conhntr · Mar 28, 2011

Justto clarify the rest of the park under nvrpa is carry ok, and have talked to the caretaker and he is friendly and agrees the sign is a disgrace. But the department veteran affairs is a "stone wall" according to him.

Feds still desecrating balls bluff cemetery

Regular Member

Founder's Club Member

Lone Star Veteran

Regular Member

Founder's Club Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Founder's Club Member

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Accomplished Advocate

Regular Member

Regular Member

Activist Member

Regular Member