Skip to comments.BLM declares Burning Man Second Amendment-free zone(NV)
Posted on 08/31/2012 6:50:38 PM PDT by marktwain
The Bureau of Land Management has declared the Burning Man radical self-expression/self-reliance" community experiment in northern Nevadas Black Rock Desert a temporary weapons-free zone, GunLeaders Blog reported today. Citing a Department of the Interior Notice of Temporary Closure and Temporary Restrictions of Specific Uses on Public Lands in Pershing County, NV appearing in the Federal Register Volume 77, Number 157 (Tuesday, August 14, 2012), the edict mandates temporary closures and temporary restrictions will be in effect from August 13, 2012 to September 17, 2012.
Proclaiming its authority under 43 CFR 8364.1., and issued by Gene Seidlitz, District Manager, Winnemucca District, the restriction notice declared The possession of any weapon is prohibited except weapons within motor vehicles passing through the public closure area, without stopping, on the west or east playa roads.
The prohibitions above shall not apply to county, state, tribal, and Federal law enforcement personnel, or any person authorized by Federal law to possess a weapon," the notice continued. "Art projects' that include weapons and are sanctioned by BRC LLC will be permitted after obtaining authorization from the BLM authorized officer.
Any person who violates the above rules and restrictions may be tried before a United States Magistrate and fined no more than $1,000, imprisoned for no more than 12 months, or both, the notice warned, adding Such violations may also be subject to the enhanced fines provided for at 18 U.S.C. 3571.
Whether this upsets Burning Man organizers and participants, and there does not appear to be any mention of weapons in the almost-anything-goes gatherings rules and regulations, remains unknown, but there are larger principles at stake here.
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
ping for later reading.......
I guess we’ll see if it sets a precedent.
I must say that armed sexual deviants trippin’ balls is a bad combo.
What is it about the 2nd Amendment that don't they understand?
These little brown-shirt Napoleon's will try ANYTHING they believe they can get away with....
...And not back off until sufficiently challenged and/or soundly beaten in court.
I think one bored attorney with some nice letterhead and 15 minutes pro bono time would settle this....
They might threaten to shut down the entire event unless everyone agrees with their new policy...??
..For all those naked druggie hippie-freak commune-lovin' Obammie voters....
... and all their demons....
As a resident taxpayer in the state of Nevada where the Federal government owns the majority of the land, this worries me significantly.
If they can do this to the counter culture, then pause for a moment and think what they can do to us.
itle 43: Public Lands: Interior
Subtitle B: Regulations Relating to Public Lands (Continued)
CHAPTER II: BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
SUBCHAPTER H: RECREATION PROGRAMS
PART 8360: VISITOR SERVICES
Subpart 8364: Closures and Restrictions
8364.1 - Closure and restriction orders.
(a) To protect persons, property, and public lands and resources, the authorized officer may issue an order to close or restrict use of designated public lands.
(b) Each order shall:
(1) Identify the public lands, roads, trails or waterways that are closed to entry or restricted as to use;
(2) Specify the uses that are restricted;
(3) Specify the period of time during which the closure or restriction shall apply;
(4) Identify those persons who are exempt from the closure or restrictions;
(5) Be posted in the local Bureau of Land Management Office having jurisdiction over the lands to which the order applies;
(6) Be posted at places near and/or within the area to which the closure or restriction applies, in such manner and location as is reasonable to bring prohibitions to the attention of users;
(7) Include a statement on the reasons for the closure; and
(c) In issuing orders pursuant to this section, the authorized officer shall publish them in the Federal Register.
(d) Any person who fails to comply with a closure or restriction order issued under this subpart may be subject to the penalties provided in ? 8360.0-7 of this title.
It would seem Burning Man LLC has rented the desert and does not want the liability of dead ‘guests’.
They are a voluntary private association. Let them police their own rules.
If this works out, maybe next year they’ll declare the festival a drug-free zone.
Lynette Fromme on LSD with shotgun
A side note, you all know that RIAA is rescinding Jefferson Airplane’s Gold Album certification for doping?
I would like to see more of that, it was interesting.
Don’t have the slightest idea what or who the “Burning Man” is or was. Other than the hazard of a burning man carrying ammo while on fire, I really can’t see what objection to the others carrying the BLM would have.
There used to be quite a bit more, you have to search Manson sites. She goes on and on about guns and she handles the shotgun, out of her mind. I had it on HD three computers ago.
This is Nevada. The BLM can squawk all they want. If folks in those parts wanna be packin, there ain’t a DAMN THING the BLM will do about it. They don’t have the guts to step into a drug induced crowd in a western desert and start something like that.
So they can burn effigies but not shoot?
Yeah, right. Like none of them have guns. Grow up.
So they declare that it is an act of performance art for the spectators to shoot at the burning effigy, and it's okay.
WTF are you babbling about?
LOL! Can you imagine what would happen if they tried?! I can! Your comment is great.
The prohibitions above shall not apply to . . . any person authorized by Federal law to possess a weapon,”
“. . . the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
Well, that should make this pretty easy, shouldn’t it?
. . . the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
Well, that should make this pretty easy, shouldnt it?
You are absolutely correct, of course. Now if we could depend on judges to follow their oath of office, we would be home free.
The prohibitions above shall not apply to ... any person authorized by Federal law to possess a weapon,”
The Constitution is the supreme federal law, is it not?
I say so, You say so... But "progressives" have always had an issue with anything that restricts the power of the state.
In 1994 the radical wing of Burning Man put on two events of interest- A Drive By Shooting Gallery; participants would blast silhouette people targets from the back of a moving pickup truck, and Golf and Skeet; participant A would hit a golf ball with a short iron and participants B, C, D, etc., would try to shred it with bird shot.
During the setting up of the site that year, they also set a Pontiac station wagon loose on the Black Rock playa with a brick on the gas pedal and eventually brought it to a standstill with semi auto rifle fire also from the back of a pickup truck. There a YouTube video of the target practice that is the envy of any full auto machine gun family day at the range.
Some of them anarchist hippies like guns and freedom as much as any Freeper and are known to hang out with militia in Oregon, Washington and Idaho, due to certain common interests and shared enemies. Beware of single word descriptors; they contain little detail.
Step 2 is to declare that ALL land is Federal land...
” temporary weapons-free zone”
Soon............coming to a town near you, then your town and then your house.
And...........where is the Republican outcry?
I’ve attended once in the last 10 years, and can report that most are not high on drugs. A minority smoke pot, and most drink alcohol. About like and small town or large city in America on a holiday weekend.
I carried the whole time, incidentally.
Probably; and the sad thing is they can use the property tax as justification for the claim... after all, what happens when one doesn't pay property tax?