Burningman gun policy, unlawful & dangerous!

Share your views on the policies, philosophies, and spirit of Burning Man.
gunsmith
Posts: 77
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:55 am

Burningman gun policy, unlawful & dangerous!

Postby gunsmith » Wed Sep 15, 2010 9:27 pm

Burningman official lit/website claimed "firearms will be confiscated at the gate"
I recently confirmed with Washoe County S.D that this did not occur- good thing too because it is totally contrary to both NV law and Federal law as well.


I'm currently local and spent way to much time at the gate getting my friends in- there were no LE at the gate-SO, who was going to conduct this ill conceived confiscation if the need arises? There were zero ppl at the gate with the necessary training to wrest a loaded gun away from an armed attendee. ... or ... does burningman org simply imagine that a local rancher who decides to go visit ( not knowing this absurd illegal policy ) will simply hand over his loaded custom engraved Ruger Vaquero in .44 magnum to some EEeeed out drunken riffraff??

OR will the shroomed out hippie who happens to have the remembered reading the screwball lit imagine that he now has the duty to get himself shot trying to enforce this ill thought out/illegal policy?

NV/Fed law is quite clear, burningman can tell people they are not allowed on to the event with a gun and if the armed person ignores the illiteratatti at the gate the most he will face is a misdemeanor trespass ticket! and be informed that they will not be allowed back in!!

THE GUN WILL NEVER BE CONFISCATED!!!

That's all folks! NV is an open carry state- guns are a fact of life for most desert folks ( including black rock rangers and senior dpw and perimeter )

burningman org policy of "confiscation" is truly imbecilic ... there isn't even a hint of legality there, they never confirmed with any LE agency how to implement this policy ( no LE agency could sign off on this without opening itself to massive ridicule/lawsuits ).

Burningman is courting disaster and death by gunshot with this illegal ill planned policy
I may not be here now but I was there then

User avatar
1durphul
Posts: 659
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 1:14 pm

Re: Burningman gun policy, unlawful & dangerous!

Postby 1durphul » Wed Sep 15, 2010 9:44 pm

gunsmith wrote:Burningman official lit/website claimed "firearms will be confiscated at the gate"
I recently confirmed with Washoe County S.D that this did not occur- good thing too because it is totally contrary to both NV law and Federal law as well.

Burningman is courting disaster and death by gunshot with this illegal ill planned policy


I imagine that what they print in the literature is not how they train the gate crew. The gate crew I believe are among the most trained of the volunteers at the event, and I'm willing to bet their training explicitly tells them to turn away a vehicle with a gun, and as a last resort to hold entry at the gate until law enforcement arrives to resolve the issue.

gunsmith
Posts: 77
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:55 am

Re: Burningman gun policy, unlawful & dangerous!

Postby gunsmith » Wed Sep 15, 2010 9:52 pm

how on earth does an unarmed burner "hold" a determined armed person?
please explain exactly because that is exactly the problem, their attempt may get them KILLED dead, shot, pushing up daisies!

you see, you're falling victim to fantasy here- & that's fine for Internet armchair warriors but in reality, please don't try that at home... you are setting yourself up to be shot.
I may not be here now but I was there then

User avatar
robrob
Posts: 232
Joined: Wed May 05, 2010 4:31 pm
Burning Since: 2010
Camp Name: Love Drippins
Location: chicago, il

Postby robrob » Wed Sep 15, 2010 10:11 pm

whats the question here?

what would some chick at the gate do if some crazy local drove up guns blazing and said "i'm going in there withg my guns or i'll kill you"?

i am not following your logic, but i assume most people would not choose to die over nitpicking a fucking printed line on a ticket, so good point?

(btw- it's a private event. the photo policy supercedes "normal" laws; if you dont want to play by their rules, you don't have to come)

User avatar
1durphul
Posts: 659
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 1:14 pm

Re: Burningman gun policy, unlawful & dangerous!

Postby 1durphul » Wed Sep 15, 2010 10:14 pm

gunsmith wrote:how on earth does an unarmed burner "hold" a determined armed person?
please explain exactly because that is exactly the problem, their attempt may get them KILLED dead, shot, pushing up daisies!

you see, you're falling victim to fantasy here- & that's fine for Internet armchair warriors but in reality, please don't try that at home... you are setting yourself up to be shot.


You're failing to differentiate between somebody brandishing a weapon, and somebody who has a weapon in their vehicle.

Of course an unarmed gate person is going to be trained to let somebody brandishing a weapon to continue on, and then call the police after they've pull onto the entry road.

Somebody who has a weapon in their vehicle has not threatened anybody, but may be refusing to leave. The gate person tactfully would call for law enforcement while not granting entry. If the vehicle enters anyway, without having been granted entry, well, once again, they'll just call for one of the many BLM that lay in wait along the entry road.

As we know from the other threads, the BLM just love an opportunity to write a revenue generating ticket.

gunsmith
Posts: 77
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:55 am

Postby gunsmith » Wed Sep 15, 2010 10:18 pm

a ticket is all that will happen to the errant gun owner, however the topic of the thread is "official" burningman policy , which is confiscation.
I may not be here now but I was there then

User avatar
1durphul
Posts: 659
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 1:14 pm

Postby 1durphul » Wed Sep 15, 2010 10:24 pm

gunsmith wrote:a ticket is all that will happen to the errant gun owner, however the topic of the thread is "official" burningman policy , which is confiscation.


Right, a ticket (revenue) and expulsion from the event (per your words in the first post.)

All of that would be handled directly by the BLM or Sheriff. The gate crew is the soft touch, and you can bet that any attempt to push it beyond that point is going to result in immediate escalation to law enforcement.

And you can bet the gate crew has been trained that whether the weapon is a firearm, or a spatula, that the response is to stand aside and call Law Enforcement. BRC LLC has no desire for that liability problem.

gunsmith
Posts: 77
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:55 am

Postby gunsmith » Wed Sep 15, 2010 10:25 pm

robrob, please re read.

the topic is pretty clear, if burningman official lit claims they will confiscate firearms- I would be very interested in seeing their plan, and would love to see the LE agency participating face a huge lawsuit.

Also, being official bmorg policy I hope to prevent the hippies getting shot trying to implement the policy... so maybe reread robrob?
I may not be here now but I was there then

gunsmith
Posts: 77
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:55 am

Postby gunsmith » Wed Sep 15, 2010 10:27 pm

thats swell one dur ful. .... however official policy is the opposite of what you describe.

please try to stay on topic, thanks
I may not be here now but I was there then

User avatar
1durphul
Posts: 659
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 1:14 pm

Postby 1durphul » Wed Sep 15, 2010 11:05 pm

gunsmith wrote:thats swell one dur ful. .... however official policy is the opposite of what you describe.

please try to stay on topic, thanks


What is written in the literature, and what the volunteers and employees of BRC LLC are actually trained to do are undoubtedly two different things.

The answer to your question is that the gate crew is not going to knowingly let a firearm into the event. That is the answer.

Beyond that you're just talking crazy, because as Rob pointed out, no gate crew person is going to put themselves between the barrel of a gun and the event. That is when they would stand aside and call for the police. What you're saying is crazy because you're failing to distinguish between a rational gun owner acting in a responsible manner, and an irrational gun owner acting in an irresponsible manner.

In any event all outcomes are the same, a person with a visible firearm does not enter the event. They either turn around and leave to take home or hide the weapon better in their vehicle, surrender their firearm to gate (god knows if there is actually a handling policy for surrendered weapons), or are intercepted by the police after leaving the entry gate at which point they are ticketed and required to leave. Those are the three VERY OBVIOUS conclusions to your scenario.

There is of course a fourth scenario in which the gate person is shot by an irrational gun holder, but I'm fairly certain you were speaking of a rational gun holder.

jerroc
Posts: 178
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 9:38 am
Location: Oregon

Postby jerroc » Thu Sep 16, 2010 3:51 am

I don't see how this needs to be a burningman topic. Sounds like you should contact the BMO With your gun rights issues and inform them of local gun laws. There is nothing any of us here can do for you.

User avatar
teardropper
Posts: 1215
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2009 3:33 pm
Burning Since: 2009
Camp Name: The late Lazy Fucks. Now Orphan Eaters.
Location: Oregon

Postby teardropper » Thu Sep 16, 2010 4:45 am

And, gunsmith, you are not providing me with a lot of info except that guns are a fact of life and if you have a gun you can do what you want because you have a gun.

That's what I love about guns...
\^/
/..\ Furthur

User avatar
AntiM
Moderator
Posts: 18935
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2004 5:23 am
Burning Since: 2001
Camp Name: Anti M's Home for Wayward Art
Location: Wild, Wild West

Postby AntiM » Thu Sep 16, 2010 6:21 am

So Gunsmith, you say confiscation is illegal, and probably correctly. You volunteering to rectify the situation? Newsflash: eplaya is the wrong venue. If you want the BMORG's attention, you have to contact headquarters directly. If you want a lively discussion leading almost nowhere, you're in the right place.

Burning Man can deny entry to those carrying firearms, just as some churches and schools choose to do. How this is done is always a matter of legal technicalities and obviously, some debate.

OT: I live in Utah and am always eyeing the nice little Lady Smith and Wessons. Too bad I can only hit anything with a shotgun, huh?
http://burningman.org/timeline/

Poke me to experience my gooey insides!

User avatar
teardropper
Posts: 1215
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2009 3:33 pm
Burning Since: 2009
Camp Name: The late Lazy Fucks. Now Orphan Eaters.
Location: Oregon

Postby teardropper » Thu Sep 16, 2010 9:46 am

AntiM, stick to your strong points.

And then get a scatter gun...
\^/

/..\ Furthur

User avatar
Mojojita
Posts: 1165
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 10:17 am
Location: Under your bed

Postby Mojojita » Thu Sep 16, 2010 1:15 pm

AntiM wrote:So Gunsmith, you say confiscation is illegal, and probably correctly. You volunteering to rectify the situation? Newsflash: eplaya is the wrong venue. If you want the BMORG's attention, you have to contact headquarters directly. If you want a lively discussion leading almost nowhere, you're in the right place.

Burning Man can deny entry to those carrying firearms, just as some churches and schools choose to do. How this is done is always a matter of legal technicalities and obviously, some debate.

OT: I live in Utah and am always eyeing the nice little Lady Smith and Wessons. Too bad I can only hit anything with a shotgun, huh?


Yes Ma'am - I LOVE my LadySmith 9mm (and I'm a peacenik!) Smaller grips made for smaller hands - best gun I've ever owned.

gunsmith
Posts: 77
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:55 am

Postby gunsmith » Thu Sep 16, 2010 5:32 pm

yup, lady smith's are wonderful side arms. I'm sure there are many at the event- though all the non LE sidearms I saw were .40's



Oh, and maybe one day I will contact the LLC maybe not.
Just trying to do my part to let the eplaya reader know that just because official lit says that guns will be confiscated, don't try.

BTW, it's not that "people with guns can do whatever they want" that is patently false or there would be shooting ranges at burningman.

What is true is gun owners have to be convinced, using reason & civility to do or not do something.
I may not be here now but I was there then

User avatar
AntiM
Moderator
Posts: 18935
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2004 5:23 am
Burning Since: 2001
Camp Name: Anti M's Home for Wayward Art
Location: Wild, Wild West

Postby AntiM » Thu Sep 16, 2010 5:38 pm

I talked to someone today who assured me there is a gun safe at the Gate, and forms for safekeeping firearms. Now, I have not seen this myself, so it is still heresay, but now I wonder, has this been used? And by whom?
http://burningman.org/timeline/

Poke me to experience my gooey insides!

User avatar
teardropper
Posts: 1215
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2009 3:33 pm
Burning Since: 2009
Camp Name: The late Lazy Fucks. Now Orphan Eaters.
Location: Oregon

Postby teardropper » Thu Sep 16, 2010 5:52 pm

gunsmith wrote:BTW, it's not that "people with guns can do whatever they want" that is patently false or there would be shooting ranges at burningman.


Again, yup back at 'cha. I don't think people with guns can do whatever they want, but you sort of said that if some hippie wanted to take a gun away they could get shot.

And do you think it proves anything if the shooting ranges were back?

And another BTW: I would so be there to shoot an auto from the back of a pick up. That just seems like fun.
\^/

/..\ Furthur

User avatar
TheJudge
Posts: 408
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 3:56 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Postby TheJudge » Fri Sep 17, 2010 6:28 am

I have firearms training and have worked at the gate for 9 years. The majority of the gate staff have also had firearms training on their own (a lot of us are fans of guns. go figure)

The majority of the people that go through the gates understand that firearms are not allowed and therefore don't bring one into the event.

If you are open carrying when you show up at the gate, you have options: Hand it over, or go home. No one is going to wrestle you for your weapon. That's just stupid.

And if there is even the slightest bit of opposition from you to this rule, I would be calling one of the many BLM officers over to deal with you. If you refuse to hand over the weapon, you will be asked to leave. If you dont leave, you will be charged with trespassing. And if you're stupid enough to confront a federal officer and refuse to follow his orders when it comes to your firearm, you deserve whatever you get, which I would assume would be a world of hurt.

I cant believe this thread exists.
"Be at one with the dust of the earth. This is primal union." - Lao Tsu

User avatar
Lassen Forge
Posts: 5322
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2005 9:35 pm
Location: Where it's always... Wednesday. Don't lose your head over it.

Postby Lassen Forge » Fri Sep 17, 2010 7:51 am

It's not the back of your ticket that enacts the prohibition, it's the clause prohibiting firearms within the BLM closure. The firearm safe is a couresy extended (and there is actually more than one on site) in case you accidentally did bring a firearm.

The BLM closure order trumps the local and state law, and is legal. When you break the closure order you are in violation of federal law.

Ask the BLM - they're really upfront about that. Ask PCSO - they will tell you the same thing. Blackrock is FEDERAL land.

It;s like saying the tribal nations within the state cannot enact their own laws, but they can do so in much the same way, trumping state law.

Don't rely on rumor - go to the source and ask! Seems to work well!!!

bbb

User avatar
gyre
Posts: 15465
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 6:01 pm
Location: ΦάÏ

Postby gyre » Fri Sep 17, 2010 8:16 am

Firearm rules on federal land have changed.

The question is whether they have the authority to make a rule changing federal law, and if so, whether it is a rule or a law.
They aren't always the same thing.

The laws under which they set up special zones, have been updated.

This may not be a question they are qualified or even willing to answer correctly.

For instance, they may have the authority to give burning man the right to eject people with legal possession, but not the right to criminalize it.

Or, as is often the case with current firearm laws, the rights may not be allowed to be abridged by anyone other than the legislative body, in this case congress.

Kiro
Posts: 80
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 6:00 pm
Burning Since: 2017

Postby Kiro » Fri Sep 17, 2010 12:36 pm

AntiM wrote:If you want a lively discussion leading almost nowhere, you're in the right place.


Hah, I love this.

User avatar
Elderberry
Moderator
Posts: 13968
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 10:00 pm
Burning Since: 2007
Camp Name: Mudskipper Cafe
Location: Palm Springs
Contact:

Postby Elderberry » Fri Sep 17, 2010 12:55 pm

It's beyond my why anyone would want to bring a gun to Burning Man.

JK

User avatar
Fire_Moose
Posts: 2488
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2008 9:40 am
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Contact:

Postby Fire_Moose » Fri Sep 17, 2010 1:08 pm

To shoot dirty hippies....and anarchists.....and malcontents...
2K8 Burning Man Virgin 2K11 Camp Envy
2K9 Camp Envy 2k12 Fucking Flamingoes
2k10 Stag Camp 2k13 Camp Envy

User avatar
some seeing eye
Posts: 2218
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 12:06 pm
Burning Since: 1999
Camp Name: Woo
Location: The Oregon

Postby some seeing eye » Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:43 pm

Mr Gunsmith, you brought up an interesting point in your original question, which I think has been answered. But then the discussion went off track about people shooting one another.

The contract on the ticket is intended to allow the ORG to get insurance and hopefully reduce liability for the first person injured by gun. After the first shot is fired, insurance and LEO costs will go through the roof, if they can even be sustained at all. I won't even speculate about LEO behavior if the event continues after that. If a person is injured by another shot in a subsequent year it would be the end the event because the ORG would be sued out of existence.

IMO

User avatar
theCryptofishist
Posts: 40300
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 9:28 am
Burning Since: 2017
Location: In Exile

Postby theCryptofishist » Fri Sep 17, 2010 6:51 pm

Hm. I seem to remember that it was several years of guns that killed Festival by the Lake.
The Lady with a Lamprey

"The powerful are exploiting people, art and ideas, and this leads to us plebes debating how to best ration ice.
Man, no wonder they always win....." Lonesomebri

User avatar
Mosin
Posts: 358
Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 11:16 am
Burning Since: 2007
Location: Highland, CA
Contact:

Postby Mosin » Fri Sep 17, 2010 9:53 pm

jkisha wrote:It's beyond my why anyone would want to bring a gun to Burning Man.


Of course I'm just speculating, but I would guess there are Burners who bring a gun along every year for protection during their remote boondocking on the way to and from the event. If such hypothetical Burners are smart, they have a well-hidden and tamperproof (yet easily accessible...preferably spring-loaded door) gun safe, which allows them to completely forget about the weapon for the duration of the Burn.
Come down with fire - Lift my spirit higher -Someone's screaming my name - Come and make me holy again....

User avatar
Elderberry
Moderator
Posts: 13968
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 10:00 pm
Burning Since: 2007
Camp Name: Mudskipper Cafe
Location: Palm Springs
Contact:

Postby Elderberry » Sat Sep 18, 2010 10:57 am

ca
Mosin wrote:
jkisha wrote:It's beyond my why anyone would want to bring a gun to Burning Man.


Of course I'm just speculating, but I would guess there are Burners who bring a gun along every year for protection during their remote boondocking on the way to and from the event. If such hypothetical Burners are smart, they have a well-hidden and tamperproof (yet easily accessible...preferably spring-loaded door) gun safe, which allows them to completely forget about the weapon for the duration of the Burn.


Hmmmm.....In which case I would ask, why would anyone need a gun for safety if they were traveling to the burn from any place in the United States or Canada????

I've driven cross-country many times and have never felt the need for carrying a gun.

JK

User avatar
Mosin
Posts: 358
Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 11:16 am
Burning Since: 2007
Location: Highland, CA
Contact:

Postby Mosin » Sat Sep 18, 2010 12:03 pm

jkisha wrote:
Hmmmm.....In which case I would ask, why would anyone need a gun for safety if they were traveling to the burn from any place in the United States or Canada????

I've driven cross-country many times and have never felt the need for carrying a gun.


They must be paranoid and/or delusional, since we all know that the highways and byways of the United States and Canada are 100% free of methhead scumbags and criminal opportunists. Plus, there are always LEOs right there to step in... just a phone call away, from remote locations along Hwy 395, to the many lovely, welcoming urban areas of the 909.
Come down with fire - Lift my spirit higher -Someone's screaming my name - Come and make me holy again....

User avatar
1durphul
Posts: 659
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 1:14 pm

Postby 1durphul » Sat Sep 18, 2010 3:07 pm

Mosin wrote:
jkisha wrote:
Hmmmm.....In which case I would ask, why would anyone need a gun for safety if they were traveling to the burn from any place in the United States or Canada????

I've driven cross-country many times and have never felt the need for carrying a gun.


They must be paranoid and/or delusional, since we all know that the highways and byways of the United States and Canada are 100% free of methhead scumbags and criminal opportunists. Plus, there are always LEOs right there to step in... just a phone call away, from remote locations along Hwy 395, to the many lovely, welcoming urban areas of the 909.


While I know gun enthusiasts like to masturbate with their gun in one hand, and their cock in the other... (not at all homoerotic... no... not... at... all) It is incredibly unlikely that all of following circumstances would align so that you don't end up in a worse predicament: 1) you need a gun 2) you have the gun ready and available, 3) your usage would be seen as justifiable under the law and 4) you(')r(e) faster/aim is better than your opponent.


Return to “Philosophical Center”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest