The Virginian-Pilot
©
NORFOLK
The city will prosecute a trespassing charge against Hampton resident Dan Moore after he was ordered to leave Waterside last week for wearing a gun on his hip, and according to police, refused to leave.
Although the retail complex has received millions of taxpayer dollars, it is a private institution that has the right to ban guns, City Attorney Bernard A. Pishko said.
In Virginia, it is legal to carry a handgun in public.
"Waterside is a commercial venture, with restaurants and shops," Pishko said. "This is not the kind of activity you would expect to find in a public building."
Moore, who has had several brushes with Norfolk police over his right to carry a gun, attended a City Council meeting on Oct. 8. He and members of the Virginia Citizens Defense League told the council that they were upset about how they were being treated by police.
Later that night, Moore and other members of the group were leaving a Waterside restaurant when they were stopped by an off-duty Norfolk police officer. They were all wearing guns. Moore was the only one arrested.
He is scheduled to appear in General District Court on Nov. 14. He could face up to a year in jail and a hefty fine if convicted of the misdemeanor.
Moore said Wednesday that he plans to contest the charge because Waterside is owned by taxpayers.
"The city is talking about tearing it down because it's not making enough money," he said. "There is no question that it is city property."
Moore also said the arresting officer told him that he could not carry a gun inside Waterside because it is a public place. However, he denies refusing to leave Waterside.
No judge will consider Waterside private property, said Philip Van Cleave, who heads the gun rights group. "The city has a big stake in that building. I think the city attorney is doing a lot of wishful thinking."
Twice before, Moore said he has been illegally stopped and questioned by Norfolk police. After the first incident a year ago, when he was detained while downtown, the city paid Moore $10,000 to avoid a lawsuit.
City officials say that although Moore and others who openly carry guns downtown are within their rights, they have done so brazenly in an attempt to attract attention. This time, Moore violated the law and his judgment "could end up costing him," Pishko said.
Pishko's office rarely sends attorneys to prosecute misdemeanors, but Pishko said they will handle this case because of its high profile nature and the precedent it could set.
Van Cleave said his group may help Moore pay for legal representation.
"He stood up to the city, and we certainly can't have that, can we?" Van Cleave asked sarcastically.
"Unfortunately, I've come to expect no less from Norfolk."
Harry Minium, (757) 446-2371, harry.minium@pilotonline.com

Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Twitter
Google
Yahoo


the sporting side
"If you are ever willing to accept an olive branch, allow me or someone you know to take you to the range so you are able to see the sporting side of the issue."
Thanks, but I've been to a firing range before. Please know it isn't that "sport" I'm concerned about. The "sport", if you will, of walking around town posing with an open carry is no sport.
donvabeach: Funny, I didn't
donvabeach: Funny, I didn't know that open carry was a privilege.
Gertz, the same could be said of those who open carry are sick of LEO's using their police power to arrest them asserting their rights under the law that they disagree with.
We are founded on God and guns
Can I still be called an American? I sit on the side lines and watch as the "Great Nation" I was born into is torn away piece by piece.
The God that I know is now denied access to certain buildings except of course when his book is necessary withn them to assure the truth is told.
Each of the freedoms I once enjoyed have been manipulated to the point where slavery is now commonplace on a national scale and is politically mandated through the current child support enforcement system.In a society where homosexual activities are overlooked and possibly even rewarded through legislature I fail to see logical evidence of any misconduct on behalf of Mr. Moore and appreciate the efforts of both Mr. Moore and the VCDL to presrve my rights as a human being with orignal American values.
donvabeach has it right
"behind a guy who was open carrying one day last month, and to see the looks on some of the people's faces, you'd think he was exposing himself.
I don't need that aggravation. Why let the "bad guys" know that you're armed? It just allows gives them more intel, if they decide to try to rob you. I'd rather let them wonder.
I hope all this notoriety doesn't end up with some do-gooders from some anti-gun groups getting a law passed to outlaw all gun carrying. Sometimes, it's better just to enjoy what privileges you have, instead of rubbing the sheeples' faces in them."
Sir, you have it right. People are already getting more active against open carry and the poser, and I'm sure you know some thrive on aggravation.
Some facts for gregoryb68599 to consider...
The Second Amendment (2A) specifies bearing arms - this includes other weapons besides firearms. The 2A is intentionally broad to include all arms from arrows to mortars used for protecting free men from tyrannical government.
If you suggest that the 2A only applies to 200+ year old firearms you must agree also that the First Amendment only applies only to the spoken word, writing with a quill on parchment paper, and publication via manual Gutenberg printing presses?
Would our Founding Fathers object to ideas and thoughts expressed using the telephone, typewriter, radio, billboard, television, computer, and internet?
Is the First Amendment inapplicable to or incompatible with these new technologies?
Jermflux
Very nice offer... I would not hold your breath, but still a nice offer.
...that is rich!
You talking about people that just don't want there rights abused as being hateful. ...and in the same thread your taking about a black guy needing to learn to stay "where he belongs". Unbelievable!
Gertz
Well we can say one thing for ya, at least you stick to your GUNS! Ha, get it? Although I strongly disagree with your views, I admire your tenacity. I do personally know people that have had the same views until I took them to the range to learn how to shoot. Once they are exposed to firearms I find it hard to get them to leave. If you are ever willing to accept an olive branch, allow me or someone you know to take you to the range so you are able to see the sporting side of the issue. Sometimes it helps both sides of an issue if ya just take a breath and share a hotdog. Just a thought…
The difference between a flint lock pistol and a 357 handgun?
Chet I think its time to give you a history lesson. In the time of our Founding Fathers they could have never envisioned the power and round capacity of any handgun from a 357 to a 9 mm. For the simple reason that all handguns were muzzle-loading flintlocks capable of firing one shot each. Usually it would take five men firing five shots simultaneously to stun a man so that he could be taken prisoner or stabbed to death with a sword or knife as attempting to reload was a waste of time and could result in escape or wrath of the enemy. That is why the weapons of choice were flintlock long rifles which was capable of killing a man with a well placed shot, which would explain the bayonet which was placed on the end of the long gun. Therefore the flintlock pistols of our Founding Fathers were essentially stun guns. Don't even try to cheapen the genius and wisdom of our Founding Farthers with your childish logic.
Gertz...
Gertz...I hope you do not consider this simple question "beyond stupidity."
What would you suggest is the best way to protect my wife and children from a drug crazed violent criminal, just out of prison, intent on a night filled with rape and murder?
Please share with me your suggestion.
Right now I carry a firearm to protect them - for the life of me I can't think of any tool more useful in a situation as described above.