• 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.

Gov of US Virgin Islands allows NatGuard to confsicate guns and ammo

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
I know some States have laws against this very type of thing. But very troubling. I saw this linked on Drudge this morning...

Full story at this link at the Daily Caller.

Excerpt:

U.S. Virgin Islands Gov. Kenneth Mapp signed an emergency order allowing the seizure of private guns, ammunition, explosives and property the National Guard may need to respond to Hurricane Irma.

Mapp signed the order Monday in preparation for Hurricane Irma. The order allows the Adjutant General of the Virgin Islands to seize private property they believe necessary to protect the islands, subject to approval by the territory’s Justice Department.
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,337
Location
Valhalla
Some might say that all of theirs were lost in a tragic boating accident.

I any event, I am opposed to confiscation - let the National Guard use their own.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
8,378
Location
here nc
EWWWW....AHHHH......R E A L L Y????

the gun sites are a twitter of the alleged injustices being done by the Governor in the Virgin Islands, bought in 1917 from Denmark, this area is considered an Unincorporated Territory by the Federal governing bodies of this country.

As an Unincorporated Territory, which only “fundamental” personal rights under the U.S. (added for clarity) Constitution apply, as undefined by several US Supreme Court cases: "In general, fundamental rights, applicable to all individuals subject to the sovereignty of the United States, are “inherent, although unexpressed principles which are the basis of all free government.” (Dorr v. United States, 195 U.S. 138, 147 (1904)) and (Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244, 282-83 (1901)).

The Supreme Court has not defined precisely which parts of the Constitution establish fundamental rights. (Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1, 13 (1957))"
Cite: GAO/OGC-98-5 The U.S. Constitution and Insular Areas, page 7.

a review of Virgin Islands Constitution Order 2007, specifically Chapter 2, FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS OF THE INDIVIDUAL, Section 9 states:

Whereas every person in the Virgin Islands is entitled to the fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual;


Whereas those fundamental rights and freedoms are enjoyed without distinction of any kind, such as sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national, ethnic or social origin, association with a national minority, property, family relations, economic status, disability, age, birth, sexual orientation, marital or other status, subject only to prescribed limitations;

Whereas it is recognised that those fundamental rights and freedoms apply, subject to respect for the rights and freedoms of others and for the public interest, to each and all of the following, namely—
(a) life, equality, liberty, security of the person and the protection of the law;
(b) freedom of conscience, expression, movement, assembly and association; and
(c) protection for private and family life, the privacy of the home and other property and from deprivation of property save in the public interest and on payment of fair compensation;


and section 27.—(1) A period of public emergency may be declared by the Governor, by proclamation published in the manner provided in subsection (2), when—(a) the well-being or security of the Virgin Islands is threatened by war, invasion, general insurrection, public disorder, natural disaster or other public emergency; and 19
(b) the declaration is considered necessary by the Governor to maintain or restore peace and order.

(3) Without prejudice to the power of the Legislature to make laws under this Constitution, during a period of public emergency the Governor may make such regulations for the Virgin Islands as appear to him or her to be necessary or expedient for securing the public safety, the defence of the Virgin Islands or the maintenance of public order, or for maintaining supplies and services essential to the life of the community.

Cite: http://www.bvi.gov.vg/virgin-islands-constitution

hummm, bottom line appears much to do about nothing since:
1. Not a US 'state' but rather a Unincorporated Territory w/only 'fundamental' rights provided to its citizens.

2. The Unincorporated Territory's 2007 Constitution does not contain the word, gun, firearm, arms and as pointed out in section 9 above and section 27, no Territorial constitutional governance has been breached to assure the safety of it's citizens!

you wish to debate the merits of this, remember...no US laws have been broken, the Governor is functioning under the Territory's Constitution and it is not under US governance.
 
Last edited:

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
8,378
Location
here nc
+1

The National Guard has a bigger budget than most and cooler toys.
VI's NG budget, 2017 projected is 5.6M compared to "The House Appropriations Committee’s Defense spending bill for fiscal year 2016 allocates $578.6 billion in discretionary funding which is $800 million above the President’s Budget Request. The bill also provides $88.4 billion for Overseas Contingency Operations for the Department of Defense."
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
the gun sites are a twitter of the alleged injustices being done by the Governor in the Virgin Islands, bought in 1917 from Denmark, this area is considered an Unincorporated Territory by the Federal governing bodies of this country.

As an Unincorporated Territory, which only “fundamental” personal rights under the U.S. (added for clarity) Constitution apply, as undefined by several US Supreme Court cases: "In general, fundamental rights, applicable to all individuals subject to the sovereignty of the United States, are “inherent, although unexpressed principles which are the basis of all free government.” (Dorr v. United States, 195 U.S. 138, 147 (1904)) and (Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244, 282-83 (1901)).

....

you wish to debate the merits of this, remember...no US laws have been broken, the Governor is functioning under the Territory's Constitution and it is not under US governance.

We are not other gun sites. And I think whether something is an "injustice" or not has far less to do with constitutions, laws, and court rulings than with what natural law dictates.

I'm reminded that under current SCOTUS rulings, police enjoy Qualified Immunity and thus no laws are broken when citizens victimized by overzealous cops acting outside the law but with "good faith" are left without legal recourse. I don't recall your posting anything like this post in response to frequent postings here expressing concerns about the injustices of QI.

That all said, do you not believe that the RKBA are fundamentals right under our constitution? Does it not flow as a fundamental right from the fundamental, natural right to defend one's own life and limb? Courts may disagree and rule this seizure of private property most useful to defend life and limb as "legal."

So too was the banning of certain guns and ammo magazines "legal". So too was slavery once legal, followed by Segregation and Jim Crow being the law of the land in many places. Injustices all.

Your post does highlight the current failings of the SCOTUS and Congress to make clear that RKBA are fundamental rights not to be infringed anywhere the US flag flies.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
8,378
Location
here nc
We are not other gun sites. And I think whether something is an "injustice" or not has far less to do with constitutions, laws, and court rulings than with what natural law dictates.

I'm reminded that under current SCOTUS rulings, police enjoy Qualified Immunity and thus no laws are broken when citizens victimized by overzealous cops acting outside the law but with "good faith" are left without legal recourse. I don't recall your posting anything like this post in response to frequent postings here expressing concerns about the injustices of QI.

That all said, do you not believe that the RKBA are fundamentals right under our constitution? Does it not flow as a fundamental right from the fundamental, natural right to defend one's own life and limb? Courts may disagree and rule this seizure of private property most useful to defend life and limb as "legal."

So too was the banning of certain guns and ammo magazines "legal". So too was slavery once legal, followed by Segregation and Jim Crow being the law of the land in many places. Injustices all.

Your post does highlight the current failings of the SCOTUS and Congress to make clear that RKBA are fundamental rights not to be infringed anywhere the US flag flies.
to which set of moral principles or natural law are you referring? who defines whose natural law is applicable to the VIslands?

the Virgin Island is not a U.S. state, the citizens are independently governed by a sovereign Constitution which has not been broken in any way shape or fashion.

if this appalls your sensibilities, go put a protest on your inactive website and scream bloody murder about it.

when oh when is the US going to quit proselytizing our perceptions of moral principles or natural laws on others - tis getting olde! (including the mix of metaphors of fundamental verses natural rights, or inclusion of slavery, and other of your perceived injustices)
 
Last edited:

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
to which set of moral principles or natural law are you referring? who defines whose natural law is applicable to the VIslands?
Do you deny a natural right to defend one's life and limb? Do you question whether such a right naturally includes the RsTKBA?

I believe the RsTKBA preclude the US Constitution which does not grant any such rights, but merely recognizes their pre-existence and explicitly prohibits our government from infringing them.

Do you believe differently?
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,337
Location
Valhalla
The US constitution has little to nothing to do with the Virgin Islands.

Neither does our federal government.
 
Last edited:

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,008
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
VI tax code is the same code under the federal system, Title 26 USC. All that is done is that where it says United States in the federal code you substitute VI. Federal law allows for deductions from your federal income tax if you invest in the VI. But, if you do the IRS will attack you for evasion, clamming you are trying to evade federal taxes.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
8,378
Location
here nc
Do you deny a natural right to defend one's life and limb? Do you question whether such a right naturally includes the RsTKBA?

I believe the RsTKBA preclude the US Constitution which does not grant any such rights, but merely recognizes their pre-existence and explicitly prohibits our government from infringing them.

Do you believe differently?
please, again cease trying to put your spin on something i have not articulated!

your beliefs are your strictly your biased opinion(s) and while you believe are germane, they are not against what the VIsland's Governor, constitutionally did, in face of an approaching and predicted massive hurricane in an effort directed towards protecting the Island's sovereign citizens.
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
please, again cease trying to put your spin on something i have not articulated!
This is a pro-RKBA / pro-OC forum.

I have not disputed your fine citation of VI law at all. Neither do I ever encourage violation of laws. I've merely offered my opinion that the RsTKBA are fundamental, natural rights. It is that belief that motivates me to seek changes to laws that I believe infringe the Rights to Keep and Bear Arms.

Please, articulate your beliefs on whether the RsTKBA are fundamental and/or natural rights.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
8,378
Location
here nc
This is a pro-RKBA / pro-OC forum.

I have not disputed your fine citation of VI law at all. Neither do I ever encourage violation of laws. I've merely offered my opinion that the RsTKBA are fundamental, natural rights. It is that belief that motivates me to seek changes to laws that I believe infringe the Rights to Keep and Bear Arms.

Please, articulate your beliefs on whether the RsTKBA are fundamental and/or natural rights.
Charles, true to your nature, you continue to misrepresent terms, in this case fundamental natural rights; therefore, i find it extremely difficult to respond to your question appropriately as long as you believe these concepts are the same.

based on my Solipsism based philosophical outlook, i find it is difficult to discern your perception of these two terms w/o some level of definition so that i, and perhaps other members, might sufficiently discuss the terms so you would understand.

on the other hand you may truly believe they are N E A R L Y synonymous but only in a vast stretch of someone's imagination.
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
Charles, true to your nature,
and true to youR nature U continue to ignore the relevant question with bizarre sides Roads

why don't you simplY tell us all Your viewS of the Rights to Keep and Bear Arms?

Call them what you will, fundamental, natural, god given, human, inherent, self evident--it matters not

expounD yoUr views on the rstkba, please
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
8,378
Location
here nc
and true to youR nature U continue to ignore the relevant question with bizarre sides Roads

why don't you simplY tell us all Your viewS of the Rights to Keep and Bear Arms?

Call them what you will, fundamental, natural, god given, human, inherent, self evident--it matters not

expounD yoUr views on the rstkba, please
sorry you fail on this emulation...

you fail on articulating your position...shows i was right you believe the terms are nearly synonymous...

therefore, not playing

later
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
therefore, not playing
iN 0ther words y0u don'T want to revEa1 your true positions on the rstkba

one starts to wOnder what your true positions aRe as you rarely poSt directly on topic of RKBA and insTead spend much of your tIme here qUoTe challenge uNquOte mostly off topic nits of what othErs post

plEase do us All a favor an "play" less oFten

just my 2 cents and my opinion of course.

no offense IntendED
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,008
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
REVISED ORGANIC ACT OF 1954 regulates the Virgin Islands.
The following provisions of and amendments to the Constitution of the United States are hereby extended to the Virgin Islands to the extent that they have not been previously extended to that territory and shall have the same force and effect there as in the United States or in any State of the United States: article I, section 9, clauses 2 and 3; article IV, section 1 and section 2, clause 1; article VI, clause 3; the first to ninth amendments inclusive; the thirteenth amendment; the second sentence of section 1 of the fourteenth amendment; and the fifteenth and nineteenth amendments;
The Virgin Islands is controlled by the federal government.

PUBLIC LAW 109–295—OCT. 4, 2006, Section 706 "FIREARMS POLICIES" (42 USC 5207) which says:
“(a) PROHIBITION ON CONFISCATION OF FIREARMS—No officer or employee of the United States (including any member of theuniformed services), or person operating pursuant to or under color of Federal law, or receiving Federal funds, or under control of any Federal official, or providing services to such an officer, employee, or other person, while acting in support of relief from a major disaster or emergency, may—
‘‘(1) temporarily or permanently seize, or authorize seizure of, any firearm the possession of which is not prohibited under Federal, State, or local law, other than for forfeiture in compliance with Federal law or as evidence in a criminal investigation;...............
The Governor's order is unlawful.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
8,378
Location
here nc
REVISED ORGANIC ACT OF 1954 regulates the Virgin Islands.

The Virgin Islands is controlled by the federal government.

PUBLIC LAW 109–295—OCT. 4, 2006, Section 706 "FIREARMS POLICIES" (42 USC 5207) which says:


The Governor's order is unlawful.
CoL, i am horrible about reading decisions, but i think the 1954 act was contested in the Supreme Court (Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1, 13 (1957))" resulting in the Supreme Court apparently could not delineate which parts of the Constitution establish fundamental rights.

if mistaken, hollar and i will delete this as this post might add a further confusion factor.
 
Top