Nesbitt (Morris) v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers!

What's going on in Washington, D.C.?

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton

User avatar

Oldgringo
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 11203
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2008 10:15 pm
Location: Pineywoods of east Texas

Re: Nesbitt (Morris) v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers!

#31

Post by Oldgringo »

Liberty wrote:Great News! The 4 years this has taken is ridiculous. I hope they permanently fix this for the rest of us soon.
Four (or more) years is job security for the governmental parasites!

flechero
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 3485
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 5:04 pm
Location: Central Texas

Re: Nesbitt (Morris) v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers!

#32

Post by flechero »

Great news, indeed!

As an avid fisherman- and living right between to COE lakes, this is huge! Boat ramps at 2am after night fishing are pretty scary places, and crawling with unscrupulous people!!!
User avatar

Topic author
ELB
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 16
Posts: 8128
Joined: Tue May 22, 2007 9:34 pm
Location: Seguin

Re: Nesbitt (Morris) v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers!

#33

Post by ELB »

I got curious last week about the status of this so I emailed the Mountain States Legal Foundation (who is representing Nesbitt and Baker) to ask. I got a polite email back from William Perry Pendley, who runs MSLF (and for all I know IS MSLF) and he basically said negotiations on the new policy are continuing.
USAF 1982-2005
____________
User avatar

Topic author
ELB
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 16
Posts: 8128
Joined: Tue May 22, 2007 9:34 pm
Location: Seguin

Re: Nesbitt (Morris) v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers!

#34

Post by ELB »

Some weeks back I once again emailed MSLF and asked for a status of the mediation that was supposed to be going on regarding rollback of the COE's regulations forbidding functional firearms on COE property.

I have received no reply.

However, today I looked through the MSLF website to see if there were any changes. There is a announcement/press release dated 15 Dec 17.
https://www.mountainstateslegal.org/new ... nsw7-Ry6Uk

In summary it appears to say three things:

1. On November 20, 2017, the Corps granted Mrs. Nesbitt and Mr. Baker [the plaintiffs] written permission to carry loaded firearms on Corps-managed lands in Idaho, Oregon, Washington, and Montana, subject to certain restrictions and local laws regarding the carrying of concealed weapons.

2. The plaintiffs and the Army COE have jointly asked the Ninth Circuit to dismiss the Army COE's appeal of the federal district judge's permanent injunction against the COE's regulations against having functional firearms on COE land, and the Ninth has done so.

3. The federal district judge's permanent injunction against the COE is still in force "while the agency considers amending its regulation"...but it applies only to COE lands in Idaho.

So Nesbitt and Baker can carry pretty much anywhere they are likely to go on COE lands in a four state area, people in Idaho can carry on COE lands in Idaho, and the rest of us are still deprived by regulation of our 2A rights on COE land.

Absent pressure from the courts, I see no reason to expect the COE to make any serious effort to amend their regulations. If bothered by anyone enough to respond, my pessimistic assessment is they will say they need to wait to see how the national reciprocity bill pending in Congress turns out (recall it would allow carry on federal lands).

Not holding my breath.
USAF 1982-2005
____________
User avatar

Pariah3j
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 865
Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2015 5:03 pm
Location: Webster

Re: Nesbitt (Morris) v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers!

#35

Post by Pariah3j »

Maybe it'll take a new case in our state to get Texas added to the list... any volunteers? :mrgreen:
"When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny" - Thomas Jefferson
User avatar

The Annoyed Man
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 26790
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:59 pm
Location: North Richland Hills, Texas
Contact:

Re: Nesbitt (Morris) v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers!

#36

Post by The Annoyed Man »

ELB wrote:Absent pressure from the courts, I see no reason to expect the COE to make any serious effort to amend their regulations. If bothered by anyone enough to respond, my pessimistic assessment is they will say they need to wait to see how the national reciprocity bill pending in Congress turns out (recall it would allow carry on federal lands).

Not holding my breath.
This is why the pessimist in me says that things like this will NEVER change until we burn this thing down and start over. Why do they persist in repressing freedom? Because they CAN, and nobody will hold them to account for it.

Stop and think for a minute what it means that the federal gov’t is so afraid of its own citizens - the citizens who in theory are their masters - that they forbid those citizens a constitutional right anywhere near or on a federal facility - even a facility where the citizen is not likely to encounter a federal employee most of the time. What are they afraid of? Their fascist laws have zero effect on criminals, and they KNOW this. So what are they afraid of?

What they are afraid of is the liberty of free citizens exercising their rights in a responsible manner, telling gov’t that they need less of it, not more, and that the gov’t can go pound sand. They are afraid of a citizenry that holds first and foremost that the gov’t serves us, not the other way around, and that they only have as much power as we let them have. In addition to that fear, they ALSO agree with Chairman Mao that all political power flows from the barrel of a gun. So, wherever they forbid YOU to have a gun, THEY hold the power.

It is really that simple.

And since power is a more addictive drug than any opiate, they’ll never willingly surrender it. Therefore, it has to be taken from them. I would vastly prefer that this be through the power of the ballot box, but if gov’t doesn’t back down, we may not be afforded that choice. What then?

These are questions every American has to answer for themselves. Are they willing to continue the slide into despotism; are they willing to vote intelligently; are they willing to hoist the Jolly Roger and take matters into their own hands when all else fails?
“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.”

― G. Michael Hopf, "Those Who Remain"

#TINVOWOOT
User avatar

bblhd672
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 4811
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 10:43 am
Location: TX

Re: Nesbitt (Morris) v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers!

#37

Post by bblhd672 »

The Annoyed Man wrote:
ELB wrote:Absent pressure from the courts, I see no reason to expect the COE to make any serious effort to amend their regulations. If bothered by anyone enough to respond, my pessimistic assessment is they will say they need to wait to see how the national reciprocity bill pending in Congress turns out (recall it would allow carry on federal lands).

Not holding my breath.
This is why the pessimist in me says that things like this will NEVER change until we burn this thing down and start over. Why do they persist in repressing freedom? Because they CAN, and nobody will hold them to account for it.

Stop and think for a minute what it means that the federal gov’t is so afraid of its own citizens - the citizens who in theory are their masters - that they forbid those citizens a constitutional right anywhere near or on a federal facility - even a facility where the citizen is not likely to encounter a federal employee most of the time. What are they afraid of? Their fascist laws have zero effect on criminals, and they KNOW this. So what are they afraid of?

What they are afraid of is the liberty of free citizens exercising their rights in a responsible manner, telling gov’t that they need less of it, not more, and that the gov’t can go pound sand. They are afraid of a citizenry that holds first and foremost that the gov’t serves us, not the other way around, and that they only have as much power as we let them have. In addition to that fear, they ALSO agree with Chairman Mao that all political power flows from the barrel of a gun. So, wherever they forbid YOU to have a gun, THEY hold the power.

It is really that simple.

And since power is a more addictive drug than any opiate, they’ll never willingly surrender it. Therefore, it has to be taken from them. I would vastly prefer that this be through the power of the ballot box, but if gov’t doesn’t back down, we may not be afforded that choice. What then?

These are questions every American has to answer for themselves. Are they willing to continue the slide into despotism; are they willing to vote intelligently; are they willing to hoist the Jolly Roger and take matters into their own hands when all else fails?
The arrogance of the fed .gov is obviously out of control with the ongoing revelations about the Foolish Bumbling Incompetents attempts to subvert the election process and put Felonia Von Pantsuit into power. If Congress and the Judiciary doesn't do their job to clean up and hold accountable the unlawful actions of government appointees and employees, the country cannot continue.
The left lies about everything. Truth is a liberal value, and truth is a conservative value, but it has never been a left-wing value. People on the left say whatever advances their immediate agenda. Power is their moral lodestar; therefore, truth is always subservient to it. - Dennis Prager

chasfm11
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 4136
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:01 pm
Location: Northern DFW

Re: Nesbitt (Morris) v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers!

#38

Post by chasfm11 »

The Annoyed Man wrote:
ELB wrote:Absent pressure from the courts, I see no reason to expect the COE to make any serious effort to amend their regulations. If bothered by anyone enough to respond, my pessimistic assessment is they will say they need to wait to see how the national reciprocity bill pending in Congress turns out (recall it would allow carry on federal lands).

Not holding my breath.
This is why the pessimist in me says that things like this will NEVER change until we burn this thing down and start over. Why do they persist in repressing freedom? Because they CAN, and nobody will hold them to account for it.

Stop and think for a minute what it means that the federal gov’t is so afraid of its own citizens - the citizens who in theory are their masters - that they forbid those citizens a constitutional right anywhere near or on a federal facility - even a facility where the citizen is not likely to encounter a federal employee most of the time. What are they afraid of? Their fascist laws have zero effect on criminals, and they KNOW this. So what are they afraid of?

What they are afraid of is the liberty of free citizens exercising their rights in a responsible manner, telling gov’t that they need less of it, not more, and that the gov’t can go pound sand. They are afraid of a citizenry that holds first and foremost that the gov’t serves us, not the other way around, and that they only have as much power as we let them have. In addition to that fear, they ALSO agree with Chairman Mao that all political power flows from the barrel of a gun. So, wherever they forbid YOU to have a gun, THEY hold the power.

It is really that simple.

And since power is a more addictive drug than any opiate, they’ll never willingly surrender it. Therefore, it has to be taken from them. I would vastly prefer that this be through the power of the ballot box, but if gov’t doesn’t back down, we may not be afforded that choice. What then?

These are questions every American has to answer for themselves. Are they willing to continue the slide into despotism; are they willing to vote intelligently; are they willing to hoist the Jolly Roger and take matters into their own hands when all else fails?
I have hoped that the NRA would help to spearhead this change. While I recognize that the NRA cannot right all of the 2nd Amendment wrongs, at the heart of this, an executive action is all that is needed to fix it. President Trump to direct the Secretary of the Army to do just that. You and I cannot bring enough focus to the President to get that to happen but a group like the NRA might.

I wrestled with the Ft. Worth District COE and the commanding officer there over the monopoly that they granted for the marinas on Lake Grapevine. He was quick to point out (in person) that the COE is in the water management business and that everything else they do is not their primary mission. It is all pretty condescending. If were to editorialize his message it would be "be glad that we allow recreational boating and such on OUR controlled land. We do things (like the monopoly) because it is easier for us to manage than several vendors." I doubt that the COE leadership mentality is different than that anywhere or on any other subject. It is, in their mind, easier to prohibit guns on their property than to allow them and there is no check and balance for that line of thinking. While I do believe that government in general gets its jollies from controlling things and the greater that control, the greater the jollies, I think that much of the action can be more easily explained as convenience.

Lastly, the discussions here about the military mentality regarding civilian guns seems to support the idea the military leadership opposes the idea. It should not be surprising when the Army leadership at COE has that same mentality. Please don't interpret that comment to include any of the rank and file working within the COE.
6/23-8/13/10 -51 days to plastic
Dum Spiro, Spero

NotRPB
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1351
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 8:24 am

Re: Nesbitt (Morris) v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers! Update 3/7/17

#39

Post by NotRPB »

ELB wrote: Tue Mar 07, 2017 4:40 pm
locke_n_load wrote:

Any news on when? So we can stop having to research parks before going to them???
No, it's just an announcement. Looks like the DOJ just notified the judge on about 3/1 or 3/2 of their change in position. Since it is a federal regulation, I presume it will have to be drafted, then put out for comments for (I think) 120 days, then comments evaluated etc, before being finally published.

So months, not days. But not years either.
These zombie threads cannot die ... Well, they won't until the problem is fixed.
LOL
Well, as a Ham operator who just learned Winter Field day will be at an ACOE park ... here I am, researching parks yet again, only to learn all Ham operaters must disarm and hope no rattesnakes are around... no matter how many legs the snake might have.
:mad5

chasfm11
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 4136
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:01 pm
Location: Northern DFW

Re: Nesbitt (Morris) v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers!

#40

Post by chasfm11 »

What we have learned since this zombie thread last raised its head is that Federal judges can issue rulings which are binding on all US immigration policy, not just their district. But rulings that should affect the entire jurisdiction of the COE do not. :mad5 :mad5 :mad5
6/23-8/13/10 -51 days to plastic
Dum Spiro, Spero

s3779m
Junior Member
Posts in topic: 8
Posts: 39
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2012 3:30 pm

Re: Nesbitt (Morris) v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers!

#41

Post by s3779m »

Seems like nothing can move slower than the acoe. Back in April
In mid-April, the corps outlined proposed regulations in the Federal Register that would remove a requirement that gun owners obtain written permission before carrying on water development sites. Currently, the requirement is only waived for hunters who unload their firearms between destinations and for patrons of shooting ranges.
"The written permission requirement in the current Corps regulation is inconsistent with the regulations and approach by the other Federal land management agencies, which generally authorize the possession of weapons when in accordance with state and local laws and the individual is not otherwise prohibited by law from possessing the weapon," the corps explains in its proposal.

The document goes on to claim that, by deferring to state and local rules entirely, these revisions will resolve inconsistencies between how firearms are governed on corps projects and on state territory.
It's been seven months and I can not find anything if these rules are in effect. Has anybody heard if Texas laws on carry are now the rules for our acoe parks?

https://www.newsweek.com/army-corps-eng ... ms-1500156

s3779m
Junior Member
Posts in topic: 8
Posts: 39
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2012 3:30 pm

Re: Nesbitt (Morris) v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers!

#42

Post by s3779m »

Seems like nothing can move slower than the acoe. Back in April
In mid-April, the corps outlined proposed regulations in the Federal Register that would remove a requirement that gun owners obtain written permission before carrying on water development sites. Currently, the requirement is only waived for hunters who unload their firearms between destinations and for patrons of shooting ranges.
"The written permission requirement in the current Corps regulation is inconsistent with the regulations and approach by the other Federal land management agencies, which generally authorize the possession of weapons when in accordance with state and local laws and the individual is not otherwise prohibited by law from possessing the weapon," the corps explains in its proposal.

The document goes on to claim that, by deferring to state and local rules entirely, these revisions will resolve inconsistencies between how firearms are governed on corps projects and on state territory.
It's been seven months and I can not find anything if these rules are in effect. Has anybody heard if Texas laws on carry are now the rules for our acoe parks?

https://www.newsweek.com/army-corps-eng ... ms-1500156
User avatar

Topic author
ELB
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 16
Posts: 8128
Joined: Tue May 22, 2007 9:34 pm
Location: Seguin

Re: Nesbitt (Morris) v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers!

#43

Post by ELB »

I tried awhile back and couldn't find anything either. I'm afraid some bureaucrat slow rolled the process hoping Trump would lose and they could ditch the changes. I'm very pessimistic these days.
USAF 1982-2005
____________
User avatar

Topic author
ELB
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 16
Posts: 8128
Joined: Tue May 22, 2007 9:34 pm
Location: Seguin

Re: Nesbitt (Morris) v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers!

#44

Post by ELB »

I called the COE point of contact listed in the docket for this rule, left a vm with my name and number asking the status of this rule. We'll see if anything comes of that.

FYI: https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=COE-2018-0008
USAF 1982-2005
____________

chasfm11
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 4136
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:01 pm
Location: Northern DFW

Re: Nesbitt (Morris) v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers!

#45

Post by chasfm11 »

ELB wrote: Wed Dec 09, 2020 11:15 am I tried awhile back and couldn't find anything either. I'm afraid some bureaucrat slow rolled the process hoping Trump would lose and they could ditch the changes. I'm very pessimistic these days.
:iagree: This one affects me because we would like to use COE RV parks but will not do so unarmed. The COE controls the State Park on Lake Whitney among other. I had hoped that President Trump would just Executive Order this out of existence since it isn't a law that needs changed but that hasn't happened. The fact that we are still here, dealing with it suggests that it isn't going away.
6/23-8/13/10 -51 days to plastic
Dum Spiro, Spero
Post Reply

Return to “Federal”