----------------------------------------------------------------------
VCDL's meeting schedule: http://www.vcdl.org/meetings.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Abbreviations used in VA-ALERT: http://www.vcdl.org/help/abbr.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
VCDL Update 3/18/10 - "Why is it that whenever the gun rights of
civilian/citizens is enhanced, it is a 'recipe for disaster' and when
gun ownership/possession is restricted, these actions promote 'the
safety of the public?' " VCDL member Bruce Furr
1. Howie Lind to speak at VCDL meeting tonight
2. Senator Vogel tries to attach Ware's HB79 to HB1092; fails
3. Taking aim at gun rights
4. RTD: Senate approves controversial gun bills
5. Effort to revive Va. gun bills fails
6. Marsh stood in way of pro-gun legislation
7. A few members of a "kill bill" subcommittee shouldn't have the power to decide state law
8. LTE: Higher standard
9. LTE: Gun column lacks supporting facts
10. VA.'s bad gun laws - A cheap shot from New York
11. Tamara Dietrich: Is Virginia gun law idiosyncrasy or idiocy?
12. Who needs a gun on a military base?
13. NYT: Pentagon shooting; uses the crime to attack Virginia
14. The Second Amendment: A guard for our future security
15. Prince William County police get it right (OC)
16. Guns for dummies
17. Examiner: Why do ATF employees question fitness of agent in 'toy gun' seizure?
18. Video on VT
19. Cops don't punish criminals
20. Second Amendment project
21. NRA convention - I'm staying home
22. Gun-free college shooting
23. Police act swiftly following gun purchases
24. US Dept of Education buys Remington 870's
25. Gun auction nets $15,000 toward new bulletproof vests
26. Massachusetts court upholds state gun-lock requirement
27. Gun control After McDonald
28. Locked, loaded, and ready to caffeinate
29. Some gun powder with that Espresso? Where Starbucks and guns collide
30. EDITORIAL: Packing a gun in Starbucks
31. Beware, Yogi: Gun rules in parks, elsewhere falling
32. LTE: Guns in national parks
33. Ammoland.com
34. Thousands of gun owners hit state capital streets
35. Stonewall Rifle and Pistol 2010 shooting season is nearly upon us!
36. Correction to VCDL Update 3/10/10
37. Correction to VCDL alert about restaurant ban repeal
**************************************************
1. Howie Lind to speak at VCDL meeting tonight
**************************************************
Howie Lind, who is running for the 10th Congressional District GOP
Chairman position, will be a speaker at tonight's VCDL membership
meeting in Annandale.
We will also be discussing the Starbucks controversy and doing a
summary on the legislative session.
The meeting is open to the public and we are expecting quite a few
members of the foreign media to be there.
The meeting is called to order at 8 PM, with fellowship starting at
7:30 PM.
Directions can be found here:
http://www.vcdl.org/meetings.html
**************************************************
2. Senator Vogel tries to attach Ware's HB79 to HB1092; fails
**************************************************
VCDL EM Hal Macklin emailed me this:
--
On Thursday, with apparent little publicity, Senator Vogel offered a
floor amendment to HB1092 in the nature of a substitute.
Her amendment included the language from Delegate Ware's HB79 (which
would have prevented Circuit Court Clerks from disseminating CHP
application information).
http://tinyurl.com/ykw6fkl
http://tinyurl.com/yhdr2bc
Sadly, the Senate leadership is so feckless, she was forced to
withdraw her amendment:
http://tinyurl.com/ykozqqx
No recorded vote on her attempt, either.
I do think VCDL should thank her in the next ALERT.
--
And so we do. At least someone had the gumption to rectify a wrong
that was done to Virginia gun owners! Senator Obenshain (item #5,
below) also deserves credit for his attempt in committee to fix things.
**************************************************
3. Taking aim at gun rights
**************************************************
A brief overview of recent gun rights legislation in Virginia and
around the country.
http://tinyurl.com/yzbsqpm
thestatecolumn.com
March 7, 2010
States look to pass legislation in favor of gun advocates
Somewhere, Charlton Heston is smiling. Last week, the state of
Virginia House of Representatives passed legislation allowing anyone
with a concealed weapons permit to take their handgun into restaurants
serving alcohol. The bill awaits Governor Bob McDonnell's signature.
Virginia, a state known for its support of gun rights, seems to be in
overdrive. A Virginia Senate panel designed to eliminate House gun
rights proposals conducted its work Thursday, killing an attempted
repeal of the state's 17-year-old ban on buying more than one handgun
a month.
The same day, the Virginia Legislature considered bills relating to
handgun concealment and protection for immigrants caught with
firearms. Starbucks of all places, is front and center in the debate.
Gun owners regularly gather at various Starbucks locations in states
where it's legal to bear arms in public. This has sparked protests
from gun-control advocates and support from pro-gun groups. A
proposal in Minnesota to require background checks for guns sold at
gun shows drew vigorous testimony at a Friday hearing. The hearing
culminated with a man pulling out the guns he said he'd bought without
a check.
Even the nation's highest court, The Supreme Court, is considering the
issue. On Tuesday the United States Supreme Court will hear argument
from attorneys representing four Chicago residents. The issue at
question: does the federal right to bear arms apply to local and state
laws? All this seems to come at an odd time, as states grapple with
budgetary problems and low public opinion polls. One would think gun
rights may not be at the top of list of priorities for state
legislators.
President Obama and the Economy
It seems to the two driving factors for state action, are President
Obama and the economy. In the weeks following the Presidents election,
sales of gun spiked nearly 27 percent, Gun store owners around the
nation described a wave of buyers concerned that an Obama
administration will curtail their right to bear arms. In Colorado,
would-be gun buyers set a one-day record with the highest number of
background check requests in a 24-hour period-all related purchases of
guns.
In the longer term, the economy also seems to play a more major role
in state legislators push for addressing the right to bear arms. While
Americans have tightened the purse strings, in a tough economy, guns
are still enjoying consumer support. Purchases of firearms and
ammunition have risen 8 to 10 percent this year, according to state
and federal data; a trend that seems set to continue. And while there
is no scientific evidence proving the correlation between the economy
and gun sales, Industry experts and law enforcement officials point to
several examples over the years. In 1994, there was a rush to buy guns
when President Bill Clinton pushed for a ban on military-style
semiautomatic rifles. People also rushed to buy guns after the 1992
riots in Los Angeles and the breakdown of order in New Orleans after
Hurricane Katrina.
The coupling of bad economic times and fears of a Democratically-
controlled Congress seemed to have redirected the focus.
**************************************************
4. RTD: Senate approves controversial gun bills
**************************************************
The Senate's pasage of HB 505 and HB 885 is a significant victory for
gun owners in Virginia.
http://tinyurl.com/ybskbue
www2.timesdispatch.com
By Jim Nolan
March 10, 2010
The Virginia Senate today approved two controversial House of
Delegates gun bills that will allow permit holders to carry concealed
handguns into bars and non-permit holders to conceal their firearms in
cars.
House Bill 505 (bars) and House Bill 885 (cars) were essentially
identical to two Senate-sponsored bills that had already passed the
chamber and were approved by the House. All four bills now head to the
desk of Gov. Bob McDonnell, who has indicated he will likely sign the
legislation.
The Senate votes on the House bills were split, with several rural
Democrats siding with Republicans. House Bill 505 passed 25-15, while
House Bill 885 passed 24-16. Democrats hold a 22-18 majority in the 40-
member Senate.
Despite having already passed Senate versions of the gun bills, some
lawmakers spoke out against the legislation before the floor vote.
Sen. David Marsden, D-Fairfax, called the bill allowing guns to be
kept concealed in locked containers in cars "ill-advised public
policy" that would increase the likelihood of firearms falling into
the wrong hands.
"That's how your children are going to get your guns," Marsden said.
Sen. Jill Holtzman Vogel, R-Fauquier, who sponsored the Senate version
of the bill, countered that locking firearms in a vehicle out of
public view "is a much safer way to transport a weapon."
Senators also approved House bills that make the murder of auxiliary
police officers and fire marshals with law enforcement powers death
penalty-eligible crimes.
**************************************************
5. Effort to revive Va. gun bills fails
**************************************************
Hats off to Senator Obenshain:
http://tinyurl.com/yg4csgm
http://www.wboc.com
RICHMOND, Va. (AP)- Virginia Republicans have lost an attempt to
revive pro-gun bills that failed last week in a special subcommittee
set up to shoot down the proposals.
Sen. Mark Obenshain of Harrisonburg tried Monday to overrule Senate
Courts Justice Committee Chairman Henry Marsh's decision not to allow
the full committee to take up 10 bills expanding gun rights. The full
committee often passes pro-gun bills.
Marsh, aided by fellow Democrats in a testy exchange, demanded that
only the chair decides which bills to bring before the committee. He
refused to allow hearings on bills that would have shielded the public
from records concerning concealed handgun permits and exempted from
federal law any gun manufactured and sold in Virginia.
**************************************************
6. Marsh stood in way of pro-gun legislation
**************************************************
A glaring example of what happens when a handful of elected lawmakers
don't play by the rules. Now it's time to show these same lawmakers
what a determined group of citizens can do at the polls.
http://tinyurl.com/ybsdwjb
www2.timesdispatch.com
By Jim Nolan
March 12, 2010
With a newly elected Republican governor, a fortified GOP majority in
the House of Delegates, and sympathetic rural Democrats in the Senate,
proponents of expanding gun rights and the death penalty entered the
2010 General Assembly session with an ambitious agenda.
Repeal the one-gun-a-month statute. Allow concealed guns in bars and
in cars. Expand the death penalty to accomplices in capital murders.
Prohibit public access to records of holders of concealed-handgun
permits. Prohibit localities from requiring fingerprints to apply for
concealed handguns. Change the restrictions on hunting near
subdivisions.
The only obstacle was the Democrat-dominated 15-member Senate Courts
of Justice Committee and its chairman -- a soft-spoken, stubborn,
septuagenarian senator and noted civil-rights lawyer from Richmond,
Sen. Henry L. Marsh III.
Marsh turned out to be carrying a big stick.
As the flow of House gun bills became a wave, Marsh, a former Richmond
City Council member and Richmond mayor who has served the past 18
years in the Senate, created a special subcommittee to hear them.
He stacked the subcommittee with himself, one centrist Republican and
three Democrats from urban areas with long-standing opposition to gun-
rights expansion. The move drew fire from the pro-gun lobby and also
Republican lawmakers, some of whom stomped out of committee hearings.
Marsh has spent much of his public life opposing the expansion of gun
rights.
In 1997, his 59-year-old brother, Richmond lawyer and substitute Judge
Harold M. Marsh Sr., was fatally shot while stopped at a South
Richmond traffic light.
The senator said the tragedy reaffirmed his stance against gun
violence and cemented his opposition to the death penalty -- two
positions he has advocated consistently on the Senate Courts of
Justice Committee.
This year, few of the significant House gun bills advanced to the full
committee. The exceptions were bills allowing holders of concealed-
weapons permits to bring their guns into bars, as well as a bill
allowing people without the permits to lock their guns in a container
or glove compartment of their vehicles.
Both bills, however, had been companions to Senate legislation that
had been approved by the full committee earlier in the session and
likely will receive Gov. Bob McDonnell's signature.
Marsh said in an interview that it was clear this year that the gun
advocates didn't want to stop there. "They want the whole enchilada,"
he said. "There has to be some balance."
"The pro-gun forces made an all-out attack," he added. "I think there
was a pent-up desire to unleash this effort to establish Virginia as
the [most] pro-gun state in the union."
Marsh defended his decision to create the subcommittee and decide its
composition. He said it was "not unprecedented and does not trespass
the protocol" for considering legislation, noting that the tactic has
been used numerous times in the past by committee chairmen of both
parties to hear legislation on issues such as mental health and
immigration.
"You will find that a majority of House subcommittees include only one
minority-party member, and often the ratio is 9 to 2 in favor of
majority-party members," he said.
The senator said organizations such as the Virginia State Police and
the state Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission -- which traditionally
appeared before the committee to oppose certain gun bills, such as
guns in cars and guns in bars -- were conspicuously absent from
hearings this time, with a new administration in charge.
"I'm not saying they were muscled, but it was strange to see them go
from strongly opposing to having no opinion," he said.
"I've been elected to exercise judgment, and I'm going to do what I
think is right," said Marsh, who gives no indication of giving up his
chairmanship or his seat, which is up for election in 2011. He said he
is having fun and said he looks at his position as "an opportunity to
do justice."
"I survived George Allen, and I survived Jim Gilmore," he said
referring to former Republican governors. "And I was able to be fairly
effective. I might be able to survive Bob McDonnell."
**************************************************
7. A few members of a "kill bill" subcommittee shouldn't have the
power to decide state law
**************************************************
http://tinyurl.com/y9w3e6z
articles.dailypress.com
March 10, 2010
There are so many ways to die, if you're a bill in the General
Assembly. The gentlest way to go is to be "laid on the table," as the
verbiage goes. A committee could set you aside until next year, or you
could be "passed by indefinitely." You could go down by nays that
outnumber ayes. You could die a quiet death: No motion is made for you
and you're left to expire when the committee's work is done.
This session brought a new place to die: a special "kill bill"
subcommittee. Late in the session, the chairman of the Senate Courts
of Justice Committee, Henry L. Marsh III, D-Richmond, formed an ad hoc
panel with one job: to off some gun bills sent over by the House.
He stacked it with people he could count on to get the job done: four
Democrats who generally oppose loosening rules on gun ownership, and
one centrist Republican.
**************************************************
8. LTE: Higher standard
**************************************************
http://tinyurl.com/yh4x3z8
http://www.connectionnewspapers.com
March 10, 2010
I have been an admirer and supporter of State Sen. Chap Petersen
(D-34) for many years, but I was deeply disappointed when he chose to
vote "Yes" on SB334, which allows concealed weapons into restaurants
that serve alcohol. I do not believe that this vote is in line with
the interests of his constituents or his community.
As Sen. Petersen notes, a restaurant owner is free to exclude CCWP
(concealed carry weapon permit) holders by posting or policy. Fair
enough. But have you ever been about to enter a restaurant and
suddenly noticed a sign that says "no guns allowed?" Would that make
you (and your family) more or less likely to enter that establishment?
Fairfax County welcomes many out-of-state and foreign visitors each
year and they all eat at our local restaurants. How do you think these
visitors would react at seeing such a sign? Sen. Petersen's "Yes" vote
was a blow to our commonwealth's hospitality industry, which is why
they fought against it for so many years.
Sen. Petersen also notes that it is illegal for someone carrying a
concealed weapon to drink alcohol. How a restaurant owner is supposed
to know that the person who is drinking is also carrying a concealed
weapon? He does not say. I assume we have to rely upon the CCWP
holders' character and their training. But the training that CCWP
holders are required to have is a joke. Any applicant can watch an
online video for about an hour and take a short - 20 easy questions -
quiz and receive the so-called "certificate of proficiency." You don't
even have to touch a gun, much less fire one.
Gun-rights politicians assert that CCWP holders are all responsible,
levelheaded, law-abiding citizens and that they would only use their
guns to protect themselves against a serious threat to their lives.
This is a fantasy. Consider the high-profile cases involving mentally
imbalanced and trigger-happy Virginia CCWP holders we have had just in
the last few weeks:
#1. Christopher Bryan Speight, a concealed carry weapons permit holder
since 1999, whose permit was renewed as recently as 2009, who amassed
an arsenal of weapons in spite of the "restrictive" one-gun-a-month
rule and in spite of his obvious and ever-increasing mental problems,
whose "high-powered rifle" had enough firepower to nearly bring down a
helicopter, killed eight people, including two children, in
Appomattox, Va. on Jan. 19.
#2. On Jan. 18, Gerald Ung, 28, a Temple University grad student and a
Virginia CHP holder, shot an unarmed Villanova college student five
times in Philadelphia. The two had been arguing and what might have
become a regular fistfight among testosterone-overloaded young men
became something much more lethal.
#3. And from the Washington Post on Friday, Feb. 5, Jose Avila, 57, a
Fairfax County respected domestic violence and anger management
counselor, and Virginia CCWP holder pulled a gun on two men in
Annandale just because he thought they were blocking his car. As if
the irony weren't palpable enough, the two men turned out to be
federal marshals.
Over the last few weeks, there has been a rapid-fire volley of bills
proposed in the Richmond that seek to expand the privileges of CCWP
holders while, at the same time, removing any burden of
responsibility. Members of the various gun groups (and the politicians
who support them) tout SB334 as a victory of their rights. But on the
subject of their responsibilities they are deathly quiet. Instead,
they actively seek to do away with any inconvenience or requirement
for training put upon CCWP holders. This is madness. Shouldn't we and
our elected leaders be holding armed citizens to a higher standard,
rather than continuing to lower them?
Laura Austin (Sonnenmark)
Alexandria
**************************************************
9. LTE: Gun column lacks supporting facts
**************************************************
Carla & Dave Hicks emailed me this:
--
http://tinyurl.com/ye9kbdf
http://www.roanoke.com
March 13, 2010
Re: "More guns, less safety," Feb. 21 column:
Luanne Traud rambles on and on about a subject that obviously she
knows nothing about. She has no facts of proof, no statistics or
information from the National Safety Council or from local law
enforcement to back up anything she says.
She is certainly entitled to her opinion by the First Amendment. By
the same logic, the Second Amendment states that gun owners have the
right to buy, own and bear firearms. In every instance when the right
to carry firearms has prevailed, crime has gone down.
Traud needs to spend some time doing her homework before writing an
article that she knows nothing about. If she wants to do an article
regarding safety, she should title it, "More booze, less safety." More
damage has been caused by alcohol resulting in destruction of
property, ruining families and causing multiple injuries and deaths.
Unfortunately, people who drink just ignore the problems that alcohol
causes.
Please, leave our guns alone.
GLENN WATSON
MAX MEADOWS
**************************************************
10. VA.'s bad gun laws - A cheap shot from New York
**************************************************
A VA-ALERT reader emailed me this:
--
One we can agree with for a change. The debate in the comments is
something else though
http://tinyurl.com/yeof78e
http://www.dnronline.com
March 13, 2010
If you want to know how obsessed The New York Times is with gun
control in Virginia, take a look at the Web version of its story on
John Patrick Bedell, the ill-fated Pentagon shooter.
In one of its first stories on the subject, the writers shoe-horned
the gun control issue into it to no seeming purpose. Of course, the
Times did have a purpose: slapping the backward yahoos down South.
"Virginia, which has some of the most lax gun laws in the nation and
has been pushing to expand gun rights, has been criticized lately by
gun control advocates," the Times declared. "The state's General
Assembly approved a bill last month allowing people to carry concealed
weapons in bars and restaurants that serve alcohol, and the House of
Delegates voted to end a 17-year-old measure barring people from
buying more than one handgun a month."
Problem was, the story didn't report where Bedell bought his guns and
ammo. Nor did the story reveal whether the reporters asked and
couldn't find out. And it didn't report that Bedell was from
California until after it fired its shot about Virginia's gun laws.
The Associated Press divulged that Bedell purchased guns and ammo at a
gun range in Sacramento. The Washington Post found a store in Silver
Spring. Geography lesson for the Times: Those cities are in California
and Maryland, which have "some of the most strict gun laws in the
nation," to borrow the Times' phraseology. They also have some of the
nuttiest liberal public officials in the nation. Anyway, the Times
published information about Bedell's purchases in California a day or
so after it misfired on Virginia's gun laws.
The Times writers may not have known where Bedell bought his guns and
ammo when they filed their report. But that invites the obvious
question of why they mentioned Virginia's gun laws. Answer: To pin
blame for the shootings on the state's gun laws, which aren't strict
enough either for the Times or New York City's liberal mayor, who has
spent the last several years blaming crime in his polyglot and
benighted city on Virginia.
Here, for instance, is a recent salvo from the Times editorial page:
"Richmond lawmakers have callously rejected a gun control proposal
sought as a memorial to the 32 students slain in the Virginia Tech
massacre. Once more, state senators proved more beholden to the gun
lobby's propaganda and campaign money than to public safety."
So, because Virginia's lawmakers do not agree with the Times' seize-
the-guns ideology they are "callous." And now, this latest little dig:
Those crazy Virginians want to let law-abiding citizens carry weapons!
No wonder a maniac shot up the Pentagon.
Virginians aren't "callous" or crazy, of course, and the Times
deserves to be called a few things itself. "Left wing" would be a good
start, followed by "hopelessly biased." That is why it publishes
ridiculous editorials, and why it permits reporters to editorialize
about subjects they know nothing about.
Of course, the Times is perfectly within its rights to editorialize
about guns in Virginia. It can permit reporters to editorialize by
inserting slickly worded anti-gun propaganda into their stories. But
they shouldn't call the latter news.
And maybe the Times should holster its rhetorical revolver. Virginians
who actually know something about guns and crime can debate the issue
without its help.
**************************************************
11. Tamara Dietrich: Is Virginia gun law idiosyncrasy or idiocy?
**************************************************
http://tinyurl.com/yztlqvl
articles.dailypress.com
By Tamara Dietrich
March 11, 2010
Let me tell you why the bill - poised to become law in Virginia - to
allow concealed firearms in restaurants that serve alcohol is a farce,
and worse.
It's a farce because right now you already can carry a firearm openly
into restaurants that serve alcohol.
And it's worse because, while the new law would forbid those with
concealed weapons from imbibing, there's not a thing in current law,
or the new one, to prevent those carrying open firearms from doing so.
As ABC spokesman Philip Bogenberger told me this week: There are "no
current statutes prohibiting persons from openly carrying weapons into
ABC-licensed establishments nor prohibiting persons openly carrying
weapons from consuming alcohol."
So it turns out all those Chicken Little pronouncements - including my
own - about this bill breaking fresh ground really are as clueless as
gun-rights activists have helpfully pointed out, particularly in my
blog.
But leave it to activists to be well-versed in the fine points of gun
law, and to everyone else to be caught flat-footed.
In fact, I called the managers of several Peninsula restaurants that
serve alcohol to see if they thought it was legal for customers to
carry openly.
Their responses varied from a firm "No" to "I have to look that up" to
"I don't care if it's legal or not, we don't allow it."
Moreover, none realized that customers openly carrying firearms were
allowed to drink alcoholic beverages. Even the manager who looked up
the proposed concealed carry law didn't get that one right. He said it
appears the new law "would make it illegal to consume alcohol, whether
or not it's concealed."
Wrong.
SB334, offered by Republican Sen. Emmett Hanger Jr. from Mount Solon,
simply gives gun owners with concealed carry permits the option of
carrying concealed.
It would also make it a misdemeanor for those carrying concealed
weapons to drink alcohol - which is baffling, considering all you'd
have to do to circumvent it is take your gun out and lay it on the
table openly. Or not tell your server you happen to be armed - how
else is she to know?
"I know it's an issue that can be sensationalized - 'slinging guns in
bars' and what have you," Hanger told me in a phone interview
Wednesday. "The issue is, for me, that law-abiding citizens that up
until now have been prohibited from being armed, even though they have
concealed carry, will now be able to. The only persons able to carry
into ABC establishments up until this point have been people who have
no regard for the law."
Not quite.
So Hanger clarified: "Currently - and this is one of those
idiosyncrasies in the law - under current law individuals can open
carry into restaurants that serve, and consume on the premises. This
law extends that privilege to individuals who have concealed carry -
which, in my opinion, is more civilized."
The question is, how many senators and delegates who voted for this
bill understood the current idiosyncrasies of the law?
**************************************************
12. Who needs a gun on a military base?
**************************************************
This link was forwarded to me by VCDL EM Pete Clark:
http://tinyurl.com/yerso2j
http://www.wavy.com
March 9, 2010
Robbery suspect sought in VB
Accused of robbing two female victims at gunpoint
VIRGINIA BEACH, Va. (WAVY) - Virginia Beach police are looking for a
suspect they say robbed two female victims at gunpoint as they walked
to their cars in the parking lot of the Little Creek Commissary.
Police say the victims complied with the suspect's demands and he fled
on foot toward the Shelton Circle apartment complex.
The victims were able to provide police with a description of the
suspect. A composite sketch of the suspect can be seen to the left of
this story.
If you've seen anyone looking like the man pictured or have any
information that could help police in this case, you're asked to call
Crime Line at 1-888-LOCK-U-UP.
**************************************************
13. NYT: Pentagon shooting; uses the crime to attack Virginia
**************************************************
http://tinyurl.com/ya9trpo
http://www.nytimes.com
By Ian Urbina and Anahad O'Connor
March 4, 2010
This seems gratuitous:
"Two Pentagon Police Officers Shot; Gunman Killed"
Blah blah, read down ....
[SNIP]
Virginia, which has some of the most lax gun laws in the nation and
has been pushing to expand gun rights, has been criticized lately by
gun control advocates. The state's General Assembly approved a bill
last month allowing people to carry concealed weapons in bars and
restaurants that serve alcohol, and the House of Delegates voted to
end a 17-year-old measure barring people from buying more than one
handgun a month.
--
H/T: David Codrea
http://tinyurl.com/ybbfw2b
[SNIP]
They must sell both booze and guns to the public at the Pentagon, right?
I mean, why else would The New York Times think this is relevant to
their story?
**************************************************
14. The Second Amendment: A guard for our future security
**************************************************
Tim Whitney emailed me this:
--
http://tinyurl.com/yg45v5l
http://www.constitution.org
By Andrew M Wayment
[SNIP]
To understand the Second Amendment and its importance and relevance
for us today, one must analyze the origins of the right to keep and
bear arms, the events surrounding the Revolutionary War, and the
ratification of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.[2] When this
is done, it becomes apparent that the right to keep and bear arms is
inseparably connected with the inalienable right of the people to
alter and abolish a tyrannical government.[3] One of the main
objectives of the Framers of the Second Amendment was to specifically
ensure that this fundamental right, which they had successfully
exercised in the Revolutionary War, would be preserved for future
generations.[4] The Second Amendment serves as an essential check and
balance against the possibility of governmental tyranny. Therefore,
the right of individuals to keep and bear arms, like many other
provisions of the Constitution, should be respected and protected
today as crucial to the maintenance of our freedom.
**************************************************
15. Prince William County police get it right (OC)
**************************************************
VCDL member Bob James emailed me about his positive open carry
experience in Prince William County.
--
So there I was . . .
Wednesday night, 10 March 2010, about 2130, I stopped at a Burger King
at Nokesville Road (Rte 28) and Pennsylvania Avenue in Prince William
County. I was open carrying, as is my wont. I have entered Burger
Kings and other fast food joints countless times all over the Northern
Virginia area without incident. Tonight was different, dear readers,
but not unpleasantly so.
The bored but affable young lady at the counter took my order, no
problem. But the manager, a flinty-eyed woman with a sour expression
on her face, was surveying me with ill-concealed hostility. She spoke
as I retrieved my order and asked with some beligerence: "Let me ask
you a question. Are you a police officer?"
I smiled, and answered "No, ma'am, I am not." I paused for the
anticipated follow-up question, but none was forthcoming; the
manager's expression just got darker, so I said nothing more and sat
down to eat.
Five minutes later, I saw the PWCP car roll up, headlights off, and
two officers enter the store. Here's the kicker. They never looked
askance at me, never asked me my name or business or why I thought I
needed a gun, or any of that nonsense. They didn't disarm me, prone me
out on the floor, or call me nasty names. Instead, both officers went
straight to the manager, who had once again returned to the front
counter to beckon them.
I could hear the manager hissing about the man with a gun, and one
officer asking, "Did he threaten anyone? Was he waving it around?"
Finally, he explained that my behavior was perfectly legal in
Virginia. Neither officer contacted me, or even so much as walked
around the tile barrier to see whether or what I was carrying. End of
story.
As it should be. [PVC: AMEN.]
Kudos to the Prince William County Police officers who handled this
call with consummate professionalism and class.
Bob James
Centreville
**************************************************
16. Guns for dummies
**************************************************
Monty Oakes emailed me this:
--
Second Amendment: Guns For Dummies
Federal authorities at the ATF recently intercepted a large shipment
of rifles labeled "toys" in Tacoma, Washington, that it claimed "could
have had far-reaching and potentially devastating ramifications if
they had gotten into the hands of individuals who wanted to do harm in
the American population." Could the weapons seizure have prevented a
shooting rampage across the nation? Perhaps -- except for one problem.
The guns actually were toys
Monty
http://tinyurl.com/ykzxxsg
pajamasmedia.com
By Bob Owens
March 8, 2010
Agents of Incompetence: ATF Seizes Gun Shipment Labeled 'Toys' - But
They Really Were Toys
One glance at the headlines would have convinced you that a major
tragedy was averted by the keen eyes of U.S. Customs inspectors at the
Port of Tacoma recently. KOMO blared: "Customs agents nab shipment of
machine guns in Tacoma." Other news outlets pointed out the dastardly
nature of the shipment. KIRO in Seattle claimed: "Automatic Rifles
Labeled As Toys Seized In Tacoma." The Seattle Post-Intelligencer went
with: "Customs seizes gun shipment labeled 'toys.'"
Working from a Customs and Border Protection (CBP) press release
entitled "Tacoma Seaport U.S. Customs and Border Protection Officers
Seize Shipment of Machineguns," these news organizations had every
reason to feel that they were just reporting the news, especially when
Customs and Border Protection Area Port Director Rolando Suliveras Jr.
claimed:
These rifles could have had far-reaching and potentially devastating
ramifications if they had gotten into the hands of individuals who
wanted to do harm in the American population. This was a good
interception by our officers.
But there was much, much more to the story that Suliveras and the CBP
failed to mention, starting with the fact that the 30 "machine guns"
seized in the raid really were toys.
To be specific, the items seized were 16 WE TTI (WE Tech) M4A1 and 14
WE TTI (WE Tech) M4 CQBR gas blowback Airsoft rifles that shoot
plastic BBs.
For those unfamiliar with these toys, Airsoft offers a less messy and
more realistic looking alternative to paintball for both gamers and
tactical training. The lightweight BBs can sting and leave welts at
close distances on bare skin, but they don't pose the same threat of
shooting your eye out we've come to associate with more traditional BB
guns and their copper-coated steel payload. Because Airsoft guns can
be made to look like existing firearms and can mimic their controls,
they are sometimes used for military and police training scenarios
where real firearms using live ammunition would be unsafe, and at a
per-round cost far cheaper than alternatives.
Of course, Airsoft guns are not real firearms, even the most realistic
looking ones.
While the exact materials used in Airsoft guns vary from manufacturer
to manufacturer and model to model, even nicer models such as those
captured by U.S. Customs in Tacoma are typically made of a mix of
inexpensive plastics and cheaply cast pot metals. Some small critical
components - typically parts of the trigger pack or gas system - are
made of more durable metals, such as brass and steel. While not
designed to handle high temperatures or pressures, the materials used
in Airsoft are sufficient to reliably propel plastic pellets to a
range of a couple hundred feet with a charge of compressed gas.
So when Brad and Ben Martin of Airsoft Outlet Northwest had their
latest shipment of 30 WE Airsoft rifles confiscated by Customs
inspectors, they expected to get them back in a reasonable amount of
time. The guns are, after all, rather plainly toys once you have a
close look at them and how they operate. The Martins have shipped
these and similar Airsoft guns through the ports of Portland, Seattle,
and Tacoma many times before, and while some Customs inspectors were
more likely than others to let the toys pass through without undue
delays, they were always eventually released.
But for reasons still inadequately explained, Customs provided the
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) one or more
of the Airsoft rifles from the shipment they seized from the Martins,
and the ATF declared that these Airsoft guns could be converted into
real, fully-automatic machine guns.
Those who know these particular Airsoft guns the best uniformly
describe the ATF claim as preposterous.
Stephen Pringle of Airsoft World Ltd. in Great Britain sells the exact
same WE Tech Airsoft products, with the handicap of selling them in a
country where real firearms have been regulated almost out of
existence, and where even Airsoft toys require permits from the
government. Asked about the possibility of converting WE M4 gas
blowback systems into functional firearms, Pringle was unconvinced:
It is certainly our understanding that any attempt to install real
AR-15 parts would fail, either at the installation stage or at the
point that the firer pulls the trigger, probably with disastrous
consequences for the shooter. Although they feature a higher
proportion of steel parts than many other Airsoft guns, they are still
a long way from the build quality required of a real firearm,
especially as regards the receiver.
The receiver on the M4/M16 family of weapons can be broken down into
two main component groups commonly referred to as the "upper" and the
"lower." The lower receiver contains the serial-numbered lower frame
of the firearm that is legally recognized as the part that is the
firearm under U.S. law, along with the trigger pack, the grip, the
stock, and other components in the lower half of the gun. The upper
receiver is comprised of the barrel, bolt, handguards, and sights.
Pringle notes that these Airsoft guns have suffered catastrophic
failures even at their much lower operating pressures, and that it
simply wouldn't make sense to try to convert a toy into a real firearm
that would more than likely explode in the user's hands with the first
shot.
We have seen an AWSS rifle break at the junction between the upper
receiver and the barrel, an area subjected to some of the greatest
stresses in a real AR-15 as that is where the chamber would be
located. The machining required to create a gas-operated rifle from
one of these rifles would be extensive and expensive, requiring the
replacement or fabrication of several key components - barrel, gas
block, gas tube, receiver, bolt carrier, bolt, firing pin, associated
springs, etc. Anything less would pose as real a danger to the shooter
as to any potential victims. There is also the long-running argument
that if someone with criminal intentions has the skills to actually
convert an Airsoft gun, they probably have the ability to fabricate a
basic firearm from scratch.
In other words, it would be difficult if not impossible to convert an
Airsoft rifle into a real firearm without replacing the upper receiver
entirely.
Pringle concludes:
I struggle to see why anyone would spend the time and money to convert
a toy when it is so much easier to obtain a genuine firearm in the
U.S. and if required do the work to convert it from semi auto only to
full auto.
Indeed, a full upper receiver can be bought online and delivered to
your door in the United States without the background check required
of the lower receiver (the serialized part recognized under the law in
the U.S. as the gun). So can the upper receiver of a real U.S. rifle
be mated to the lower receiver of an Airsoft gun as the BATF is trying
to claim, turning the Frankentoy into a a real and untraceable machine
gun? Or are U.S. Customs inspectors and their allies at the BATF way
in over their heads, and perhaps trying to cover up serial incompetency?
We'll address these questions and hear from other professionals in
"Agents of Incompetence, Part II."
**************************************************
17. Examiner: Why do ATF employees question fitness of agent in 'toy
gun' seizure?
**************************************************
http://tinyurl.com/yjo23fj
http://www.examiner.com
By David Codrea
March 12, 2010
[SNIP]
When we first met ATF Special Agent Kelven Crenshaw, he was telling
KOINlocal6, Portland, that a shipment of toy guns the agency had
seized could be "easily retro-fitted into dangerous weapons":
"With minimal work it could be converted to a machine gun," Crenshaw
said.
To prove his credentials as a professional firearms expert, Crenshaw
proceeded to insert a magazine backwards on video. Click here to watch
and pay attention at at the 1:17 mark.
In my March 9 follow-up on this story, I mentioned a related three-
part series at Pajamas Media by writer Bob Owens. Click the respective
links for parts one, two and three. The whole thing is just excellent,
but something he said in his last installment really caught my
attention:
This is apparently the same Special Agent Kelven Crenshaw that ATF
whistleblower site Cleanup ATF says is a former assistant director
demoted and moved for incompetence, reprisals against his own
employees, and regulation violations.
**************************************************
18. Video on VT
**************************************************
http://vimeo.com/4620751
A mostly slanted video about the Virginia Tech tragedy. The antis get
about 3 minutes for every 1 given our side, but we get our point
across, countering their emotion-only appeal.
The question is asked at one point, "Why would you need to bring a gun
to school?" Clearly those dead and wounded students and teachers did
have a need, but, sadly, didn't bring one to protect themselves with.
http://vimeo.com/4620751
**************************************************
19. Cops don't punish criminals
**************************************************
Rick Randall emailed me about item 24 in VCDL Update 3/10/10 "Sentara
Hospitals". I fully agree and shows the stupidity of whoever put that
presentation together.
--
"Law enforcement punishes offenders after they have already caused the
problem"?!?
Someone needs to explain to Sentara that law enforcement officers are
NOT supposed to PUNISH offenders -- they are supposed to apprehend
them if they cannot be deterred.
The baton, taser, pepper spray, and firearms are all there to help the
officer coerce a violent offender or to defend against him.
If the cop is using his weapons to "punish" the offender, he is
violating his basic civil rights.
Cops deter or catch.
COURTS punish.
When cops punish, it's called "torture".
Rick Randall
**************************************************
20. Second Amendment project
**************************************************
Kristin Henderson emailed me this:
--
Good morning,
My name is Kristin Henderson and I am a researcher/writer for Mission
City Productions (MCP) based out of San Antonio, Texas. We are in the
initial production stages of a film series on the Second Amendment,
and we wanted to connect with you to make you aware of our project.
This made-for-TV series is entitled "Homegrown Heroes", and profiles
everyday Americans who have made a difference in their communities by
fighting back against crime. Our intent with this series is to
highlight the importance of self-defense and our Second Amendment
rights, as well as demonstrate the role that these rights play in
safety of individuals and communities both in the United States and
around the globe.
Barb Divisek (http://www.divisekcasting.com/Site/Home_.html) and Ray
Bengston (http://www.eyekool.com/) are our MCP executives. Barbara has
been a prominent casting director and acting coach in Los Angeles for
more than 20 years. Ray directs and produces commercials and training/
safety films for the City of San Antonio and the San Antonio Fire
Department. He also produces an informational magazine format show
called "In The Line of Fire" that runs locally in the San Antonio
area. Archives of this show are available here:
http://sanantonio.granicus.com/ViewPubl ... view_id=11
MCP also works closely with the team at First Take Media
(http://www.firsttakemedia.com/) for operational needs.
The MCP Mission Statement is as follows: To create, develop and
produce high quality film and television that is family oriented with
strong moral values for theatrical worldwide release including DVD,
home video, pay-per-view, Internet and television. The MCP family
consists of producers dedicated to the highest standards of ethics and
integrity, who pride themselves on their ability to attract innovative
minds, engaging material and original creative collaborators with a
unique voice.
As we develop "Homegrown Heroes", we are searching for individuals who
have a self-defense story to share. If you know of anyone who would be
open to sharing their story through our platform, we would love to
hear from them.
Barb Divisek is the executive producer on this project and can provide
additional information or answer any questions questions that you may
have regarding the project. She can be reached at:
divisekmcp@gmail.com or 210.246.3610.
Please feel free to reach out to me via email: khendersonmcp@gmail.com
or phone (210.491.2160 xt. 3).
Best regards,
Kristin
**************************************************
21. NRA convention - I'm staying home
**************************************************
I don't attend conferences or events held at anti-gun locations, so I
won't be attending the NRA convention in Charlotte, NC from May
14-16. The Charlotte Convention Center bans guns. The link below
downloads a PDF file with the rules:
http://tinyurl.com/yk6ufkn
Here is the rule:
7.30
DANGEROUS WEAPONS
A "dangerous weapon" is any object or device designed or intended to
be used to inflict serious injury upon persons or property.
1. The possession of a dangerous weapon is prohibited in the
Convention Center, except as provided below. Concealed weapons are
strictly prohibited in the Convention Center.
**************************************************
22. Gun-free college shooting
**************************************************
David Custer emailed me this:
--
I'm assuming, but haven't verified, that Ohio U bans guns on campus.
And I'd love to know what they mean by "the campus is secure." If
they can secure it after the fact, why can't they secure it before the
incident? And if it was secure before the incident then why did the
incident occur? Furthermore, if the campus is secure, why do
they have to "...going through the building to ensure there are no
additional victims that have not been accounted for." If they're
might be un-accounted for victims how do they know there aren't un-
accounted for criminals?
I'm sure the police and campus security are doing their best, but they
need help in the PR department. And maybe, just maybe, some help of
law abiding citizens able to defend themselves!
Dave
http://tinyurl.com/yhu2q9e
http://www.msnbc.msn.com
AP - March 9, 2010
Ohio St.: Employee kills co-worker, then self
Officials say Ohio State custodian shot two workers, killing one
COLUMBUS, Ohio - Records showed that an Ohio State University janitor
who fatally shot a supervisor and injured another was told last week
he was being fired.
Documents released by the university from Nathaniel Brown's personnel
file show that supervisors complained he was tardy, slept on the job
and had problems following instructions.
Brown had been hired in October and was still on probation. The
university sent him a letter March 2 informing him that his employment
was to end Saturday.
Police said the 51-year-old Brown entered a campus maintenance
building early Tuesday and shot two supervisors in an office suite. He
was in dark clothing and carried two handguns in a backpack, campus
Police Chief Paul Denton said.
Brown was found with a self-inflicted gunshot wound in a garage bay
and died later at a hospital.
One of the victims, building services manager Larry Wallington, 48,
died at the scene. The other victim, operations shift leader Henry
Butler, 60, was in stable condition at Ohio University Medical Center,
officials said.
No students were hurt and classes went on as scheduled.
More than a half-dozen employees were in the maintenance building when
the shooting occurred and have been offered grief counseling, Denton
said during a news conference.
"This is a tragic event, and our hearts go out to all of the
families," said Vernon Baisden, a university assistant vice president
of public safety.
Graduate student Kiernan Gordon, 31, said he found out about the
shooting from his wife, who called him on his cell phone while he was
driving to campus. He said he didn't have any concerns about his own
safety.
"Ohio State is really a city unto itself, and like any city it has
problems unto itself," Gordon said.
More than 55,000 students are enrolled at the university's main campus
in Columbus.
The maintenance building where the shooting occurred is adjacent to a
classroom building and a parking garage and is near Ohio Stadium,
where the school's football team plays.
----
VCDL EM Dale Welch emailed me to verify that the University does, in
fact, prohibit firearms on campus.
--
Residence Hall Handbook
Community Standards of Conduct 2009-2010
7.2 Firearms and Weapons
(a) Possession and/or use of any type of firearm or other weapon is
not permitted in or around........................
This prohibition includes persons in possession of a concealed
firearms permit.
http://www.housing.osu.edu
---- Dale
**************************************************
23. Police act swiftly following gun purchases
**************************************************
Howard Roland emailed me this about true life "Minority Report" movie
scenario. The government moved in on somebody because they thought he
might be a threat because he bought some guns and ammunition after
being placed on administrative leave.
"'Instead of being reactive, we took a proactive approach,' OSP Sgt.
Jeff Proulx said."
OK - let's play that game: There's a chance that Sgt. Jeff Proulx
might hit his wife someday and therefore he should be arrested and
thrown in jail immediately and held there so we can be sure that his
wife is safe. How's that for a pro-active approach, Sgt.?
--
http://tinyurl.com/y9a9qyb
http://www.mailtribune.com
By Anita Burke
March 9, 2010
ODOT worker who'd been put on leave is mentally evaluated after buying
handguns, AK-47
Concerns about an Oregon Department of Transportation employee who
purchased several guns after being placed on leave prompted law
enforcement across Southern Oregon to step in.
Negotiators and a SWAT team from Medford police safely took a man
whose name wasn't released into protective custody Monday morning in
the 500 block of Effie Street, Medford police said in a news release.
He was taken to Rogue Valley Medical Center for a mental-health
evaluation.
The man recently had been placed on administrative leave from his job
and was "very disgruntled," the news release said.
ODOT Communications Director Patrick Cooney said there were
administrative, personnel matters involved that limited what the
department could discuss.
However, the state agency had reported concerns about the man to law
enforcement agencies, who started monitoring him, officials said.
"We had concerning information regarding a personnel issue and were
watching the subject," Jackson County Sheriff Mike Winters said.
In two days, the man bought a Heckler & Koch .45-caliber universal
self-loading handgun, a Walther .380-caliber handgun and an AK-47
assault rifle, Medford police Lt. Bob Hansen said. All of those
firearms were purchased legally, with required record checks by the
Oregon State Police.
Authorities were "extremely concerned" that the man may have been
planning to retaliate against his employers, the news release said.
"Instead of being reactive, we took a proactive approach," OSP Sgt.
Jeff Proulx said.
Douglas and Jackson County sheriff's departments, OSP officers based
in both counties and police in Medford and Roseburg collaborated, he
said.
Medford police watched the man's home overnight, starting at about 9
p.m. Sunday, Hansen said.
Because he was known to have weapons, police wanted to defuse the
situation and ensure the man wasn't a danger to himself or others
before the neighborhood awakened and people started their daily
activities, Hansen said.
Medford's hostage negotiators and SWAT team were called in at 3 a.m.
Monday and arrived on the scene at about 5:45 a.m., he said.
About a dozen officers responded. They closed the street for about an
hour and evacuated three homes to protect neighbors and prevent
bystanders from gathering, he said.
After a phone conversation with negotiators, the man who was alone in
the home agreed to come out, Hansen said.
Police seized the recently purchased firearms, as well as another .45-
caliber Heckler & Koch handgun and a 12-gauge shotgun. Police are
holding the weapons for safekeeping, but no criminal charges have been
filed.
**************************************************
24. US Dept of Education buys Remington 870's
**************************************************
Hah - talk about guns in schools! Every inch of the government
continues to arm itself, while begrudging us even carrying in the Wolf
Trap amphitheater (see next week's update):
Howard Roland emailed me this:
--
http://tinyurl.com/yccyd6m
http://www.fbo.gov
March 8, 2010
[SNIP]
The U.S. Department of Education (ED) intends to purchase twenty-seven
(27) REMINGTON BRAND MODEL 870 POLICE 12/14P MOD GRWC XS4 KXCS SF.
RAMAC #24587 GAUGE: 12 BARREL: 14" - PARKERIZED CHOKE: MODIFIED
SIGHTS: GHOST RING REAR WILSON COMBAT; FRONT - XS CONTOUR BEAD SIGHT
STOCK: KNOXX REDUCE RECOIL ADJUSTABLE STOCK FORE-END: SPEEDFEED SPORT-
SOLID - 14" LOP are designated as the only shotguns authorized for ED
based on compatibility with ED existing shotgun inventory, certified
armor and combat training and protocol, maintenance, and parts.
The required date of delivery is March 22, 2010.
Interested sources must submit detailed technical capabilities and any
other information that demonstrates their ability to meet the
requirements above,
**************************************************
25. Gun auction nets $15,000 toward new bulletproof vests
**************************************************
http://tinyurl.com/yebr85h
http://www.neshobademocrat.com
By Steven Thomas
March 10, 2010
More than 250 handguns and long guns confiscated in criminal cases
over the past several years in the city were auctioned to federally
licensed dealers last month and the proceeds will be used to purchase
bulletproof vests for police.
Head Auction auctioned the guns at its facility at 289-A Commerce Park
Dr., Ridgeland.
Police Chief Dickie Sistrunk submitted a list of surplus firearms to
the Mayor and Board of Aldermen at a Febuary meeting. While most were
auctioned, many were destroyed for various reasons including no
visible serial numbers, the chief said.
Three Glock .40 handguns, similar to those currently used by police
officers, were added to the department's inventory.
Mayor James A. Young voiced concern that certain firearms, such as
automatic weapons and high-powered rifles, should not be allowed back
on the streets.
"We took them off the streets from drug dealers and people who don't
care for life," Young said. "I'd rather we cut them up than put them
back on the streets."
Chief Sistrunk assured the board that no automatic weapons or sawed
off shotguns would be placed on the auction.
He said that high power rifles and shotguns were not the weapons of
choice for criminals but used mostly by hunters.
Alderman Cecil Nichols agreed, noting that the department had plenty
of surplus shotguns and that they needed to be disposed of properly.
Many of the guns stemmed from drug cases while others were seized
after being discharged inside the city limits, the police chief said.
Some of the guns have been in the police vault for over 20 years.
The auction brought in just under $15,000, for the police department,
with 10 percent going to Head Auction. According to Sistrunk, there
were a number of small guns that were not in the best condition so
they sold for a lot less.
Sistrunk told the board that proceeds from the auction would be used
to purchase new bulletproof vests, a requirement under the law.
The police department has an ongoing need for bulletproof vests,
Sistrunk said, because they only have a five-year lifespan. After
that, they lose effectiveness, he said.
"The vests will hopefully save one of my officer's lives," Sistrunk
said.
William Head, a Philadelphia native, oversaw the auction.
He told aldermen at the Feb. 16 meeting that he had conducted similar
auctions for the state Bureau of Narcotics, the Internal Revenue
Service and the U. S. Marshal Service.
We only sell to federally licensed firearms dealers, he said.
Any dealer without a license was not allowed to attend the auction,
Head said.
Before a dealer can resale one of the guns, the law requires him to
perform a background check on any perspective buyer, he said.
**************************************************
26. Massachusetts court upholds state gun-lock requirement
**************************************************
The U.S. Supreme Court in ruling on Chicago vs McDonald in a few
months could turn bad rulings like this on its head.
Roy B Scherer emailed me this:
--
http://tinyurl.com/yhu8fln
http://www.npr.org
AP
March 10, 2010
The highest court in Massachusetts on Wednesday upheld the
constitutionality of a state law that requires gun owners to lock
weapons in their homes, a case closely watched by both gun-control and
gun-rights proponents.
Massachusetts prosecutors argued that the law saves lives because it
requires guns to be kept in a locked container or equipped with a
trigger lock when not under the owner's control. The Gun Owners'
Action League and the Second Amendment Foundation Inc., however,
pointed to a 2008 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that said people have a
constitutional right to keep weapons for self-defense.
The state Supreme Judicial Court, ruling in the case of a man charged
with improperly storing a hunting rifle in his Billerica home,
unanimously agreed that the Second Amendment does not overrule the
state's right to require owners to store guns safely.
"We conclude that the legal obligation safely to secure firearms (in
the Massachusetts law) is not unconstitutional ... and that the
defendant may face prosecution on this count," Justice Ralph Gants
wrote.
The case involved Richard Runyan, whose mentally disabled son
allegedly shot at a neighbor with a BB gun. The 18-year-old showed
police where his father kept other guns, and the father was charged
with improperly storing a hunting rifle under his bed.
A Lowell District Court judge later dismissed the charges, citing the
U.S. Supreme Court's 2008 ruling that threw out a District of Columbia
requirement that firearms be equipped with trigger locks or kept
disassembled. In that case, the Supreme Court found that the Second
Amendment gives people the right to keep and bear arms for self-
defense in their homes.
Massachusetts prosecutors argued that the state law requiring guns to
be secured when not under an owner's control is less restrictive than
the D.C. law. The Massachusetts court agreed, finding that the state
law allows gun owners to keep their guns unlocked when they are at
home and the guns are under their control, but must keep them locked
when they are not home.
Gun proponents said the law makes it virtually impossible for
homeowners to quickly access a gun for self-defense.
**************************************************
27. Gun control After McDonald
**************************************************
http://tinyurl.com/yepnhmd
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org
By David Rittgers
March 10, 2010
I recently appeared on the Patt Morrison Show in southern California
opposite Paul Helmke of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence in
a segment that begs the question of what gun control laws will look
like if the Supreme Court incorporates the Second Amendment with the
McDonald v. Chicago case. The audio of the program is here, but the
issue merits a more detailed discussion than I could get into on the
radio.
The litigation over the boundaries of the Second Amendment in the
District of Columbia previews the kinds of gun laws that will face
court scrutiny.
First, certain restrictions on the purchase of firearms will likely be
overturned. California maintains a "safe gun roster" of handguns that
manufacturers have successfully submitted for safety testing.
Following the Heller decision, the District adopted California's
roster. The roster is very specific, and handgun models are certified
"safe" right down to the color. The District rejected applications to
register two-tone guns, discontinued models, and guns not on the
California roster. Three plaintiffs filed suit, alleging that this
policy violated constitutional protections against irrational
administrative regulations. The District relented, expanding its
roster to include the "safe handguns" listings for Maryland and
Massachusetts.
California courts are likely to reach similar conclusions. The Calguns
Foundation has a plaintiff who wants to register a Glock handgun. The
state has certified the right-handed but not the ambidextrous version,
and the Calguns plaintiff was born without a right arm below the
elbow. This compelling case, along with others parallel to the DC
plaintiffs, will force California to open up its roster.
Second, jurisdictions will be forced to allow some form of handgun
carry, either open or concealed. Outright bans on concealed carry
cited in cases from the mid-1800's come from a time when it was
assumed that only brigands carried handguns concealed, and it was an
unquestioned right of the people to carry arms openly wherever they
went. States and localities will not be able to delete the right to
bear arms from the right to keep and bear arms.
My colleague Tom Palmer is currently litigating this issue in the
District of Columbia, and states will have to confront the plain text
of the Second Amendment and clear historical recognition of a right to
be armed outside the home.
California allows open carry as long as the handgun is unloaded, but
Los Angeles and other jurisdictions in the state refuse to issue
concealed handgun permits. California will probably opt for concealed
carry when push comes to shove. Public views have shifted to an "out
of sight, out of mind" mentality, and concealed carry is the rule in
most states. A California police officer recently put a comment up on
Facebook that proposes intimidating open carriers with violence.
"Haha, we had one guy last week try to do it! He got proned out and
reminded where he was at and that turds will jack him for his gun in a
heartbeat!" Turds indeed.
This brings us back to the Starbucks controversy that prompted the
radio segment. Gun control proponents asked Starbucks to ban firearms
from their coffee shops, and gun rights activists asked that they
continue their current policy of following the law of the jurisdiction
where each franchise is located.
The call-ins to the radio show expressed a willingness to boycott
Starbucks if it keeps its "follow the law" policy, but that's a
rationale to boycott gas stations, grocery stores, and restaurants
across the nation. If self-defense scares you that much, the best
advice is to stay home. Or venture out and be a good victim.
Callers also expressed concerns about off-duty cops brandishing guns
while intoxicated, and this is something we should take seriously. As
I've said before, no magical powers accrue to a sworn officer. That's
a great case for barring everyone from carrying and drinking in
public, law enforcement officers included. Federal law does this - the
Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act allows current and retired law
enforcement officers to carry concealed nationwide but requires that
they not be under the influence while doing so. The same can't be said
for some state laws that make law enforcement officers a higher class
of citizens than everyone else. Virginia allows retired law
enforcement officers from any jurisdiction to imbibe while armed, but
citizens with concealed handgun permits must transition from concealed
carry to open carry when entering an establishment that serves alcohol
for on-premises consumption. Better to treat permit holders and
officers alike, and allow carry in restaurants but bar alcohol
consumption while armed.
It's unclear what the patchwork of gun laws across the nation will
look like in ten years, but Eugene Volokh gives a framework for
analysis in this article. Cato held an event the day before oral
argument of the McDonald case, and our brief is available here. Ilya
Shapiro and Josh Blackman discussed the application of the Privileges
or Immunities Clause in this excellent article, and provided some post-
argument commentary.
**************************************************
28. Locked, loaded, and ready to caffeinate
**************************************************
http://tinyurl.com/yd9fx8l
http://www.nytimes.com
By ian Urbina
March 7, 2010
For years, being able to carry a concealed handgun has been a sacred
right for many gun enthusiasts. In defending it, Charlton Heston, the
actor and former president of the National Rifle Association, used to
say that the flock is safer when the wolves cannot tell the difference
between the lions and the lambs.
But a grass-roots effort among some gun rights advocates is shifting
attention to a different goal: exercising the right to carry
unconcealed weapons in the 38 or more states that have so-called open-
carry laws allowing guns to be carried in public view with little or
no restrictions. The movement is not only raising alarm among gun
control proponents but also exposing rifts among gun rights advocates.
The call for gun owners to carry their guns openly in the normal
course of business first drew broad attention last summer, when
opponents of the Obama administration's health care overhaul began
appearing at town-hall-style meetings wearing sidearms. But in recent
weeks, the practice has expanded as gun owners in California and other
states that allow guns to be openly carried have tested the law by
showing up at so-called meet-ups, in which gun owners appear at
Starbucks, pizza parlors and other businesses openly bearing their
weapons.
"Our point is to do the same thing that concealed carriers do," said
Mike Stollenwerk, a co-founder of OpenCarry.org, which serves as a
national forum. "We're just taking off our jackets."
The goal, at least in part, is to make the case for liberalized
concealed weapon laws by demonstrating how uncomfortable many people
are with publicly displayed guns. The tactic has startled many
business owners like Peet's Coffee and Tea and California Pizza
Kitchen, which forbid guns at their establishments. So far, Starbucks
has resisted doing the same.
The open-carry movement is a wild card in gun rights advocacy and in
some ways is to the N.R.A. and other mainstream gun rights advocacy
groups what the Tea Party movement is to the Republican Party.
Newer, more driven by grass-roots and the Internet than the N.R.A.,
open-carry groups are also less centralized, less predictable and
often more confrontational in their push for gun rights. In the last
year, there have been at least 140 formal and informal meet-ups at
coffee shops and restaurants in California alone, organizers say.
Some gun rights advocates see risks in the approach.
"I'm all for open-carry laws," said Alan Gottlieb, founder of the
Second Amendment Foundation, a gun rights advocacy organization in
Washington State. "But I don't think flaunting it is very productive
for our cause. It just scares people."
Robert Weisberg, a gun law expert and a criminal justice professor at
Stanford University, described the open-carry activists as "a
liability" for the N.R.A., in particular.
While the N.R.A. is almost always going to support the increased
deregulation of guns, Professor Weisberg said, the organization keeps
its distance from open-carry advocacy because it does not want to
distract attention from its higher priority of promoting the right to
carry concealed weapons.
"Add to this that the N.R.A. is a very disciplined, on-message
organization," he said, contrasting the N.R.A.'s approach with the
free-wheeling nature of some open-carry advocates.
Asked to comment on the open-carry movement, Andrew Arulanandam, a
spokesman for the N.R.A., said the organization "supports the right of
law abiding people to exercise their self-defense rights in accordance
with state local and federal law." He declined to comment further.
Gun control advocates have raised particular concerns about open-carry
laws because under these laws in many states, gun owners are not
required to have a permit or any sort of training or testing.
The first meet-ups by open-carry advocates started nearly a decade ago
in Virginia, but they became popular more recently in California
because the law there makes it difficult for people to get a permit to
carry a concealed weapon.
"It is a discriminatory issue in California," said Paul Higgins, 43, a
software engineer who runs a Web forum called CaliforniaOpenCarry.org.
"If you are politically connected, if you're rich, if you're a
politician, if you're a celebrity, you get a permit. Otherwise, you
don't."
Mr. Higgins said the meet-ups were not meant to be confrontational.
The hope, he said, is that if other restaurant or cafe patrons are
uncomfortable with guns being displayed so conspicuously, pressure
will increase on lawmakers to consider changing the law so that
weapons can be carried more discreetly.
Mr. Stollenwerk, the co-founder of OpenCarry.org., who is a retired
Army officer from Fairfax County, Va., said the meet-ups were also
meant as chances for gun owners to exercise and advertise their rights
in states that allow people to openly carry firearms. More than 27,000
members are registered for his group's online discussion forum, he said.
Gun control advocates say the open-carry movement's real aim is to
push the envelope and to force companies to take a public stand on the
issue.
"You have to wonder where their next frontier will be," said Paul
Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. "Will
gun owners start trying to carry firearms openly into banks, on
subways and buses, in schools?"
For Starbucks, the debate has become a headache.
After California gun owners began holding meet-ups in January at
Starbucks, the Brady Campaign began sending out petitions to pressure
the company to forbid weapons. Starbucks released a statement saying
it would not turn gun carriers away from its cafes, and would instead
continue to comply with local laws and statutes.
"The political, policy and legal debates around these issues belong in
the legislatures and courts, not in our stores," Starbuck officials
said. They said the company did not want to be in the middle of the
controversy.
Other businesses have taken a different tack - and are embracing the
movement.
The East Coast Pizza Bar and Grill in Walnut Creek, Calif., about 25
miles east of San Francisco, invited gun owners to host open carry
meet-ups. At least 70 people attended one last Sunday, many carrying
firearms, said the owner, Jessie Grunner, 30. And over a dozen
returned on Thursday night for more.
"Frankly, I wasn't sure how I would feel in that type of situation,
and it really turned out to be a total nonissue," Ms. Grunner said.
"The families were great," she said. "These were very gracious
people." The fact that customers wore sidearms, she said, "just faded
into the background."
**************************************************
29. Some gun powder with that Espresso? Where Starbucks and guns collide
**************************************************
http://tinyurl.com/yklnuem
http://www.examiner.com
By Jeremy Borden
March 8, 2010
Picture this: You have just waited 25 minutes at your local Starbucks,
craving that burnt espresso and bit of foam, and before taking out
your American Express black card to afford Bucks' $4.50 latte, you see
that the person in front of you is cradling a weapon.
I've lived in Virginia for a few years now and haven't seen anybody
take advantage of the laws that allow citizens to carry a firearm with
the proper paperwork. Of course, I imagine it would be somewhat
difficult to be carrying your favorite shotgun down the very-public
sidewalk and then want to go into a very-private shop...and all of a
sudden you've broken the law.
Starbucks, for one, has solved this problem, according to numerous
news reports. In states that have open-carry laws (like Virginia)
Starbucks will abide by the local laws. This has gotten gun activists
on both sides fired up (pun intended) and we'll leave the politics to
the rest of the D.C. chattering masses.
I wonder, though: Will this affect business in Virginia?
**************************************************
30. EDITORIAL: Packing a gun in Starbucks
**************************************************
Montford Oakes emailed me this:
--
http://tinyurl.com/yg4mvva
http://www.washingtontimes.com
March 10, 2010
If you want to have a nice, relaxing cup of coffee in a safe
environment, try Starbucks. The coffee-shop chain, generally known for
environmentalist chic, is probably one of the safest places to hang
out these days for a reason that doesn't fit its image - Starbucks is
letting customers openly carry guns in its stores. Americans thus can
enjoy their rights and wash them down with a Frappuccino.
Not surprisingly, Starbucks has taken some flak for its stand. The
Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, an organization that has
supported gun bans in Washington and Chicago, wants guns kept out of
Starbucks. Collecting signatures from across the country, the gun
controllers announced this week that they have gathered 28,000
signatures to try to pressure the bean sellers to hang fire. What the
Brady Campaign actually did is misfire.
Here is some free PR advice for those who support gun bans: 28,000
signatures from a country of 200-some million adults is embarrassingly
small. The National Rifle Association, with more than 4 million
members, could collect that many signatures for the opposite position
in less than an hour. It's obvious which side won this duel. Despite
all the harping from the left, a spokesman for Starbucks said last
week that the company is sticking to its policy of letting customers
carry guns where it's legal.
From sea to shining sea, the climate for guns is changing, and the
progress extends beyond Starbucks. Major retailers such as Home Depot,
Best Buy and Barnes & Noble apparently also are friendly to people who
openly pack heat, according to the Wall Street Journal. The Brady
Campaign warns businesses that allowing customers to carry guns will
scare away other customers. Yet it seems pretty obvious that the
businesses themselves - despite all the pressure they face from trial
lawyers and bureaucrats to ban guns - are in a much better position to
know what their customers want.
Hollywood and the liberal media have skewed public perceptions to such
a degree that most Americans probably don't realize that not so long
ago, people openly carried guns without a second thought all the time.
Up until 1969, all but one of the public high schools in New York City
had rifle teams. Thousands of students carried their rifles every day
on subways, buses and streets on their way to school, when they went
to practice in the afternoon and on their way home. The students would
store their guns in homerooms in the morning and then pick them up in
the afternoon. In more normal times, no one thought it was a big deal.
Liberals claim they believe in science, but guns vividly illustrate
their intellectual blinders. There is not a single refereed study by
criminologists or economists using crime data from across America that
shows that right-to-carry laws increase violent crime. The academic
debate in refereed journals has been over how large the benefits are.
Here is a prediction: In a very short time, all the furor over
Starbucks' pro-gun policy will be forgotten. The gun grabbers might
not like it, but most Americans respect the right to keep and bear
arms - even in a coffee shop.
**************************************************
31. Beware, Yogi: Gun rules in parks, elsewhere falling
**************************************************
http://tinyurl.com/yk9acfx
blog.syracuse.com
By The Post-Standard Editorial Board
March 8, 2010
Wayne Bosowicz, a hunter and guide, calls it "apple pie and motherhood."
He's talking about guns strapped to the hips of visitors to U.S.
national parks, who now can carry firearms openly. Customers also are
packing heat while enjoying a caffeine boost at Starbucks cafes.
Yes, it's the season for conspicuous gun displays. As the headline on
a news release from gun-advocate Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., noted:
"Second Amendment prevails - no matter where you are." "Now it's a big
sea of gun freedom," exulted Mike Stollenwerk, whose Web site
opencarry.org promotes handguns as an accessory everywhere, including
restaurants, bars and churches.
Legislation overturning the National Parks Service's 94-year-old gun
ban was attached to the Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights Act, signed
by President Barack Obama. It took effect last month.
Why anyone would need a gun in a national park, where rangers
themselves are unarmed, is a puzzle - though Bosowicz says he wishes
he'd had one when he was confronted by a bear in Yellowstone two years
ago. The perceived need to be armed extends to coffee shops. "I don't
know of anybody who would provide me with defense other than myself,"
insists retiree and Starbucks gun-toter Dale Welch of Richmond, Va.
The new law still bars firearms from park visitor centers. Gun owners
must abide by state gun laws, and are not allowed to shoot except in
dire circumstances. Coffee houses, meanwhile, may declare themselves
"gun-free" - so far.
New York allows the open carry of weapons only in cars - permits
required.
A majority of U.S. Supreme Court justices appear poised to dismantle
restrictive state and local gun laws across the country, as they did
two years ago in overturning Washington, D.C.'s handgun ban.
The Brady Center has gathered more than 28,000 signatures on a
petition urging Starbucks to bar guns. (Go to http://www.bradycampaign.org/starbucks.)
But in a Gallup poll released in October, a record-low 44 percent of
respondents supported stricter gun laws, down from a high of 78
percent in 1990. Only 29 percent backed a ban on handguns.
Forget renewing the lapsed assault weapons ban. Forget tougher
background checks. The gun lobby is on a roll. Unless the people and
political leaders come to their senses, the mantra of John Velleco of
Gun Owners of America soon may become as American as apple pie: "Any
gun, anywhere, anytime." [PVC: YES!]
**************************************************
32. LTE: Guns in national parks
**************************************************
Bruce Jackson emailed me this:
--
Don't you mean Too bad the right to bear arms isn't tied to one's
ability to think like you? Should the guards at the Tomb of the
Unknown Soldier give up their rifles? Or is it that you think that our
rights should only be exercised one at a time? You can have a gun, but
don't speak! You can speak, but don't have a gun! You can go to
church, but don't have your gun and you better keep your mouth shut!
Or do you just believe that bad things cannot happen in a national
park? Heck, if that is the case, let's all just go live on National
Park land and we will all be safe in a crime free environment! Wake UP
Mr. Weller!
http://tinyurl.com/yzlpx7r
http://www.alachuacountytoday.com
March 8, 2010
A new law just took effect which allows people visiting National Parks
to carry firearms into the parks. I heard that some celebrated the
passage of this law by going to Gettysburg National Park with their
guns and having a barbeque. Gettysburg is the scene of the greatest
carnage in American history. More than 50,000 soldiers lost their life
in those three days on that battlefield in Pennsylvania. That park is
sacred ground to me and should be for all Americans: much the same as
Arlington National Cemetery.
Do those who "celebrated" their right to bear arms have any concept of
propriety?
I am outraged by their thoughtless act.
I don't give a darn if they were exercising their right to bear arms.
People also have the right to free speech. Free speech includes the
use of profanity. But anyone with a brain the size of a walnut should
realize that one should not walk into a church or elementary school
and yell out obscenities.
The carrying of firearms on to the sacred ground at Gettysburg is
mindless and incredibly crass: as crass and mindless as if they were
carried into Arlington National Cemetery.
Too bad the right to bear arms isn't tied to one's ability to think.
Thomas Weller
High Springs, Fla
**************************************************
33. Ammoland.com
**************************************************
Ammoland.com puts our VA-ALERTs on their website so they go out to a
wider audience. I have been amazed at how much of the press monitors
their site, too.
Here is an alert from last week, along with a picture of Senator Marsh
that Ammoland.com added to the story:
http://tinyurl.com/yksk3m
**************************************************
34. Thousands of gun owners hit state capital streets
**************************************************
Look at this HUGE rally for concealed carry in Illinois - SEVEN-
THOUSAND people! It makes our Lobby Day look like peanuts. But
that's because they don't have any way to carry a gun for self-defense
in Illinois and people want their right to self-defense to be
honored! Our fight here is of a smaller magnitude because we are
already quite away down the path of liberty.
Nonetheless, a very impressive rally from my birth state:
http://tinyurl.com/yfbypyt
illinoisreview.typepad.com
March 12, 2010
See Illinois conservative Don Castella's video of Illinois Gun Owners
Legislative Day March this past Wednesday.
http://tinyurl.com/yhffvgk
The march wasn't covered much in Chicago news, and certainly no
lengthy videos like this one was featured on local news. These folks
want Illinois to become the nation's 49th State to allow their
citizens to defend themselves -- the Second Amendment right to carry.
**************************************************
35. Stonewall Rifle and Pistol 2010 shooting season is nearly upon us!
**************************************************
Mike Piper emailed me this:
--
Mr. V.,
It's been a decent year for gun owners in the Virginia legislature,
but I'm sure a lot of people are ready for a change of pace. Perhaps
you could include the following in one of the upcoming updates?
Thanks!
Mike Piper
http://tinyurl.com/yetqpmu
After a long hard winter, I'm sure all of us are ready to get out, and
do some recreational shooting!
Stonewall Rifle and Pistol club, is a private club located
approximately 20 miles west of Staunton, VA on U.S. route 250. The
club has been in operation for over 60 years, and the facilities
include a 50 yard pistol range, 2 trap fields, and rifle ranges to 400
yards. They also have a nice clubhouse facility.
http://www.stonewallrpc.com/
While the club is for members and guests only, they do host a large
number of events that are open to the public. You can view the
calender here.
http://www.stonewallrpc.com/calendar.html
All events with an * before them, are open to the public. There are
events for pistol, rifle, blackpowder, and shotgun. Mark the ones that
look interesting on your calender, and come on out and have a fun time!
For more information, you can find the contact information for the
event directors here:
http://www.stonewallrpc.com/contact.html
Please note, that the number listed for the club, rings inside the
clubhouse, so you are better off contacting the director for the type
of event you are interested in!
**************************************************
36. Correction to VCDL Update 3/10/10
**************************************************
Bob Ham emailed me with a correction to item 5 in VCDL Update 3/10/10.
Oops - Thanks Bob.
--
Philip-
Minor point:
Item 5 is headlined "VERY GOOD Op Ed -- Richmond Times" and yet the
very excellent op-ed actually concerns the Roanoke Times, not the
Richmond Times.
Regards,
Bob
**************************************************
37. Correction to VCDL alert about restaurant ban repeal
**************************************************
Earlier this week I mistakenly said in an alert that the restaurant
ban repeal bill allows **retired** law enforcement officers to carry
concealed and drink in a restaurant. That particular provision had
been stripped out in the Senate, leaving only active law enforcement
and Commonwealth Attorneys as being able to carry concealed and drink.
Sorry for the goof up!
***************************************************************************
VA-ALERT is a project of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc.
(VCDL). VCDL is an all-volunteer, non-partisan grassroots organization
dedicated to defending the human rights of all Virginians. The Right to
Keep and Bear Arms is a fundamental human right.
VCDL web page: http://www.vcdl.org [http://www.vcdl.org/]
|
| |||||
Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOFFreedom Isn't Free - Buy a Gun. VGOF is *the* place for Local Virginia Firearm News and Events 
Hey Firearm Owner - Join the discussion!
You are not registered yet? Please do so by clicking here: Register Already a member? Login here
Virginia Citizens Defense League (VCDL) Needs Your Help - Click Here to Donate Now!
Click here for details -> why does VCDL need my help? VA-ALERT: VCDL Update 3/18/10
Forum rules
Gun related political postings are welcome here. If it's not firearm related, please don't post it.
1 post • Page 1 of 1
VA-ALERT: VCDL Update 3/18/10
“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” — Edmund Burke
1 post • Page 1 of 1
Return to Virginia and National Politics (Firearm Related Only) Who is onlineUsers browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests Powered by phpBB
|
Our Sponsors 
| ||||
VGOF RSS Feed![[Valid RSS]](images/valid-rss.png "Valid RSS feed")
