VA-ALERT: VCDL Update 1/31/15

[OakRidgeStars]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not yet a VCDL member? Join VCDL at: http://www.vcdl.org/join
----------------------------------------------------------------------
VCDL's meeting schedule: http://www.vcdl.org/meetings
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Abbreviations used in VA-ALERT: http://www.vcdl.org/help/abbr.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Big thanks to our Lobby Day Team Leaders!
2. Reminder on how a bill becomes law at the General Assembly
3. Liberty-challenged Delegate Lopez gets rated "pants on fire" by Politifact.com for comments on guns
4. MUST SEE: Video on where America really stands in the world relative to crime and gun ownership!
5. David Codrea writeup on Lobby Day
6. Links to David Codrea and Emily Miller Lobby Day speeches
7. Story on Lobby Day
8. College student's gun helps save her life
9. DC issues a handful of CHP licenses - VCDL quoted in article
10. Web site for guns, ammo, accessories
11. GOA backs a new federal CHP Reciprocity bill
12. City Councilman draws his gun to defend meeting from killer
13. Picture worth 1,000 words: how did our gun rights get infringed over the years?
14. Daily Press editorial wants us to "Cooperate, for Safety"
15. VCDL member get LTE publish in the Richmond Times-Dispatch
16. Second Amendment protects more than guns

******************************************************
1. Big thanks to our Lobby Day Team Leaders!
******************************************************

From EM Bob Sadtler:

A fourth year as Lobby Day Coordinator, and a fourth success. I want to thank Philip for arranging the buses, Dennis O'Connor for coordinating them, Bruce Jackson for helping me direct traffic, and, most of all, my Team Leader volunteers:

Ed Levine, John Wilburn, Matt White, Alan Fisher, Marcus White, Bruce Garris, Randy Weidman, Kyle Heath, Chris Karanski, Kurt Mueller, Ron "Benghazi" Hedlund, Al Shank, Greg Trojan, Jason Kruse, Bob Charlton, Gary Moeller and Hunter Allen, who stepped in when needed, and Pat Webb, who would have preferred to make the rounds with Philip, but sacrificed for the greater good.

Thanks also to my alternates, who were ready to step in: Leonard Harris, Bob Kennedy, Bruce Biggs, and John Pierce.

Every year, I get accolades for a job well done, and these men and women are the reason. I am proud to work with them all. [PVC: Me, too!]


******************************************************
2. Reminder on how a bill becomes law at the General Assembly
******************************************************

A new member asked when a bill that just passed out of subcommittee will become law. Here is the answer from VCDL VP Jim Snyder:

Bills have many, many more hurdles to pass before they become law. A very simplified series of hurdles they must pass are:

-- Pass out of subcommittee
-- Pass out of committee
-- Pass out of the House (or Senate)
-- Go to the other chamber (Senate or House)
-- Get assigned to a committee
-- Pass out of subcommittee
-- Pass out of the committee
-- Pass out of the Senate (or House)
-- Sent to the Governor
-- The Governor has to sign the bill into law
-- Most bills become law on July 1

As you can see, the bills that passed out of committee this week are just at the beginning of the simplified process that I outlined above.

A more complete explanation of how bills become law can be found at:

http://virginiageneralassembly.gov/incl ... e=b&cid=90


******************************************************
3. Liberty-challenged Delegate Lopez gets rated "pants on fire" by Politifact.com for comments on guns
******************************************************

http://www.politifact.com/virginia/stat ... r-people-/

or

http://tinyurl.com/m47zkq5

**

Delegate Alfonso Lopez says Va. shields ducks better than people from assault weapon
violence

By Warren Fiske on Monday, January 26th, 2015 at 10:26 a.m.

SNIP

In a speech on the House floor, Lopez said that under Virginia law "ducks
have more protection that people" from assault gun violence. To drive the
point home, he repeated it.

There’s simply no basis to this jarring claim. Virginia sanctions duck
hunting; it’s a misdemeanor with no jail time if you shoot one with a gun
that can hold more than three bullets. It’s a felony to purposefully shoot a
person, sometimes punishable by death, and the capacity of firearms doesn’t
alter this simple fact.

We rate Lopez’s statement Pants on Fire.


******************************************************
4. MUST SEE: Video on where America really stands in the world relative to crime and gun ownership!
******************************************************

Bill Whittle hits a home run with this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pELwCqz2JfE


******************************************************
5. David Codrea writeup on Lobby Day
******************************************************

http://www.examiner.com/article/virgini ... s-activism

or

http://tinyurl.com/omyx44v

Text of David's speech:

http://www.examiner.com/article/speech- ... n-grabbers

or

http://tinyurl.com/k35n2an


******************************************************
6. Links to David Codrea and Emily Miller Lobby Day speeches
******************************************************

Thanks to Matt Gottshalk and Kenneth Van Wyk for video and links:

Codrea: http://youtu.be/LVQImldpUas

Miller: http://youtu.be/GvB40t2lKBo


******************************************************
7. Story on Lobby Day
******************************************************

Reporter grossly underestimates the number of attendees we had. She saying 200. The most conservative estimates I've heard are 600-700 ADULTS at the rally (we had many still in the buildings lobbying and others that left before the rally).

When Dennis O’Connor told a reporter in an interview that the numbers were around 600, she said, "well, I'm going with 200." Dennis wondered why she even bothered asking if she had her mind made up.

The other side brought in a large group of kids to pad their numbers. ("Since school is out today, who wants to go on a field trip to Richmond?!")

http://wvtf.org/post/both-sides-gun-deb ... y-richmond

Both Sides of Gun Debate Rally in Richmond
By Sandy Hausman

Hundreds of people came to voice support or opposition to gun control laws. Activist and blogger David Codrea told about 200 people – some openly carrying long-guns – that Governor Terry McAuliffe should not be trusted.

“I once had a boss who taught me the correct way to pronounce that is McAwful. Who said, in his state of the Commonwealth address – this is what the guy says: ‘As a gun owner myself, I fully believe that law abiding citizens have a right and responsible to carry fire arms, but …’ Stop right there. There are sure are a lot of politicians with big butts waddling around, aren’t there?”

Codrea supposed there were a million gun owners in Virginia. He called on them to get involved in politics – to support a simple agenda:

“No new gun laws. Repeal existing intolerable acts. Deny success to mass murderers by abolishing phony gun-free zones now. Work with us or we will retire you, and I will not disarm. Thank you.”

A somewhat larger crowd was set to gather three hours later in support of gun control, but police surrounded the area with yellow crime scene tape and shut down roads when one officer spotted a suspicious package. The bomb squad arrived and determined the package was not a danger, while Attorney General Mark Herring addressed about 300 people nearby.

“Last year, there were 4,228 crimes committed with firearms, 209 of them murders, and that is unacceptable. Every Virginian has the right to grow up and achieve their full potential, free from the fear of gun violence.” [PVC: By inference, other types of violence, like "knife violence" or "baseball-bat violence" are OK with Herring.]

Herring called on lawmakers to close the gun show loophole that allows people to buy weapons without a background check. He also praised bills that would re-instate a one-handgun-per-month limit on purchases and bar people convicted of domestic violence from buying guns.

Then, Secretary of Public Safety Brian Moran made his political pitch, saying elections matter.

“We have an attorney general on the steps here speaking about the values that are near and dear to our hearts. We have a lieutenant governor in support of these issues, and we have a governor who is in support of these issues and is giving voice to these issues.”

He did not mention that both houses of the General Assembly are now controlled by Republicans who are unlikely to pass any new restrictions on guns in Virginia. Republican bills would allow issuance of a lifetime concealed weapons permit – something that must now be renewed every five years and permit firearms on college campuses and in airports.


******************************************************
8. College student's gun helps save her life
******************************************************

Guns Save Lives

http://www.bizpacreview.com/2015/01/29/ ... paign=Link

or

http://tinyurl.com/n8n78qn


******************************************************
9. DC issues a handful of CHP licenses - VCDL quoted in article
******************************************************

http://freebeacon.com/culture/gun-right ... y-permits/


******************************************************
10. Web site for guns, ammo, accessories
******************************************************

Thanks to member Walter Jackson for pointing out this jewel:

http://www.gunwatcher.com/?c=2598


******************************************************
11. GOA backs a new federal CHP Reciprocity bill
******************************************************

Gun Owners of America likes a soon-to-be-introduced bill that will protect our Second Amendment rights via national reciprocity, without requiring Constitutional Carry states to change their laws to be part of that reciprocity.

More information here:

http://tinyurl.com/lq9clr2


******************************************************
12. City Councilman draws his gun to defend meeting from killer
******************************************************

New Hope City Council meeting in Minnesota came under attack by a man with a rifle, who was killed by the police before he got into the council chambers. One of the councilmen was armed and prepared had that not been the case, as the video below shows:

http://controversialtimes.com/news/vide ... olleagues/

or

http://tinyurl.com/lbh4lue


******************************************************
13. Picture worth 1,000 words: how did our gun rights get infringed over the years?
******************************************************

Thanks to member Paul Henick for the link:

http://hsgca.net/wp-content/uploads/201 ... se_v21.png


******************************************************
14. Daily Press editorial wants us to "Cooperate, for Safety"
******************************************************

Yet another tired call for gun control to save the Commonwealth. Forget that gun control doesn't work, we're just supposed to accept it because a newspaper tells us we should. Board member Dennis O'Connor sent me an email demolishing this article. I have included his comments below in [DO: ....] format. This article is so silly, that I also had to include my comments in the usual [PVC:...] fashion.

Thanks to Billy Huckleberry for the link:

http://www.dailypress.com/news/opinion/ ... story.html

or

http://tinyurl.com/l7gugza

Cooperate, for safety

Sometime this year, if the statistical projections prove accurate, firearm deaths will surpass automobile accidents as the leading killer of Americans younger than 25. That strikes us as an astounding shift, one owed as much to safer cars and changing driving habits as it is to a proliferation of gun violence.

There is ample sentiment — perhaps driven by trends such as this — that the rules surrounding private ownership of firearms deserve reexamination. [PVC: With 20,000 gun laws in the country, that's been done over 20,000 times before and only made everyone less safe.] Many believe a better balance can be struck between the guarantees of the Second Amendment and the potential public safety benefits of stronger gun control. [PVC: But many more believe that less gun control means more public safety.]

Gov. Terry McAuliffe recently proposed that Virginia begin such a discussion. [DO: Discussion? No discussion - He's trying to push tyranny down our throats!] He wants the commonwealth to consider measures that promise to make the state safer while leaving intact the right to keep and bear arms. [PVC: I can't help but wonder what the definition of "intact" is to the Governor.]

It is a debate Virginia should welcome, but Republican leaders in the General Assembly have dismissed the governor's proposals as non-starters. [DO: Debate? See previous comment about our throats.] That is not acceptable. We all have a stake in making sure firearms are kept away from those intent on doing harm and it falls to our elected officials, at the behest of citizens, to determine how best to do so. [PVC: No law can keep a gun out of the hands of a criminal who really wants to have one, unless he is behind bars in a prison. And even then...]

In December, Gov. McAuliffe introduced a series of measures aimed at tightening gun control in the commonwealth.

The most prominent rule would reinstitute a Virginia law passed two decades ago, and repealed under Gov. Bob McDonnell to limit handgun purchases to one a month. Other proposals would seek to keep firearms from domestic abusers and institute background checks for private gun sales at gun shows.

The governor timed his announcement to closely follow the anniversary of the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. But he campaigned for office as a gun-control advocate, so one cannot accuse him of seeking to use that emotional event to manipulate public opinion. [DO: HUH?!??] [PVC: Oh, heavens no! A gun-grabber using an emotional event to manipulate public opinion? Why, that never happens! <eye roll> ]

In fact, while we don't think the governor is acting absent a political motive, the ideas he has proposed are generally even-handed, pragmatic solutions to some of the troubling problems involving firearms in Virginia. [PVC: "Solutions?" Nothing the Governor wants will make any difference to criminals. If the Governor had gotten everything he wanted this year, we'd still be back here next year, with crime rates either the same or worse, looking for more ways to disarm the People, running in the completely wrong direction.]

Take the one-handgun-a-month rule, for instance. To those who support gun control, that limit will seem reasonable. To firearm enthusiasts, it will seem like an unwarranted intrusion on the Second Amendment.

But we know the legislature originally passed the measure in an attempt to stamp out firearms trafficking originating in Virginia. Detractors claimed that loopholes and exemptions rendered the law toothless, but repeal of that measure, rather than its reform, struck us as counterintuitive.

The attempt to limit gun purchasing by convicted domestic abusers is another measure deserving attention. It would impose restrictions on people with protective orders against them, on those convicted of certain domestic violence misdemeanors and on parents with delinquent child support payments.

Last year, a bill that would have enacted those limits passed the Senate but stalled in the House. We can only hope that chamber is more proactive in trying to protect domestic violence victims this year. [PVC: They are - they are NOT disarming everybody for misdemeanors! Nor are they taking guns away from parties to a divorce because of protective orders that are issued at the drop of a hat.]

Truthfully, we expect very little from the General Assembly when it comes to guns. With both houses in the hands of Republicans, Gov. McAuliffe's proposals will struggle to find traction. GOP leaders have already declared some of them dead on arrival.

That is shameful, since by working together to bridge the divide between responsible gun owners and those who advocate thoughtful gun-control measures, Virginia could set an example for the nation. [PVC: For years gun owners gave up some of their rights to build a bridge, while the other side gave up nothing. We're not playing that game any more. In fact, we are taking back what we should have never, ever given up.]

We respect the proud traditions of the commonwealth. We respect the protection granted under the Second Amendment. [DO: Really? How?] And by building bipartisan consensus in the interest of public safety, Virginia could draft appropriate laws to keep firearms away from abusers, those who seek to illegally traffic in weapons and those judged a threat to themselves and others. [PVC: We already have those bases covered.]

Gov. McAuliffe wants to begin the debate and citizens should call on lawmakers to participate honestly and in good faith. [DO: So it's really just a discussion where all of our views will be respected?]


******************************************************
15. VCDL member get LTE publish in the Richmond Times-Dispatch
******************************************************

Letter to the Editor by member Evan Smith published:

http://www.richmond.com/opinion/your-op ... a7591.html

or

http://tinyurl.com/ojbzd2v

Second Amendment keeps us safe

Editor, Times-Dispatch:

Virginians are not defenseless. As a former military officer, and one of more than 300,000 Virginians who possess a concealed handgun permit, I can assure you that I will not submit to a criminal or terrorist without a fight. I have carried a concealed handgun for nearly five years. I go about my business without others knowing I carry a firearm. I do my best to avoid any situation where I might feel compelled to display or use my firearm. But rest assured, if I see a police officer pinned down and in need of assistance, or if I am in the wrong place at the wrong time and am about to become the hostage of a common criminal or a terrorist, I will respond with deadly force.

While not everyone wants to carry a firearm, in Virginia — and the rest of the United States — we have the right to carry one to defend ourselves. I thank God that I do not live in a country like France where the civilian citizens, and for the most part the police, are by law unarmed. At least if I find myself in line in a grocery store in Richmond where a criminal or terrorist is taking hostages, I have more options than begging for my life. Sadly, the French have that option only. [PVC: We saw how well that worked out for them.]

Evan Smith.
North Chesterfield.


******************************************************
16. Second Amendment protects more than guns
******************************************************

The Connecticut Supreme Court points out that not just guns are protected by the Second Amendment.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volo ... ce-batons/

or

http://tinyurl.com/np9p45b

Second Amendment protects dirk knives and police batons
By Eugene Volokh December 16, 2014

So holds the Connecticut Supreme Court, in the just-released State v. DeCiccio. Here’s an excerpt of the reasoning as to police batons, which also applies in large measure to dirks, and which, I would argue, should apply to stun guns and Tasers (paragraph break added). (Disclosure: I represent the Association of Women Against Rape and Endangerment, as amicus curiae, in Commonwealth v. Caetano, now pending before the Massachusetts high court; that cases involves the question whether stun guns and Tasers are “arms” for Second Amendment purposes; we argue that they are.)

This widespread acceptance of batons within the law enforcement community also supports the conclusion that they are not so dangerous or unusual as to fall outside the purview of the second amendment. To this end, the fact that police batons are inherently less lethal, and therefore less dangerous and less intrinsically harmful, than handguns, which clearly constitute “arms” within the meaning of the second amendment, provides further reason to conclude that they are entitled to constitutional protection. Cf. People v. Yanna, supra, 297 Mich. App. 145 (“[T]he prosecution also argues that Tasers and stun guns are so dangerous that they are not protected by the [s]econd [a]mendment. However, it is difficult to see how this is so since Heller concluded that handguns are not sufficiently dangerous to be banned. Tasers and stun guns, while plainly dangerous, are substantially less dangerous than handguns. Therefore, [T]asers and stun guns do not constitute dangerous weapons for purposes of [s]econd [a]mendment inquiries.”); D. Kopel et al., supra, 47 U. Mich. J.L. Reform 184 (“[K]nives are far less dangerous than guns. Any public safety justification for knife regulation is necessarily less persuasive than the public safety justification for firearms regulation.”).

Indeed, expandable batons are intermediate force devices that, when used as intended, are unlikely to cause death or permanent bodily injury. For these reasons, we are persuaded that the police baton that the defendant had in his vehicle is the kind of weapon traditionally used by the state for public safety purposes and is neither so dangerous nor so unusual as to fall outside the purview of the second amendment’s right to keep and bear arms.

The court also holds that the total ban on transporting such weapons in a vehicle violates the Second Amendment (some paragraph breaks added):

[T]he prohibition against transporting a dirk knife and a police baton to a new home constitutes a significant restriction on the right to possess those weapons in that new home. Indeed, aside from an outright ban on possessing those weapons, it is difficult to conceive of a greater abridgement of that right than a restriction that bars the use of a vehicle to transport either of those weapons from one home to another.

Moreover, under § 29-38, it is unlawful for an ordinary citizen, like the defendant, to transport those weapons from the place of purchase to the purchaser’s home. As a consequence, the statute’s complete proscription against using a vehicle to transport the two protected weapons deprives their owner of any realistic opportunity either to bring them home after they have been purchased or to move them from one home to another. In fact, at oral argument before this court, the state acknowledged that, in light of that statutory prohibition, there may be no lawful means of doing either….

In light of the nature and extent of the restrictions at issue in the present case, we agree with the state that intermediate scrutiny represents the applicable level of constitutional review. “[A]lthough addressing varied and divergent laws, courts throughout the country have nearly universally applied some form of intermediate scrutiny in the [s]econd [a]mendment context.” … Nevertheless, to establish the requisite substantial relationship between the purpose to be served by the statutory provision and the means employed to achieve that end [under intermediate scrutiny], the explanation that the state proffers in defense of the provision must be “exceedingly persuasive.” …

Post-Heller case law supports the commonsense conclusion that the core right to possess a protected weapon in the home for self-defense necessarily entails the right, subject to reasonable regulation, to engage in activities necessary to enable possession in the home. Thus, the safe transportation of weapons protected by the second amendment is an essential corollary of the right to possess them in the home for self-defense when such transportation is necessary to effectuate that right. Conversely, in rejecting second amendment challenges to measures prohibiting the possession of handguns outside the home, courts have deemed it significant that those regulatory schemes contained provisions including, in addition to the right to possess handguns in the home, limited exceptions permitting the transportation of handguns between homes, or between home and dealer or repairer.

We conclude that the state has not provided sufficient reason for extending the ban on transporting dirk knives and police batons to a scenario, like the present one, in which the owner of those weapons uses his vehicle to move them from a former residence to a new one.

The court’s holding that the right to bear arms includes non-firearms, such as knives and batons, is consistent with the bulk of modern precedent on the subject; for other cases striking down bans on such weapons, see State v. Griffin, 47 A.3d 487 (Del. 2012) (knives); People v. Yanna, 824 N.W.2d 241 (stun guns and Tasers); 1986 Fla. Op. Att’y Gen. 2 (stun guns and Tasers); State v. Delgado, 692 P.2d 610 (Or. 1984) (switchblades); State v. Blocker, 630 P.2d 824 (Or. 1981) (billy clubs); State v. Kessler, 614 P.2d 94 (Or. 1980) (billy clubs); Barnett v. State, 695 P.2d 991 (Or. Ct. App. 1985) (blackjacks). But see City of Seattle v. Evans (Wash. 2014) (concluding that kitchen knives aren’t constitutionally protected, but not deciding about knives more broadly); State v. Swanton, 629 P.2d 98, 98 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1981) (holding that nunchakus are not arms, because “arms” is limited to “such arms as are recognized in civilized warfare and not those used by a ruffian, brawler or assassin”).



***************************************************************************
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/]