----------------------------------------------------------------------
VCDL's meeting schedule: http://www.vcdl.org/meetings.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Abbreviations used in VA-ALERT: http://www.vcdl.org/help/abbr.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
VCDL Update 10/25/09 - Note: Sorry for the high volume of alerts
lately, but things are approaching a fever pitch with the elections
just around the corner!
1. Antis are upset about VCDL protesting anti-gun mayors Monday and
Tuesday night!
2. VT students join LU in fight for gun rights [video]
3. Candidates differ little in chamber debate
4. 2009 state delegate candidate forum [video]
5. Who needs a gun in a restaurant?
6. VB man held at gunpoint inside car
7. Va. Tech families target Albo
8. Reasons to question new poll showing 80% of Virginians favor gun
control
9. Metro columnist Dan Casey: 'Deadeye Dan' targets online training law
10. Mousetrapping and other underhanded tactics
11. Surviving disaster: Mall shooting
12. NIH quietly begins to study gun safety
13. Update: More info on homeowner shot by police
14. L.A. Times Editorial: Targeting gun shows
15. U.S.-Mexico groups urge new U.S. assault weapons ban
16. Editorial: Get rid of the guns
17. LTE: "Gun" column fails to consider 2nd Amendment
18. Violent crime data
19. Gun facts
20. Ohio town to Bloomberg: Butt out
21. Awesome video from the National Shooting Sports Foundation
22. Kentucky pastor drops flock for his Glock
23. Norfolk Gun show 11/7 - 11/8 CANCELLED
24. Help needed at new Richmond gun show
**************************************************
1. Antis are upset about VCDL protesting anti-gun mayors Monday and
Tuesday night!
**************************************************
The antis have "learned" about VCDL protesting the Falls Church Mayor,
tomorrow, Monday, October 26 and the Norfolk Mayor, Tuesday, October
27 and are, er, up in arms. They are trying to get their members to
turn out at the city council meetings to counter our protest.
As EM Matt Gottshalk said when he saw this, "I've never seen so much
slander in so few words."
Here is what the Virginia Center for Public Safety (how's that for a
misnomer?) sent to their members (my comments imbedded in brackets)
--
CRITICAL ALERT!
Please forward this to anyone who can help!
The most extreme representatives of the pro-gun movement are planning
to show up at local city council meetings across the Commonwealth for
the purpose of harassing and intimidating the seven Virginia Mayors
who have courageously stood up in support of the safety and well-
being of their citizens over the fear-mongering and cowardice of the
gun carriers. [PVC: Where do I begin? Since when is redressing
grievances with the government considered harassing or intimidating
the government? And I have to laugh when I hear the antis calling US
cowards. "Harassing," intimidating," and "cowardice" are THEIR
qualities which they are "projecting" on us.]
PLEASE DON"T ALLOW THEM TO SUCCEED!
On a Web site called "Ammoland", the President of the so-called
"Virginia Citizens Defense League" has pledged to show up at each
Mayor's next City Council Meeting in order to try to browbeat and
intimidate these public servants into capitulating to the VCDL's
irrational and dangerous positions. [PVC: Protecting the Second
Amendment civil right of Americans is "irrational and dangerous?"]
Believing that no democracy can tolerate political action through
armed intimidation, The Virginia Center for Public Safety hopes all
Virginians, liberal, moderate, and conservative, will help us stand
up to these extremists, who while cloaking themselves in the veil of
law and order, are perfectly satisfied with felons, terrorists, and
the mentally disturbed having easy, unscrutinized access to guns,
including military-grade weapons, as long as they do too. [PVC:
Great example of the temper that the antis have. Look at the
viciousness of those words against all of you. VCDL members carry
guns for self-defense and will attend these city council meetings as
we always have - as an orderly law-abiding group of citizens. Only
the antis have ever accused us of being anything else. The antis, on
the other hand, are the ones you have to watch out for. VCDL does not
want terrorists and violent criminals to have guns, but we are smart
enough to know that you can't stop them from getting guns, even if
every law-abiding citizen turned in every gun they owned.]
WE NEED YOUR PRESENCE, PARTICULARLY THAT OF RESIDENTS OF THESE
CITIES, AT THE FOLLOWING CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS:
In support of Falls Church Mayor Robin Gardner:
Monday, October 26th, at 7:30 PM
In support of Norfolk Mayor Paul D. Fraim:
Tuesday, October 27th, at 7:00 PM
As we learn about any other attempts by the VCDL to engage in this
type of intimidation of public servants, we'll pass it on. We
anticipate they will try to harass the other five mayors, also.
[PVC: Heck, pass it on now. The other mayors are from Petersburg,
Richmond, Hopewell, Portsmouth, and Alexandria. We just don't have
dates/times yet for their protests.]
**************************************************
2. VT students join LU in fight for gun rights [video]
**************************************************
VCDL joins students to support concealed-carry on campus
http://tinyurl.com/yhs7gs7
http://www.wset.com
VT Students Join LU in Fight for Gun Rights
10/16/09 |
reporter: Jeremy Mills producer: Amy Foster
Lynchburg, VA - Supporters of the Second Amendment gathered Friday
afternoon at the Liberty University (web) School of Law for a gun
rights symposium.
The discussion of current legal cases turned into a cry for help from
students at Virginia Tech. Some Virginia Tech students even skipped
class to do it.
Alyson Boyce with VT Students for Concealed Carry President said, "Two
and a half years ago, if you would have asked me anything about gun
rights, I would not have been able to tell you a thing."
Now, Boyce is the president of the Hokie Chapter of Students for
Concealed Carry Rights.
"I lost a very good friend of mine named Mike Pohle on April 16th and
after that, it really opened my eyes to the discussion," Boyce said.
VT Students for Concealed Carry Founder Ken Stanton said he wants to
be a college professor. He founded the student group after the
massacre because he doesn't believe he should have to choose between
education or self defense.
"It's a decision I don't like to make. I am very passionate about
education but I am also very passionate about surviving any kind of
disaster so that I can continue to teach in the future," Stanton said.
Virginia Citizens League President Philip Van Cleave said, "The worst
crimes we have, if you think back on all these massacres, they
happened in gun-free zones. Virginia Tech was a gun free zone."
The student group asked for help in getting their college concealed
rights passed next year in the General Assembly. They admit there's no
proof it would stop future campus shootings, but they believe it will.
"The reality is that nobody even had the chance to find out if it
could have stopped or kept the body count down," Boyce said.
Students for Concealed Carry Rights believe they have a good shot at
getting their bill passed. They tell us it depends largely on who wins
the governor's race.
--------
Videos of the symposium:
6:00pm Promo Spot [video]
http://tinyurl.com/yfp6p79
http://dl.getdropbox.com
7:00pm Spot [video]
http://tinyurl.com/yjzu2ku
http://dl.getdropbox.com
--------
http://tinyurl.com/ylkgc5t
www2.newsadvance.com
Gun rights advocates speak at Liberty
Robert Dowlut, General Counsel for the NRA, speaks to Liberty
University students, faculty and members of the community on Friday.
By Liz Barry
Published: October 16, 2009
With a "Guns Save Lives" sticker on his breast pocket, Philip Van
Cleave, president of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, made the
case Friday for why students should be allowed to carry concealed
firearms on college campuses during
the "To Keep and Bear" Second Amendment symposium at Liberty
University School of Law.
"At the end of the day, I don't think there should be restrictions of
firearms. Period," Van Cleave said during the question and answer
period.
"There are always going to be criminals; they will always get guns.
But the key is, can you protect yourself? God gave you one life and I
think he wants you to protect it."
Guest speakers Van Cleave and Robert Dowlut, general counsel for the
National Rifle Association, took center stage during the two-hour
dialogue in the law school's Supreme Courtroom -- a full-scale replica
of the U.S. Supreme Court, complete with a nine-member bench and Roman
columns.
More than 100 students, faculty and community members attended the
event, which was sponsored by the Liberty chapter of the Federalist
Society, a national organization that advocates a legal system based
on individual liberty, traditional values and the rule of law.
The brainchild behind the symposium was third-year law student Jeremy
Morris, who believes in a strict interpretation of the Second
Amendment.
"Especially in this time of Comrade Obama, excuse me, President Obama,
we want to make sure our gun rights are protected," Morris said during
his introductory remarks, eliciting some chuckles from the audience.
Dowlut's speech focused on the status of gun rights on the state and
national levels. He drew on his experience with the NRA and court
cases old and new to show how gun law has been shaped over the past
century.
"State courts are a very important bulwark of freedom," Dowlut said.
"The national Constitution is a floor, not a ceiling," he said, adding
that broader gun rights may be achieved on the state level.
Van Cleave, a former police officer, heads up the Virginia Citizens
Defense League, a grassroots organization devoted to advancing Second
Amendment rights in Virginia.
He argued that lives might have been saved during the Virginia Tech
massacre if students and faculty with concealed firearms permits had
been allowed to arm themselves while on campus. Van Cleave said he
believes that future shootings can be prevented or mitigated with
looser gun laws, and cites colleges in Utah and Colorado as leaders in
allowing guns on campus.
Self-defense with firearms is a basic right, he said.
"The worst crimes we have, when you think back to all those massacres,
they happen in gun- free zones."
The symposium was rounded out with comments from Virginia Tech student
Ken Stanton, who founded the VT chapter of Students for Concealed
Carry on Campus (SCCC). Stanton, who lost a friend in the shootings,
said he was compelled to start the chapter as a way to make his campus
safer.
Liberty University also has a chapter of SCCC, headed by Clint
Armstrong, a student and full-time IT employee at the school. Last
spring, Liberty's board of directors decided that the school should
stay gun-free, after Armstrong and others approached the school about
allowing people with concealed handgun permits to carry weapons on
campus.
Armstrong, who attended the symposium, said he hopes Liberty will
change its policy on concealed handguns.
"I have my concealed carry permit and I carry a gun everywhere else I
go, but I work here five days a week, full-time," he said.
"It just never made sense that the place where I spend the most amount
of time I have to be disarmed. I'm not as safe as I am when I go to
Walmart or a restaurant."
Morris is also a strong proponent for allowing guns on campus.
"We live in a violent society, a society where a seemingly peaceful,
safe community, like here in Southern Virginia, can see tremendous
violence.
"I have a natural right to protect myself that's guaranteed to me in
the Constitution, and derivatively through the Bill of Rights."
Federalist Society president Benjamin Boyd said that the symposium was
a good fit for university.
"Liberty University is well known for its conservative positions. We
have an automatic appeal in that most conservatives and many
evangelicals are emphatically supporting gun rights."
He said he hopes the speakers' messages reached some anti-gun people
in the audience, even if they were in the minority.
"It's good just to see people coming together and speaking about gun
rights."
**************************************************
3. Candidates differ little in chamber debate
**************************************************
With both candidates in the 35th District wanting to close a non-
existent loophole, I wonder if it is worth even going to the polls in
that district?
--
http://tinyurl.com/yft2wh8
http://www.connectionnewspapers.com
Candidates Differ Little in Chamber Debate
Delegate District 35: Hyland, Keam share views on transportation and
gun show sales.
By Julia O'Donoghue
Thursday, October 15, 2009
The 35th District seat in the Virginia House of Delegates is the
definition of what politicos like to call a "swing" district.
In recent elections, Democrats and Republicans have switched off in
controlling the delegate seat that represents Vienna, Oakton and part
of Fairfax during open races.
During a special election in 1996, Democrat and Vienna town council
member George Lovelace won the office over Republican and independent
candidates with 51.6 percent of the vote. The very next year, he was
defeated by Republican Jeannemarie Devolites Davis, who edged Lovelace
out with 51.3 percent of the vote, according to the Virginia State
Board of Elections.
In 2003, the most recent election with no incumbent in the race, Del.
Steve Shannon (D-35) narrowly beat his Republican opponent with 51.9
percent of the vote.
And though U.S. president Barack Obama won the 35th district easily in
2008, Democratic nominee John Kerry beat U.S. President George W. Bush
(R) with only 51 percent of the vote four years earlier, according to
the Virginia Public Access Project.
WITH SHANNON running for Virginia attorney general instead of delegate
this year, voters in the 35th District will once again be filling an
open seat in the House of Delegates.
Republican Jim Hyland, who was a candidate for the same office in
2005, faces Democrat Mark Keam in the Nov. 3 election.
Both candidates considered the district to be up for grabs and
characterized it as independent and centrist in nature.
Perhaps that is why Hyland and Keam articulated many of the same,
moderate perspectives on issues during a candidates' forum before the
Vienna-Tysons Chamber of Commerce Oct. 8.
THE TWO CANDIDATES both break with their party's respective nominees
for governor when it came to funding transportation projects.
Hyland and Keam had virtually the same response when asked how they
would approach finding a funding solution for Northern Virginia's
transportation needs.
"Everything has to be on the table," said Hyland.
Keam opened his response with "every option has to be on the table."
By "everything" and "every option," Hyland and Keam meant that both
tax increases -- which candidates tend to call "new revenue sources" --
as well as shifting money from the general fund should be considered
when coming up with a transportation compromise.
"If you draw lines in the sand, nothing is going to get accomplished,"
said Hyland.
But so far, leaders from both political parties in Richmond, including
the gubernatorial candidates, have been unwilling to move from their
partisan or ideological positions to reach a compromise.
BOTH 35TH DISTRICT candidates rather candidly said there is a need for
"new revenue" -- typically in the form of taxes -- to solve the
transportation problem.
"We have to be honest with ourselves about the need for new revenue,"
said Hyland.
"Nobody wants to talk about new revenue. Both governor candidates
skirt the issue frankly," said Keam, who agreed with Hyland.
Hyland also seemed to have concerns about McDonnell's plan to sell off
the commonwealth-run liquor stores to provide money for
transportation.
"I consider alcohol a very powerful drug and if we sell the stores, I
want to make sure there are restrictions in place. We don't want to
find two or three liquor stores on one street corner," said Hyland.
THE TWO CANDIDATES also said they supported closing the so-called "gun
show loop hole," which allows people who are not licensed firearms
dealers to sell weapons without a background check at gun shows.
People who are federally-licensed dealers, those who usually own a gun
store, are required to perform background checks on customers at the
gun shows.
Keam said he owns a rifle that he keeps at his brother's house because
he has small children.
He said the U.S. Constitution does protect the right of reasonable
people to own firearms, though guns should be kept out of the hands of
people who are mentally ill, abusive, violent criminals or have
similar problems.
Hyland supports a former restriction in Virginia under Gov. Doug
Wilder (D) that allowed people to only purchase one gun per month. He
said he is worried that criminals, including gang members from
Northern states, come to Virginia to buy multiple weapons because they
are allowed to.
POLITICAL REDISTRICTING was one issue on which the candidates differed.
Every 10 years, the Virginia General Assembly redraws the political
districts for the state senate, delegates, local government officials
like supervisors and members of the U.S. Congress. Typically, the
political party in power draws lines to benefit their own candidates.
Almost always the residency and political viability of incumbents from
both parties is also taken into consideration.
"Incumbents of both parties make an absurd joke of our democracy
through redistricting," said Keam, who favors having a nonpartisan
commission draw the new district lines.
Hyland disagreed with Keam, saying it is difficult to find a truly
nonpartisan group of individuals, particularly if they have to be
appointed by political officials.
"The legislature has to do what the legislature has to do," he said.
**************************************************
4. 2009 state delegate candidate forum [video]
**************************************************
VA state delegate candidates answer a question on gun laws. Delegates
Shuler and Nutter and candidate Peggy Frank respond to the question on
the first part of the video:
http://tinyurl.com/yztrdze
**************************************************
5. Who needs a gun in a restaurant?
**************************************************
One dead, one injured in Va. Beach pub shooting
Josh Kellogg emailed me this:
--
http://tinyurl.com/yj995kp
http://hamptonroads.com
One dead, one injured in shooting at Beach pub
By Alicia P.Q. Wittmeyer
The Virginian-Pilot
(c) October 19, 2009
One man was killed and another injured in a shooting early Sunday
morning at a sports bar.
Police received a call at 2:19 a.m. reporting the shooting at the
Hometown Heroes Sports Pub, in the 3700 block of Tiffany Lane,
Virginia Beach police spokeswoman Margie Hobbs said.
They arrived and found two men with gunshot wounds. Both were taken to
the hospital, where one was pronounced dead. The other had non-life-
threatening injuries, Hobbs said.
Police identified the dead man as Jawan Evans, 29, of the 3600 block
of Burns Court.
Hobbs said police do not have a good description of the shooter and
ask that anyone with information call the Crime Line at 1-888-LOCK-U-UP.
**************************************************
6. VB man held at gunpoint inside car
**************************************************
Motorist stopped for man crossing road, who then drew his gun and
forced the driver to run errands with him before robbing him
http://tinyurl.com/yjguppk
http://www.wavy.com
VB man held at gunpoint inside car
Updated: Monday, 12 Oct 2009, 5:31 PM EDT
Published : Monday, 12 Oct 2009, 4:19 PM EDT
Jason Marks
VIRGINIA BEACH, Va. - A Virginia Beach man became the victim of a
crime inside his own car. Virginia Beach police say a man with a gun
forced the victim to drive several places before he robbed him.
"We're very concerned about what happened," said Virginia Beach Master
Police Officer Margie Hobbs.
Police say on Saturday night a man stepped in front of a car on
Newtown Road. The unsuspecting driver was simply being courteous. "He
just saw him crossing the road," added Hobbs. "He just slowed down to
let him cross and unfortunately became a victim of carjacking."
Police tell WAVY.com the suspect jumped in the passenger seat and
pulled out a gun. He told the driver to head to the 7-11 at the corner
of Virginia Beach Boulevard and Wexford Drive.
"When he pulled into the 7-11 he told the victim to stay," said Hobbs.
"He took his car keys so he couldn't go anywhere and told him if he
moved he would shoot him, so it's very scary for him."
The suspect walked into the store wearing a white shirt. He made a
couple purchases and got back into the car. The victim was so afraid
he couldn't even make a run for it. They then drove another three
blocks to Nelms Lane. Police say the suspect stole the victim's keys,
wallet and cell phone before he ran off. The only evidence left behind
was his visit to the 7-11.
Police tell WAVY.com you can protect yourself by driving with your
doors locked. If have any information on this case call Crime Line at
1-888-LOCK-U-UP.
**************************************************
7. Va. Tech families target Albo
**************************************************
Some anti-gun families are campaigning against Del. Dave Albo (R-
Fairfax) for dragging his feet on closing the "gun-show loophole.
Delegate Albo - how's supporting all those anti-gunners working out
for you?
http://tinyurl.com/ykhe7mn
http://voices.washingtonpost.com
VaTech Families Target Albo
Relatives of victims of the 2007 Virginia Tech massacre have been
among the most vocal proponents of a change to state law that would
close the state's so-called gun show "loophole," which permits private
gun show vendors to sell to customers without first conducting a
background check.
Now, some of those same family members are campaigning against a
member of the House of Delegates whom they say betrayed them in that
fight: Del. Dave Albo (R-Fairfax).
Funny thing is, Albo says he agrees with the familes that the law
should be changed and even voted that way as chairman of the Virginia
State Crime Commission. But some of the Tech families believe Albo is
paying lip service to his more liberal Northern Virginia constituents
while obstructing the families' efforts behind the scenes to appease
pro-gun Republicans.
Here's their beef: In January, Albo delayed a vote by the crime
commission that would have recommended to the state legislature that
the law be changed. The delay allowed Del. Terry Kilgore (R-Scott), an
opponent of the legislation who was running late, to participate in a
vote that deadlocked the panel. (More on that meeting here.)
So while Albo voted yes, his actions imply that he wanted the effort
to fail, they say. Their suspicions were confirmed, they said, when
Albo later told them to "just forget it" after they asked for further
assistance.
Their outrage intensified this fall when Albo objected to his
opponent, Democrat Greg Werkheiser, featuring Lori Haas in a mailer.
By enlisting Haas, whose daughter Emily was injured in the shooting,
Albo said Werkheiser was essentially exploiting the Tech tragedy for
political gain. But in an open letter to Albo Tuesday, five family
members including Haas countered that, "If anyone is guilty of
exploiting the tragedy -- a tragedy that all of us live with every day
-- it is you."
"Earlier this year, Greg Werkheiser helped Lori Haas share, in her own
words, how you treated her and your record on the issue," they wrote.
"It is clear to us that despite your pledge to support us, you never
intended to follow through. It was all a facade and clearly a
political maneuver to obtain more votes this fall. Your recent mailer
reinforced our belief when, like a typical politician, you used Lori's
words against your opponent."
Albo said he is puzzled by the actions of the family members. "Usually
I get people against me when I vote against their bill," he said.
"This is a new one."
[By way of clarification, this bill has never gotten out of committee
in the House over the years, and Albo has never had a chance to vote
on it on the floor. The vote he is referring to was as part of the
crime commission.]
Albo today said it is routine to delay a vote to wait for tardy
members of the crime commission. And he said the "forget it" remark
was simply a statement of fact about the bill's prospects this year.
"If you can't get it out of the Democrat-controlled senate, you're not
going to be able to get it passed this year," he elaborated.
"I'm really confused as to why this is all about me," he said. "I bent
over backwards to give them their day. [Republican Del.] Rob Bell and
I rewrote the entire mental health commitment laws. I am the sponsor
and author of the bill that closed the [mental health] loophole that
Cho actually used to get the guns. And I voted to close the gun show
loophole exactly as they wanted, so I'm just confused about the
animus."
He speculated that the family members might be campaigning against him
in the hopes that a Democratic House of Delegates would be more
favorable toward their legislation.
Haas acknowledged that she would like to see the Democrats take
control of the House. "I would be happy to see a House of Delegates
that would support gun safety, and I think our best shot is a
Democratic-controlled House of Delegates," she said. But she said her
problem with Albo goes deeper than that. "Del. Albo's actions belied
his words," she said. "To our faces he said, 'Oh I want to close the
gun show loophole.' His action was totally opposite."
By Sandhya Somashekhar | October 14, 2009; 4:42 PM ET
**************************************************
8. Reasons to question new poll showing 80% of Virginians favor gun
control
**************************************************
Image you work for a newspaper who is losing readership and your
political agenda is in the toilet.
What to do?
It's simple! Just stir up readership and plug your agenda at the same
time by commissioning a "survey" that shows that 80 percent of
Virginians want the imaginary "gun show loophole" to be closed and
want a ban on concealed handguns in restaurants!
What a joke. The results look like they polled the Brady Campaign.
Here are a bunch of other surveys, with opposite results, that show
just how phony the Virginian-Pilot's survey is:
http://tinyurl.com/yjtwjvl
Gallup poll
October 9, 2009
"Gallup finds a new low of 44% of Americans saying the laws covering
firearm sales should be made more strict. That is down 5 points in the
last year and 34 points from the high of 78% recorded the first time
the question was asked, in 1990."
"The trends on the questions about gun-sale laws and a handgun-
possession ban indicate that Americans' attitudes have moved toward
being more pro-gun rights."
-
http://tinyurl.com/yeqlqz6
Rasmussen poll
Monday, October 05, 2009
"Just 39% of Americans now say the United States needs stricter gun
control, as the U.S. Supreme Court prepares to review the
constitutionality of state and local anti-gun laws.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 50% are
opposed to stricter gun control laws, and 11% are not sure."
"Yet, despite these findings, a plurality of Americans (46%) says it
is too easy to buy a gun in America. Only 13% say it's too hard to
purchase a firearm. One-out of-three adults (33%) say the level of
difficulty is about right."
-
http://tinyurl.com/c5dykm
CNN poll
April 2009
"Since 2001, most Americans have favored stricter gun laws, though
support has slightly dropped in recent years: 54 percent favored
stricter laws in 2001, compared with 50 percent in 2007, according to
Gallup polling.
Now, a recent poll reveals a sudden drop -- only 39 percent of
Americans now favor stricter gun laws, according to a new CNN/Opinion
Research Corporation poll."
-
http://tinyurl.com/cwnlno
ABC News poll
April 2009
"Just 51 percent in this poll support the general principle of
"stricter gun control laws," about the same as last September (50
percent) and down sharply from its peak, 67 percent in mid-2000. The
48 percent now opposed to gun control is the most in polls dating to
1989, and the number "strongly" opposed, at 36 percent, its highest in
that time."
-----
Here is the Virginia-Pilot story covering their made up news, er,
"poll."
http://tinyurl.com/yfg8yc3
http://hamptonroads.com
Tighten gun rules, most Virginians say in poll
By Bill Bartel
The Virginian-Pilot
(c) October 18, 2009
Most Virginians say they want to close the so-called gun show loophole
that permits some gun sales without criminal background checks, and
they dislike the notion of someone carrying a concealed firearm into a
restaurant that serves alcohol, according to a new poll.
The survey, conducted by Christopher Newport University's Judy Ford
Wason Center for Public Policy, found that eight of every 10 likely
voters interviewed wanted to change a state law that allows someone to
buy a firearm from an unlicensed seller at a gun show without first
undergoing a criminal background check.
If the same sale is between a buyer and a licensed dealer at a show, a
background check is required.
Support for closing the loophole was shared by people of all ages and
political and ethnic backgrounds - and in all regions of the state,
the poll found.
Almost 17 percent of those polled said they favor keeping the law as
it is.
A strong majority of those polled - 68.4 percent - also do not want
Virginia to allow people with concealed-weapons permits to bring their
firearms into eateries that sell alcohol. More than a quarter of those
surveyed - 26.3 percent - disagreed, saying the ban should be lifted.
Earlier this year, the General Assembly passed legislation to legalize
the practice but failed to muster the votes to override Gov. Timothy
M. Kaine's veto.
In his veto message in March, Kaine noted the objection of law
enforcement officials to the bill, saying it "puts the public, the
employees and our public safety officers at risk."
However, legislators won a partial victory because they overrode
Kaine's veto of a bill - now a state law - that permits retired law
enforcement officers to carry concealed weapons in restaurants where
alcohol is served.
The gun show loophole has been a divisive issue in this year's
governor's race.
State Sen. Creigh Deeds, the Democratic candidate, lost the backing of
the National Rifle Association because of his support for requiring
the background checks.
Republican candidate Bob McDonnell, who was endorsed by the NRA,
opposes closing the loophole.
The survey, which was conducted Oct. 8-13 as part of a joint effort by
The Virginian-Pilot, WVEC-TV and CNU, also found that a majority of
people want the redrawing of lines for state and federal legislative
districts to be done by a bipartisan commission rather than the
General Assembly.
About 63 percent of those polled said setting boundaries for General
Assembly and congressional districts, which are redrawn every 10 years
when a new U.S. census is completed, should be handled by a bipartisan
commission. About 22 percent said state legislators should continue to
set the boundaries.
The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.4 percentage points.
Bill Bartel, (757) 446-2398, bill.bartel@pilotonline.com
-----
Here is Neal Jefferis response to the editor:
--
Dear Editor,
I read the piece in today's PILOT with interest. Is it fiction? The
article, "Tighten up gun rules, most respondents say" (Pilot,
10.18.09, pg. 5 of the Hampton Roads section) claims the results of a
recent PILOT-WVEC-CNU poll indicate over 80% of Virginians favor
closing the infamous (but in reality fictional) "Gun Show Loophole",
and that the majority oppose allowing the people holding a Concealed
Handgun Permit from using that permit to enter a restraurant with an
on-premise ABC license will retaining the right to provide the means
of self-defense. I can only conclude the poll was faulty, or faulty
reporting of polls' results occurred.
Time and again, the American people have shown they do not support
adding or making stricter the multitude of laws already on the books
regarding firearms. Examples (attached) from Gallup, Rasmussen, CNN,
and ABC News show many - most Americans don't favor stronger or
additional gun laws.
The so-called "Gun Show Loophole" is fiction. A private citizen
continues to retain the control of their private property, whether a
firearm, knife, hachet, cordless drill, nail gun, baseball bat, metal
pipe section, or automobile. All are material possessions, and all
can be used as "deadly weapons". The physical location -- gun show --
has no real bearing on personal property rights. However, the PILOT
and other organizations with a history of opposing Second Amendment
rights to firearms and firearms ownership (by using their First
Amendment rights to free speech) continue to refuse to recognize this
true.
Twice the state legislature has reflected the majority view in
Virginia and passed changes to the VIrginia code to allow the
trustworthy citizens of the Commonwealth, who hold a CHP after
undergoing background checks and demonstrating safety training with
firearms has been completed, to carry their concealed handguns into
Red Robin, Pizza Hut, Outback, the family-run Mexican or Japanese
restraurant down the street merely because that business chose to
expand its revenue opportunities by having a license to sell alcohol
for on-premise consumption. Twice the current Gov. of Virginia has
demonstrated his distain or distrust of those same trustworthy
citizens by vetoing that change to the code. He gave reasons, not
supported by the facts in other states that have made this legal, but
he did demonstrate his trust or concern for the Commonwealth Attorneys
by giving them to right to conceal carry (without background checks or
safety training) into those very same places.
I don't know what 506 likely voters were contacted on this telephone
poll. Were cell phones, land lines or both used. Was the poll
conducted during the day, evening, or some of each. How were the
phone numbers selected? How was the discussion started? (Many people
hang up when called for a poll, especially when the topic introduced
is one they may or may not want to provide information regarding. A
stranger calling to ask a household about firearms may really be
someone setting up a home burglery!)
In short, I don't see the overwhelming negative numbers in this poll
being reflected in most other polls, even by liberal organizations
like CNN and ABC.
Sincerely,
Neal J.
**************************************************
9. Metro columnist Dan Casey: 'Deadeye Dan' targets online training law
**************************************************
Columnist finally gets his hands on an actual firearm a month *after*
qualifying for a VA CHP
http://tinyurl.com/ylgkmk4
http://www.roanoke.com
Metro columnist Dan Casey: 'Deadeye Dan' targets online training law
More than a month after qualifying for a concealed carry permit, Dan
Casey finally gets his hands on an actual firearm.
Sunday I did something I've never done before.
With my Virginia-issued concealed handgun permit tucked securely in my
back pocket, I touched a handgun for the first time.
I fired one, too. Actually, I touched, held and fired a small arsenal
of handguns, plus a beastly rifle used in elephant hunts.
And you know what? It was a lot of fun.
Marc Davis and Hugh Hagan were my hosts at a private outdoor range in
Southwest Roanoke County.
Davis is in the real estate business, and he's a pistol-shooting
champion. Hagan is the accomplished surgeon who rebuilt my shattered
wrist back in 2001 after a nasty bicycle wreck.
They had been after me to come out and shoot since early July.
That's when I took, and passed, and wrote about a one-hour, online
streaming video course that rendered me "competent" to apply for a
Virginia concealed carry permit -- even though I'd never touched a
handgun. (The state granted my permit in August.)
Sunday at the range, the first thing Davis explained were the rules,
such as where and where not to stand, and when the range was "hot"
(firing allowed) and "cold" (no firing allowed).
He told me to treat all guns as if they are loaded. They should always
be pointed downrange. He showed me how to load them. And he warned me
to keep my finger off the trigger until I was ready to fire. He
demonstrated how to aim.
After donning eye and ear protection, I blasted away with a bunch of
different caliber small and large revolvers and semiautomatic pistols.
The surprising result?
I am a pretty good shot. I got a near double bull's-eye at one paper
target at 10 yards, and nailed another target a bunch of times at 20
yards. I hit the latter much more than I missed.
I even hit a pie-plate-sized metal disc at 50 yards with a .22-caliber
semiautomatic that had an electronic sight.
By the end of the lesson, those friendly guys on the range were
calling me "a natural."
"You shoot like a woman," Hagan told me. He explained that was
actually a compliment: Women often do better than men the first time
on a target range because they're more relaxed when firing.
The truth is, I had great teachers. They demonstrated how each of the
different guns worked, how to safely grip them, the intricacies of
good aim and the best way to pull the trigger.
Most of that is covered in the Concealed Carry Institute's $39.95
online course, too.
One of the big differences was, I could ask questions. There were many
over the course of a couple of hours, and Davis and Hagan patiently
answered each one. That's why a majority of states with concealed
carry laws require classroom training.
Another, of course, is that I could hold and fire a gun.
On streaming video you cannot get answers or touch the weapon, after
all.
There's still no doubt in my mind that the state law that deemed me
"competent" enough to get a Virginia concealed handgun permit via that
online course is asinine and irresponsible.
The online training law was introduced by state Sen. Ken Cuccinelli,
R-Fairfax County, and the General Assembly enacted it over Gov. Tim
Kaine's veto. Cuccinelli is now running for attorney general. His
Democratic opponent, Del. Steve Shannon, voted for that bill, too.
The General Assembly ought to undo that dumb law in the next session.
But unquestionably, shooting guns is fun. I learned a lot and have a
newfound respect for folks with serious gun habits.
"When you bring a person out here who's never shot before, they always
love it," Hagan said. "They always leave with a smile on their face."
It's far too early in this process to call me any kind of a gun expert.
"Gun novice" is a much better description.
Or just call me Deadeye Dan.
**************************************************
10. Mousetrapping and other underhanded tactics
**************************************************
Gun owners should always be careful to ask the right questions of
potential firearms buyers when selling guns privately so as to avoid
illegally selling to a felon or someone from out of state.
For those who might like to ask more detailed questions about possible
sale disqualifications, here is what the ATF Form 4473 asks buyers:
-Are you the actual buyer of the firearm(s?
-Are you a fugitive from justice?
-Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana, or any
depressant, stimulant, or narcotic drug, or any other controlled
substance?
-Are you a nonimmigrant alien?
-Have you been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable
conditions?
-Have you ever been adjudicated mentally defective (which includes
having been adjudicated incompetent to manage your own affairs) or
have you ever been committed to a mental institution?
-Are you an alien illegally in the United States?
-Are you under indictment or information in any court for a felony, or
any other crime, for which the judge could imprison you for more than
one year?
-Have you been convicted in any court of a felony, or any other crime,
for which the judge could have imprisoned you for more than one year,
even if you received a shorter sentence including probation?
-Are you subject to a court order restraining you from harassing,
stalking, or threatening your child or an intimate partner or child of
such partner.
-Have you been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of
domestic violence?
-Have you ever renounced your United States citizenship?
**************************************************
11. Surviving disaster: Mall shooting
**************************************************
Spike TV show answers the question: What do you do if terrorists
strike the mall you're in?
http://tinyurl.com/ylqjhrp
http://www.spike.com
**************************************************
12. NIH quietly begins to study gun safety
**************************************************
National Institutes of Health restarts research into gun safety.
Here we go again. Can't get any traction with gun control? Not to
worry - just use junk science to make up some reasons why we need gun
control.
http://tinyurl.com/yhqve3s
http://www.washingtontimes.com
U.S. quietly begins to study gun safety
Jim McElhatton
More than a decade after Congress cut funding for firearms research by
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), another federal
health agency has been spending millions of dollars to study such
topics as whether teenagers who carry firearms run a different risk of
getting shot compared with suffering other sorts of injuries.
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) also has been financing
research to investigate whether having many liquor stores in a
neighborhood puts people at greater risk of getting shot.
Such studies are coming under sharp scrutiny by Republican lawmakers
who question whether the money could be better spent on biomedical
research at a time of increasing competition for NIH funding. They're
also leery of NIH research relating to firearms in general, recalling
how 13 years ago the House voted to cut CDC funding when critics
complained that the agency was trying to win public support for gun
control.
"It's almost as if someone's been looking for a way to get this study
done ever since the Centers for Disease Control was banned from doing
it 10 years ago," Rep. Joe L. Barton, Texas Republican, said of one of
the NIH studies. "But it doesn't make any more sense now than it did
then."
The NIH, which administers more than $30 billion in taxpayer funds for
medical research, defended the grants.
"Gun related violence is a public health problem - it diverts
considerable health care resources away from other problems and,
therefore, is of interest to NIH," Don Ralbovsky, NIH spokesman, wrote
in an e-mail responding to questions about the grants.
"These particular grants do not address gun control; rather they deal
with the surrounding web of circumstances involved in many violent
crimes, especially how alcohol policy may reduce the public health
burden from gun-related injury and death," he said.
Mr. Barton and Rep. Greg Walden of Oregon, the ranking Republican on
the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the ranking member on the
Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee, respectively, first
questioned the NIH about the gun-related grants in a letter Friday to
NIH Director Dr. Francis Collins.
The letter sought information about grants for current projects and
for others starting as far back as 2002, totaling nearly $5 million.
The lawmakers called the study of criminal behavior "a laudable
endeavor which consistently benefits the American people, often in
ways that people do not see."
"And yet we have trouble understanding the administration's desire to
spend, for example, $642,561 in taxpayer funds to learn how inner-city
teenagers whose friends, acquaintances and peers carry firearms and
drink alcohol on street corners could show up in emergency rooms with
gunshot wounds.
"The day-follows-night quality of this question and its potential
answer simply do not seem to justify the expense that would be borne
by people who work and pay their taxes," the lawmakers wrote.
Special interests on both sides of the gun-control issue differ on the
question of whether the NIH ought to be conducting firearms-related
research.
"This kind of research does concern us, and we're going to be watching
it closely," said Erich Pratt, a spokesman for the Gun Owners
Association of America. "You'd think that after the CDC had their
money revoked, we wouldn't be dealing with this."
But Peter Hamm, spokesman for the Washington-based Brady Campaign to
Prevent Gun Violence, said Republican lawmakers were "blaming the
messenger" by criticizing the research.
"Burying the evidence is what the gun lobby is best at," he said.
"Whether the members of Congress like it or not, gun violence is a
public health problem in America today."
NIH records show that one study being questioned by lawmakers aimed to
"investigate whether adolescents who consume alcohol and/or carry
firearms, and/or whose daily activities occur in surroundings rich in
alcohol and/or firearms, face a differential risk of being shot with a
firearm or injured in a non-gun assault."
A separate study on child safety looked at the decision-making process
by couples on whether to own firearms, in part trying to identify
whether women are less supportive of firearms compared with their
partners.
The questions about whether the NIH should fund such research are
being raised more than a decade after the House voted against
restoring $2.6 million to the CDC's budget, money that the agency was
spending on gun studies. The move, backed by the National Rifle
Association (NRA), was made after Republicans and some Democrats
complained that the CDC was pushing for gun control.
The money was eventually restored to the CDC budget but with a
spending restriction that has remained in place ever since, mandating
that funds cannot be used "in whole or in part to advocate or promote
gun control."
Mr. Barton and Mr. Walden, both of whom have received political
contributions from the NRA over the years, requested more information
on the NIH firearms research funding a month after they separately
raised questions about several other NIH grants.
Their earlier letter to the NIH cited questions about grants that "do
not seem to be of the highest scientific rigor," including one on
whether participating on dragon-boat paddling teams helped cancer
survivors more than taking part in an organized walking program.
**************************************************
13. Update: More info on homeowner shot by police
**************************************************
There is some course language below. I have tried to blot the
offensive words out. It looks like there is a whole lot more to the
story on the home owner who was shot in the back by the police after
calling them to come pick up a burglar he was holding at gun point.
Scott Kreidler emailed me this:
--
Philip,
There's more to this story, and it is utterly appalling. A friend of
mine noted this:
"Just to fill in some details here, the cops actually tried to cover
this shooting up, with the supervisor telling the shooter cop that and
treated the homeowner as a hot suspect for a long period of time. The
homeowner was shot *in the back* with all six rounds.
The official court papers allege that he was driven *all the way*
downtown, like a shot deer, on the boiling-hot car hood after he was
thrown around the property several times and lifted by his wounded
limbs. They never called for an ambulance, they just walked over him,
assessing how best to cover their stupid corrupt asses, before driving
him to the station house on the hood to keep the interior of the
cruiser clean. It's a nearly unbelievable story. He and his family
became and remained 'the enemy' as soon as they entered the house,
basically.
This sheds far more light on the story than that crappy CNN piece.
http://blog.simplejustice.us
The Look From The Rear
Posted by SHG at 9/26/2009 7:22 AM
Categories: uncategorized
It seemed like Anthony Arambula did everything right. A man breaks
into his Maricopa County home and runs into his son's bedroom. He
sends his wife and kids outside, then gets his gun out of the closet
and holds the burglar at bay. He calls 911. But what happened after
that wasn't quite what he had in mind.
From Courthouse News:
Phoenix Police officers already in the neighborhood heard the crash of
the Arambulas' window. When they approached the house, Lesley says,
she told Sgt. Sean Coutts that her husband was inside holding the
intruder at gunpoint. Lesley says Coutts failed to pass on that
information to the two other officers.
Inside the house, the Arambulas say, Officer Brian Lilly shot Anthony
six times in the back while he was still on the phone with the 911
operator - twice when he was on the ground.
The officers ran into the bedroom after Anthony told them, "You just
killed ... you just killed the homeowner. The bad guy is in there."
Darn it. Cops hate when that happens. No, not because they pumped 6
bullets into the wrong guy, but because they could get in big
trouble. Cops hate getting into big trouble.
Tony Arambula didn't die, however. Instead, he sued. In a rather
interesting complaint, more along the lines of melodramatic chatting
than legal description, one detail makes the cops' efforts to cover up
their mistake exceedingly difficult. It seems that the 911 call was
still being recorded as Lilly was busy shooting. And still recording
after he stopped and realized his mistake.
According to the complaint, Lilly can be heard on the 911 tape telling
Coutts, "We f**ked up."
Lilly says on the tape that he did not know where Anthony's gun was
when he shot him and that he "opened fire because he heard loud noises
and saw someone who looked like he might be the 'Hispanic' male they
were pursuing" before getting to the Arambulas' house, according to
the complaint.
But we all look like Hispanic males from the rear.
If things were bad after Lilly put six bullets into Tony, they got
worse as the cops were left to figure out what to do about it.
Sgt. Coutts was quick to commence the cover-up of their terrible
mistake. Sgt. Coutts asked Office Lilly where Tony's gun was at the
time Officer Lilly had opened fire on Tony. Officer Lilly admitted
that he did not know where Tony's gun was: 'I don't know. I heard
screaming and I fired.'"
Lilly later told a police internal affairs investigator that Anthony
had pointed his gun in his direction, "in the 'ready' position," the
complaint states. But Anthony Arambula says he was facing away from
the officers, who could not have even seen his gun.
The complaint continues: "Still not knowing that he is being recorded
n the 911 tape, Sgt. Coutts interrupted Officer Lilly's admission and
apology with his assurance that the cover-up would commence: 'That's
all right. Don't worry about it. I got your back. ... We clear?'"
And it goes on and on, with the cops dragging Tony Arambula outside
the house by his shot leg onto gravel in the backyard, where he was
put on display for his wife and children. He was placed on the "hot
hood" of the squad car and driven down the street writhing in pain.
Later, they tried to get the gun dealer who sold Tony the weapon to go
along with their pretense that the gun may have been illegal, but the
dealer refused to play ball. Then detectives tried to pin drug
warrants on Tony from other states that he's never been to, but the
details didn't match.
It's so much easier when you shoot the wrong guy and just put a throw-
away in his hand to justify it. It's harder when you shoot the
homeowner. And it's really hard when the 911 recording catches it
all. And you thought it was easy to be a cop.
--------
http://tinyurl.com/y8ztx8x
http://www.courthousenews.com
Family Says 911 Tape Caught Cops Planning Cover-Up After Shooting
By JAMIE ROSS
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
PHOENIX (CN) - A homeowner says a Phoenix police officer shot him six
times in the back during a 911 home-invasion call, and the 911 tape
recorded the officer's partner saying, "That's all right. Don't worry
about it. I got your back. ... We clear?" The family says the officers
were not aware that the 911 call was still recording as they spoke
about covering up the shooting.
In their complaint in Maricopa County Court, Anthony and Lesley
Arambula say an armed intruder "crashed through the front window" of
their home on Sept. 17, 2008 and ran into one of their son's bedrooms.
Anthony, worried about his son who was still in his bedroom, says
he "held the intruder calmly at gunpoint" and called 911.
Phoenix Police officers already in the neighborhood heard the
crash of the Arambulas' window. When they approached the house, Lesley
says, she told Sgt. Sean Coutts that her husband was inside holding
the intruder at gunpoint. Lesley says Coutts failed to pass on that
information to the two other officers.
Inside the house, the Arambulas say, Officer Brian Lilly shot
Anthony six times in the back while he was still on the phone with the
911 operator - twice when he was on the ground.
The officers ran into the bedroom after Anthony told them, "You
just killed ... you just killed the homeowner. The bad guy is in there."
The complaint states that Officer Lilly "admitted that it was
only after Tony was laying, bullet-ridden, on the ground that he
assessed the situation. The 911 tape continued to record what happened
even after Officer Lilly unloaded his weapon into Tony, including
Officer Lilly's post-shooting, one-word 'assessment': 'F**k.'
"Tony believed he was going to die; the 911 tape records his
plaintive goodbye to his family: '... I love you ... I love you.' Then
Tony made what he believed was a dying request to the officers; he did
not want his young family to see him shot and bloodied. Officers
callously ignored his request and painfully dragged Tony by his
injured leg, through the home and out to his backyard patio, where
they left him bloodied and shot right in front of Lesley, Matthew and
Zachary."
The Arambulas say the officers later dragged Anthony onto gravel,
then put him on top of the hot hood of a squad car, and "drove the
squad car down the street with Tony lying on top, writhing in pain."
According to the complaint, Lilly can be heard on the 911 tape
telling Coutts, "We f**ked up."
Lilly says on the tape that he did not know where Anthony's gun
was when he shot him and that he "opened fire because he heard loud
noises and saw someone who looked like he might be the 'Hispanic' male
they were pursuing" before getting to the Arambulas' house, according
to the complaint.
The complaint states: "Sgt. Coutts knew that officers has just
shot up and likely killed an innocent homeowner and the husband of
Lesley, with whom he had spoken before entering the home, instead of
the armed intruder. Sgt. Coutts was quick to commence the cover-up of
their terrible mistake. Sgt. Coutts asked Office Lilly where Tony's
gun was at the time Officer Lilly had opened fire on Tony. Officer
Lilly admitted that he did not know where Tony's gun was: 'I don't
know. I heard screaming and I fired.'"
Lilly later told a police internal affairs investigator that
Anthony had pointed his gun in his direction, "in the 'ready'
position," the complaint states. But Anthony Arambula says he was
facing away from the officers, who could not have even seen his gun.
The complaint continues: "Still not knowing that he is being
recorded n the 911 tape, Sgt. Coutts interrupted Officer Lilly's
admission and apology with his assurance that the cover-up would
commence: 'That's all right. Don't worry about it. I got your
back. ... We clear?'"
After the shooting, the Arambulas say, the Phoenix Police
Department treated them "like suspects in a drug bust," denying
Lesley, Michael and Zachary information about Anthony's condition and
denying friends and family members access to him at the hospital.
Anthony Arambula survived, but continues to suffer pain, which he
expects will last for the rest of his life.
The City of Phoenix and Officer Dzenan Ahmetovic also are named
as defendants.
The Arambulas seek punitive damages for gross negligence, civil
rights violations, failure to supervise, excessive force, deliberate
indifference to medical needs, false arrest, and emotional distress.
They are represented by Michael Manning with Stinson Morrison Hecker.
-------
911 tapes record a possible police cover-up in homeowner shooting
April Poff emailed me this:
--
Regarding the following snippet from this issue:
"The lawsuit, filed in Maricopa County Court, alleges that Phoenix
Police Officer Brian Lilly and his on-scene supervisor, Sgt. Sean
Coutts, quickly conspired to cover up the mistake, not realizing that
911 was still recording Arambula's call for help."
It looks like we need to add one more tip to our collective lists of
how to handle ourselves in an emergency. KEEP THE 911 OPERATOR ON THE
LINE UNTIL THE INCIDENT IS COMPLETELY OVER.
Sounds like common sense, but it's not something I've ever thought
about one way or the other before now.
Thanks for everything as always.
April Poff
**************************************************
14. L.A. Times Editorial: Targeting gun shows
**************************************************
N.Y. probe of "gun show loophole" demands greater regulation of
firearm sales
The article admits that California's strict gun show law hasn't had
any affect on crime. But, what the heck, they want a national version
anyhow.
Rick Haskins emailed me this:
--
http://tinyurl.com/ykcuxcd
Closing the "gun show loophole" doesn't go far enough?
Rick Haskins
http://www.latimes.com
EDITORIAL
Targeting gun shows
An N.Y. probe exposes loopholes that let criminals buy firearms -- and
the need for greater regulation.
October 16, 2009
For shock value, they may not rank with the videos released last month
showing ACORN workers giving tax advice to a couple of undercover
investigators posing as a prostitute and her pimp. But New York Mayor
Michael R. Bloomberg's covert recordings of what really goes on at gun
shows are appalling nonetheless.
In the midst of a reelection campaign in a Democratic-majority city,
the Republican (sort of) Bloomberg has latched on to an issue that
appeals mainly to liberals: gun control. Though New York state has
fairly restrictive gun laws, Bloomberg believes firearms bought out of
state play a big role in Gotham's crime problems. So he sent private
investigators to seven gun shows in three states between May and
August and posted the results, including video shot with hidden
cameras, on a city-sponsored website.
"So no background check, right?" the investigators ask. "Because I
probably couldn't pass one." The response, over and over, is laughter,
a shrug or even admissions from gun sellers that they couldn't pass
one either. Out of 30 vendors approached, 19 sold guns to people they
knew were barred from owning them. Also captured on tape were dealers
selling weapons to an obvious straw buyer -- someone who buys a gun
for someone else, usually because the actual buyer couldn't pass the
federal background check. Sixteen of 17 vendors approached sold guns
to straw buyers, which is a felony.
Gun shows are thought to be a key supplier of guns used in crimes,
though how big a role they play is the subject of heated debate. To
understand why they're considered a problem, one first has to
understand the contorted nature of federal gun laws.
New-gun retailers are closely regulated, with laws forcing them to
obtain licenses, keep transaction records so that guns used in crimes
can be traced, and perform background checks on buyers to ensure they
aren't legally barred from owning guns. Convicted felons, drug
addicts, the mentally ill and illegal immigrants are among those who
fall into that category. Meanwhile, nonprofessional used-gun traders
are subject to none of those requirements, although even resellers are
forbidden from transactions in which they know the buyer couldn't pass
a background check (something Bloomberg's investigators caught on tape
repeatedly).
The absence of regulation of second-hand sales is often referred to as
the "gun-show loophole." Any criminal can go to a gun show in most
states and buy an armful of used firearms, including semiautomatic
assault weapons, knowing they're untraceable and that no one will
check his conviction record. Bloomberg and other activists seek to
close this loophole, and they have powerful friends. During the
presidential campaign, Barack Obama agreed, as did his Republican
opponent, John McCain. Yet bills that have sought to close the
loophole have never gone far, and there's little reason to think that
current efforts, including a bill from Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-
N.J.), will be more successful. That's because the gun lobby enjoys
political power that greatly exceeds the number of hard-core gun
enthusiasts in the United States, and because many Democrats believe
they lost their congressional majority in the mid-1990s because of
their aggressive pursuit of gun-control laws -- and they're terrified
of a repeat.
Democrats' cowardice is distressing, particularly when it's exhibited
by Obama, who has been silent on the issue since the campaign and has
made no attempt to back Lautenberg's bill. But even if it were to
pass, it wouldn't go far enough. In truth, the phrase "gun-show
loophole" is a misnomer, because unregulated secondary sales don't
just happen at gun shows. Used guns are sold at swap meets, through
classified ads and even over the Internet. What's more, criminals get
their guns from many sources besides gun shows, including straw buyers
and licensed dealers who break the law.
What's really needed is a federal law patterned on California's tough
restrictions on firearm sales. Lautenberg's bill, S. 843,:S.843:
regulates gun-show transactions exclusively. In California, it is
illegal for anyone to sell or transfer a firearm, whether at a gun
show or not, without processing the transaction through a licensed
dealer, who must perform a background check. Opponents claim that this
would be overly burdensome, but it has had no discernible effects on
gun sales in California, which, according to a recent UC Davis study,
hosted 100 gun shows in 2007 and like many other states saw a 30% year-
over-year sales increase in late 2008 and early 2009. Though there's
little evidence that this law has reduced gun violence in the Golden
State, that's probably because it's still so easy for criminals to get
guns from elsewhere, especially from anything-goes border states such
as Nevada and Arizona. A federal law would change that.
But it still wouldn't go far enough. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms and Explosives investigates a gun show only when it gets a
tip that illegal activity is expected; as a result, it conducts
operations at less than 5% of them. If nothing else, Bloomberg's
investigation proves that more attention is badly needed. The agency
should be given the funding, and a mandate, to post undercover
operatives at most if not all gun shows. Though the lunatic fringe
that believes the ATF to be a Gestapo-like arm of a repressive
government would loudly object, most legitimate merchants wouldn't,
because they're tired of unfair competition from resellers who don't
follow the rules.
None of these measures would restrict the 2nd Amendment rights of law-
abiding citizens; their intent is solely to keep guns out of the hands
of dangerous individuals. Though the gun lobby raises a hue and cry
whenever such proposals arise, it has yet to explain why it wants to
make it easy for murderers, armed robbers and other criminals to
obtain the tools of their trade. Bloomberg's gun-show expose has the
whiff of a political stunt, but if it gets politicians and the public
talking about gun control again, it's a stunt we can applaud.
**************************************************
15. U.S.-Mexico group urges new U.S. assault weapons ban
**************************************************
Mexican drug cartel violence fueled by U.S. gun sales, group says.
Sure, Mexico can't control their criminals so it only makes sense that
law-abiding American citizens, who having nothing to do with Mexico's
woes, should be restricted from buying semi-automatic firearms. Yeah,
makes a whole lot of sense.
Do they really think Americans are going to fall for this baloney?
http://tinyurl.com/yz8g8y4
http://www.wtop.com
US-Mexico groups urges new US assault weapons ban
October 14, 2009
By CATHERINE E. SHOICHET
Associated Press Writer
MEXICO CITY (AP) - The United States should reinstate a Clinton-era
ban on assault weapons to prevent such guns from reaching Mexican drug
cartels, former officials from both countries said in a report
released Tuesday.
The group, which includes two former U.S. ambassadors to Mexico, also
said the U.S. should do more to stop the smuggling of firearms and
ammunition into Mexico by stepping up investigations of gun dealers
and more strictly regulating gun shows.
The Binational Task Force on the United States-Mexico Border listed
the assault weapons ban as a step the U.S. should take immediately to
improve security in both countries. The 10-year ban expired in 2004.
"Improving our efforts ... will weaken the drug cartels and disrupt
their illegal activities, and make it easier ultimately to dismantle
and destroy them," said Robert Bonner, co-chairman of the group and
former head of both the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration and
Customs and Border Protection agency.
U.S. and Mexican officials say drug cartels frequently use assault
rifles, which are banned in Mexico but easily purchased in the United
States.
Mexican President Felipe Calderon launched a nationwide crackdown on
drug cartels when he took office in December 2006. The offensive has
been met with unprecedented violence, leaving more than 13,800 people
dead.
During his run for office, President Barack Obama promised to push to
reinstate the ban. He has since said he would rather enforce existing
laws that make it illegal to send assault weapons across the border.
Other recommendations related to border security included
restructuring Mexico's law enforcement operations to create a
counterpart to the U.S. Border Patrol, increasing U.S. assistance to
Mexico to build up law enforcement and reducing demand for drugs in
the United States through more treatment programs.
**************************************************
16. Editorial: Get rid of the guns
**************************************************
Notice how they slip that guns should be kept out of the hands of
children into the article below. They just drop that statement in
like it is a given and isn't up for debate.
Well, that is a not a fact. Kids do just fine around guns and have
been doing so for as long as there have been guns. We need to call
out anyone who says differently, especially in the media.
http://tinyurl.com/yfk9aop
Illegal guns crackdown needed, say editors
http://www.yournabe.com
Get Rid of the Guns
Thursday, October 15, 2009
We would like to think the shooting death of a 13-year-old boy near a
Cambria Heights car wash would sound a wake-up call in the war against
illegal guns, but it is sounded every time a young life is lost and
nothing happens. It is as easy to buy an illegal gun today in
southeast Queens as it was before Kevin Miller was shot. Mothers
raising teen boys in this part of town who do not worry every day that
their child will not come home are fooling themselves.
The NYPD projects there will be about 457 murders this year, the
lowest total since the department started keeping records in 1962. But
that will be of little consolation for Kevin's family.
We have learned Kevin was a good child who was in the wrong place at
the wrong time. He was a good student who served as an usher and youth
minister at New Jerusalem Baptist Church in Jamaica.
The tragedy does not stop with Kevin. Nnonso Ekwegbalu, 16, of
Springfield Gardens, and Gregory Calas, 18, of St. Albans have been
arrested in the shooting, authorities said. Ekwegbalu said he was not
shooting at Kevin, according to police. He was in a gang fight with
three other boys. Kevin got in the way. If convicted of murder both
could spend much of their lives in prison. Ekwegbalu was a student at
Campus Magnet High School, the DA said.
Justice demands Kevin's killer be punished, but that will not stop the
next angry kid with a gun from claiming another life.
The senseless killings will not stop until we stop the flow of illegal
guns into our community. Mayor Michael Bloomberg has taken the fight
to places like Virginia, where it is possible to buy guns from
unlicensed dealers at gun shows. States must come down hard on these
dealers.
The war on illegal guns cannot be won until the mayor makes an ally of
the National Rifle Association. Bloomberg and the NRA have seen
themselves on opposite sides in the war on guns. The NRA is made up of
Americans who cherish the right to bear arms and feel threatened by
the anti-gun lobby. But they also do not want see guns get into the
hands of children and thugs.
They should work with gun manufactures to keep guns out of the hands
of children and off Cambria Heights streets.
**************************************************
17. LTE: "Gun" column fails to consider 2nd Amendment
**************************************************
http://tinyurl.com/yl9sbv3
http://www.flyernews.com
Letter To The Editor
Louis Schulte - Senior, Civil Engineering
October 15, 2009
This article is in response to Michael Miller's recent column about
the Second Amendment. His proposal was that the Second Amendment has
run its course and that it is now time to adopt tighter gun control
laws in the name of the safety of Americans. He cites the historical
context of the law and the shootings in Columbine and Virginia Tech as
reasons to adopt new gun control laws. With all do respect, one should
also consider the rest of the facts before adopting this opinion.
One fact that wasn't mentioned was the original intention of the
Second Amendment, which he claims was meant to protect Americans from
their enemies since no police or army existed to protect them. This
may be true, but the main reason Americans were given the right to
bear arms was to protect themselves from what the Founding Fathers
would call the real enemy: an out of control government. Thomas
Jefferson and company knew that America's birth came out of the
failure of the British to protect the individual rights of the
colonists, and they didn't want their newly created government to do
the same. The right to bear arms was born out of the notion that
people are granted by their Creator with the right to protect
themselves should their government come after their individual rights.
This notion holds as much truth today as it did 250 years ago. The
government may now provide protection from foreign armies and domestic
criminals, but the one thing government cannot guarantee Americans is
protection from itself. If a government were to attempt to take away
the individual right to own a gun, wouldn't it essentially be taking
away the right to protect oneself from the government taking away his
or her individual rights? That would be the real end of the safety of
Americans. Benjamin Franklin said it best by saying, "Any society that
would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve
neither and lose both."
**************************************************
18. Violent crime data
**************************************************
Dale Welch emailed me this:
--
http://tinyurl.com/yhzfn2c
Great statistical data - worth bookmarking if you don't already have it.
28% of violent crimes happen within the home. 76% happen within 5
miles of the home.
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics
----Dale
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov
**************************************************
19. Gun facts
**************************************************
A reference for countering anti-gun arguments
David R. Neal emailed me this:
--
Something for a future newsletter?
You may have covered this before, but the free PDF download of "Gun
Facts"
is available at the above website.
Lots of footnotes/references to use to counter anti-gun arguments etc.
Gun Facts - Your Guide to Debunking Gun Control Myths
INTRODUCTION: Gun Facts is a free e-book that debunks common myths
about
gun control. It is intended as a reference guide for journalists,
activists, politicians, and other people interested in restoring
honesty to
the debate about guns, crime, and the 2nd Amendment.
Gun Facts has 98 pages of information. Divided into chapters based on
gun
control topics (assault weapons, ballistic finger printing, firearm
availability, etc.), finding information is quick and easy.
Each chapter lists common gun control myths, then lists a number of
documented and cited facts (with nearly 500 detailed footnotes). Thus
when
a neighbor, editor or politician repeats some sound bite about firearm
control policy, you can quickly find that myth then rebuke with real
information.
David Neal
http://tinyurl.com/6c44yo
http://www.gunfacts.info/
**************************************************
20. Ohio town to Bloomberg: Butt out
**************************************************
Sharonville, Ohio blasts Bloomberg's gun show sting operation in their
state.
Or, how to make friends and influence the governments of other states:
http://tinyurl.com/ylhe2b6
http://gothamist.com
Ohio Town To Bloomberg: Butt Out
On Wednesday, Mayor Bloomberg unveiled the latest efforts in his
crusade against illegal guns coming in NYC by allegedly showing how
easy it would be to buy a gun--without a background check or with a
straw purchaser--at gun shows in Nevada, Ohio and Tennessee. Of course,
one town wasn't too pleased with our big city mayor sending in
investigators for the sting operation at a local gun show.
Based on NYC's "Gun Show Undercover" report, 75% of the time guns were
"sold to people who said either they probably could not pass a
background check or to apparent 'straw purchasers.'" The town of
Sharonville, Ohio issued a statement:
"It is nice that Mayor Bloomberg has spent New York money hiring
private investigators to identify alleged crimes of federal law in
other states. However, proper arrests cannot be made without informing
the Sharonville Police Department. Customarily, we are informed of
these types of investigations so that we can coordinate with the
appropriate federal agency...
It should be noted that federal agencies are actively involved in
monitoring and enforcing these gun shows including the one represented
in the investigation. The violations referred to are federal and not
state. The City of Sharonville does not have jurisdiction over federal
laws, but does take any violation very seriously. To our knowledge no
federal agency was informed of this private investigation and,
therefore, makes enforcement of these particular incidents impossible.
The town did add that it was working with the gun show organizer to
make sure all laws are being followed. Private unlicensed gun sellers
are not required to perform background checks, though it's still a
felony to sell guns to people they have reason to believe are
prohibited purchasers, like felons. Mayor Bloomberg said, "The gun
show loophole is a deadly serious problem."
Earlier this week, the NRA offered up a pro-Bloomberg mobster-type in
a video to rally support for a Republican gubernatorial candidate in
Virginia.
**************************************************
21. Awesome video from the National Shooting Sports Foundation
**************************************************
Video chronicles how most hunting rifles evolved from service weapons
http://tinyurl.com/njsvdd
http://nssf.org
**************************************************
22. Kentucky pastor drops flock for his Glock
**************************************************
Pastor quits to focus on church security full-time
Deborah Jane Anderson emailed me this:
--
Now, here's the original article from the Washington Times. I
especially like the pastor's statement about self-defense.
"People have this idea that Christians have to turn the other cheek,"
Mr. Pagano said. "That's true, but I don't think there's anything in
the Old or New Testament that requires them to roll over and die if
someone attacks them or their family."
Blessings,
Deborah Jane Anderson
http://tinyurl.com/yz76z4z
http://www.washingtontimes.com
Kentucky pastor drops flock for his Glock
By Valerie Richardson
The Kentucky pastor who drew notice earlier this year for hosting a
God-and-guns event at his church is giving up his flock for his Glock.
Pastor Ken Pagano resigned his post last month at the New Bethel
Church in Louisville, Ky., after nearly 30 years in the ministry,
saying he wants to focus on Second Amendment and church-security issues.
"Thirty years was a good, long run, but it's time for a change," Mr.
Pagano said in an interview with The Washington Times. "If I can write
my own ticket, I want to get involved more in Second Amendment issues
as they affect the church, and I can do more from outside the pulpit
than from behind it."
Mr. Pagano gained national attention when his congregation hosted an
Open Carry Celebration a week before Independence Day to commemorate
the roles of religion and gun ownership in the nation's founding.
About 200 people attended the event, which featured a handgun raffle
and firearm-safety information.
Some of them wore their own guns in holsters. Kentucky law allows
residents to carry guns openly in public with some restrictions,
although gun owners who carry concealed weapons must have permits. The
event wasn't supposed to be a big deal, Mr. Pagano said, but "it
really struck a nerve."
"I would say 90 to 95 percent of all the correspondence we received
was positive, saying, 'We're glad somebody's standing up for this,' "
Mr. Pagano said. "There were some who said, 'Oh, it's a bunch of
rednecks.' "
Mr. Pagano said he was considering a career change even before the
event, but the ripple effect led him to Rabbi Gary Moskowitz of New
York, who has long worked with synagogues on protection from terrorist
threats.
Mr. Pagano and Mr. Moskowitz have since teamed up to form the
International Security Coalition of Clergy, an organization dedicated
to "making the vulnerable less vulnerable," according to their mission
statement.
"Churches are very soft targets and very vulnerable to attack from
terrorists and other homegrown, disgruntled individuals," Mr. Pagano
said. "Unfortunately, most religious leaders are living in denial."
The number of high-profile attacks on churches has spiraled in the
past decade. This year's church violence includes the deadly shooting
of a late-term abortion provider in Wichita, Kan., a fatal attack on a
pastor shot midsermon in Maryville, Ill., and the killing of a female
parishioner by her estranged husband in a church parking lot in Silver
Spring, Md.
A handful of companies specializing in church security have sprung up
in response. Glen Evans, who runs the Church Security Alliance in
Dayton, Ohio, said many churches are eager to improve on basic
security, such as locking doors and checking perimeters regularly, but
wrestle with the idea of having an armed guard or parishioner within
the church during services.
"When you have a church, you have people with the belief that you
shouldn't have a gun in church," said Mr. Evans, a police officer with
a SWAT background. "But sometimes a firearm is the only thing that's
going to stop someone from shooting people."
Mr. Pagano advocates a security team of five church members who have
at least 40 hours of training in firearms and other tactics. The
advantage of using church members instead of a hired guard is that
they're better able to separate the regular attendees from the first-
time visitors.
The idea is self-defense, not aggression, Mr. Moskowitz said.
"I'm not taking the position that everyone should have a gun. I'm
taking the position that every house of worship or any other high-
visibility target should have a person or persons trained in the use
of firearms," the rabbi said.
Such talk exasperates gun-control advocates, who say that firearms in
a crowded environment such as a house of worship has the potential for
disaster.
"I've got no problems with any institution, whether it's a business or
a church, hiring professional, trained security people who know the
risks," said Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent
Gun Violence. "What I do have serious concerns about is the idea that
a private individual, just because they're a gun owner, can be a
security guard just by carrying a gun to church."
As for Mr. Pagano, Mr. Helmke said, "Maybe he should be more concerned
about the Fifth Commandment than the Second Amendment."
What some people don't realize is that a pastor isn't a "sanctified
sheep," Mr. Pagano said, but a shepherd, the protector of the flock.
That includes the physical safety of the parishioners within the
church building.
"People have this idea that Christians have to turn the other cheek,"
Mr. Pagano said. "That's true, but I don't think there's anything in
the Old or New Testament that requires them to roll over and die if
someone attacks them or their family."
**************************************************
23. Norfolk Gun show 11/7 - 11/8 CANCELLED
**************************************************
The Norfolk Gun show on November 7 and 8 has been cancelled. Thanks
to those who had volunteered.
**************************************************
24. Help needed at new Richmond gun show
**************************************************
Paul Henick, who is one of the Richmond Gun Show Coordinators, says he
needs one or two more people for Sunday morning, November 1, at the
Meadow Event Park gun show.
I don't have Paul's VCDL email address yet, so please respond to me (president@vcdl.org
) and I will forward to Paul.
***************************************************************************
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/]
VA-ALERT: VCDL Update 10/25/09
Contact your Federal or State Representative and Delegates. Send them an email and let them know that you want them to fight for your Second Amendment Rights.
Forum rules
Gun related political postings are welcome here. If it's not firearm related, please don't post it.
Gun related political postings are welcome here. If it's not firearm related, please don't post it.
-
OakRidgeStars
- VGOF Gold Supporter
- Posts: 14108
- Joined: Sun, 22 Mar 2009 10:13:20
Return to “Virginia and National Politics (Firearm Related Only)”
Jump to
- General Discussions
- ↳ General Discussion
- ↳ Articles and Op-Ed
- ↳ Rules and Regulations
- ↳ Announcements
- ↳ Forum Suggestions and Help
- ↳ New Members Report Here
- ↳ Meet and Greet
- Hardware Specific Discussions
- ↳ Firearms
- ↳ Handguns/Pistols
- ↳ Rifles
- ↳ Shotguns
- ↳ Rimfires
- ↳ Large Bore and "Assault" Rifles
- ↳ Curios and Relics
- ↳ Muzzleloaders and Black Powder
- ↳ Range Reports
- ↳ Show Off Your Hardware
- ↳ Ammunition and Reloading
- ↳ Scopes and Optics
- ↳ Carrying Your Firearm
- ↳ Question and Answer
- ↳ Gun Shop/Range/Gunsmith Reviews
- ↳ National Discussions
- ↳ Hunting in Virginia
- ↳ Geeks with Guns
- ↳ Survival and Emergency Preparedness (SHTF)
- ↳ NFA & SOT
- Laws, Legal Issues and Politics
- ↳ Virginia Laws and Regulations
- ↳ Virginia and National Politics (Firearm Related Only)
- ↳ Politics (All other non-firearm related)
- ↳ Virginia Citizens Defense League (VCDL) VA Alerts
- ↳ National Rifle Association - Institute of Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) Alerts
- ↳ Gun Owners of America (GOA) Newsletters and Alerts
- Marketplace
- ↳ Firearms for Sale or Trade
- ↳ Want to Buy
- ↳ Firearms Accessories and Ammunition for Sale
- ↳ Miscellaneous For Sale
- ↳ Feedback
- ↳ Merchant Advertising
- ↳ Sold or Completed Ads
- Vendor Forums
- ↳ ALL-IN Tactical
- ↳ Sterling Arsenal Works & Tactical Supply, LLC
- Virginia Regional Forums
- ↳ Tidewater Area
- ↳ Northern Virginia
- ↳ Richmond
- ↳ Proactive Shooters - Firearms Safety Training
- ↳ Fredericksburg
- ↳ Roanoke
- ↳ Charlottesville
- ↳ Southern Virginia