VA-ALERT: VCDL Update 7/13/15

[OakRidgeStars]

VA-ALERT: VCDL Update 7/13/15

----------------------------------------------------------------------
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. Good news! Langley Federal Credit Union drops dangerous “no guns” policy!
2. Bedford Regional Water Authority removes “no weapons” sign after being contacted by VCDL
3. Henrico County Circuit Court Clerk contacted over illegal requirement for CHP applicants
4. Bad news. Fauquier County extends distance for firearm discharge in New Baltimore area
5. Nice to hear about Maine, but how do I get my guns up there to be able to carry?
6. More feedback, good and bad, on permit renewals around the state
7. [DC] Why the media silence on horrendous public murder on the DC Metro?
8. [DC] More articles on the DC Metro murder, VCDL interviewed
9. [NM] More from Lynne Russell on the attempted murder of her and her husband
10. [MO] Typical of the “Let’s all just get along” crowd: Anti-gunner verbally harassing an open carrier [VIDEO]
11. Media gets it wrong yet again. Yaaawwwnnnn

**********************************************************
1. Good news! Langley Federal Credit Union drops dangerous “no guns” policy!
**********************************************************

Member Wes Thomas told me that the Langely Federal Credit Union (LFCU) in Poquoson has removed its “No guns” sign. Wes checked with the manager and confirmed the policy had been rescinded!

If anyone has a branch with the signs, I’d like to know about it.


**********************************************************
2. Bedford Regional Water Authority removes “no weapons” sign after being contacted by VCDL
**********************************************************

Some VCDL members contacted me about a “no weapons” sign on the door of the Bedford Regional Water Authority (BRWA). In turn, I exchanged emails with BRWA about the legality of the sign. Yesterday I learned that the sign has been removed.

I thank the BRWA for doing the right thing.


**********************************************************
3. Henrico County Circuit Court Clerk contacted over illegal requirement for CHP applicants
**********************************************************

The Henrico County Circuit Court Clerk office was requiring that CHP applicants fill out an additional “Henrico County Police Division Criminal Record Request Form” (HCPD-143 (02/12)). When one of our members declined to put their Social Security Number on the form, they were told it was mandatory!

I contacted the Clerk, Yvonne G. Smith, and we spoke about the issue. She said she had no idea that requiring the form to be filled out was not allowed under the law, and I believe she was being sincere. She said the PD told her that filling out the form would speed up the background check process. She also said that her office is NOT requiring applicants to put their Social Security Number on the form. Perhaps it was just an underling who was not property trained who made that comment. Nonetheless, I pointed her at 18.2-308.02. She said she would contact the Henrico PD. I was left with the impression that she was going to drop the requirement.

If you live in Henrico and are going to be renewing soon, please let me know if you are told to fill out that form and/or told that you are required to provide your Social Security Number.


**********************************************************
4. Bad news. Fauquier County extends distance for firearm discharge in New Baltimore area
**********************************************************

A disagreement between neighbors over a private shooting-range has led to that range being closed because Fauquier County decided to pass an ordinance to "[create] a scenario where neighbors are forced to work together." Oh, in theory the neighbors who are within 200 yards could agree to let the gun owner and VCDL member, Jerry Compton, use his range, but in practice with at least one neighbor being hostile, the range is probably closed for good. To be able to shoot, Jerry would have to get EVERY neighbor within 200 yards to agree - that’s not likely to happen, even if none were outright hostile.

I had talked to Jerry a couple of times about this situation a month or so ago, and I was worried that the situation might not end well. That said, I’m not sure that Jerry could have come to any acceptable compromise with a few particular neighbors. And the end result was NO compromise. Jerry’s neighbors did not give up one single thing, while Jerry gave up everything. Jerry DID try to compromise, contrary to the article below. As far as VCDL is concerned, this is NOT over. Stay tuned.

Oh, and since when is it government’s duty to pass laws to make neighbors “work together?”

Perhaps the Fauquier voters can pick a more liberty-minded Board of Supervisors in the next election.

I got this report from VCDL member Troy Hayes in Warrenton:

As VCDL members were alerted in an earlier email, the Fauquier County Board of Supervisors (the Board) met to take public opinion and vote on an amendment to increase shooting distance from regularly occupied structures [houses] from 100 yards to 200 yards, but only for a portion of the county in the New Baltimore area. With advance permission, shooting could occur within the specified distances.

I'm guessing that about 20 people spoke in the hour and a half public hearing. Roughly twice as many people opposed the amendment as supported it.

As the evening wore on, it became clear that the reason for the proposal was due to a long standing feud between a family that had an informal range and nearby neighbors that objected. Some objected for perceived safety reasons, but nobody could produce any evidence of a stray bullet that had hit a house or other property. One man said he hear bullets hit the trees behind him, although I find this assertion outrageous. Testimony revealed that numerous visits by the Fauquier Sheriff's department had uncovered only minor safety issues, which were quickly corrected.

The prevailing complaint of the neighbors was the noise. The close by neighbors said that the shooting went on for hours on weekend days, as well as other days.

Numerous speakers defended the safety issues. Many warned that approval would become a slippery slope of losing Second Amendment rights. Others suggested that the Board should stay out of a feud between neighbors.

After all the citizens had spoken, the public hearing was ended and the supervisors spoke. In general safety was not a problem as the sheriff's reports were accepted. It came down to balancing the right to shoot on one's property versus the right to the peaceful enjoyment of one's property. The proposal passed with only Supervisor Lee Sherbeyn (Cedar Run District) voting against it. I suspect that the supervisors had given considerable thought to the problem and had probably made up their minds before the public hearing.

In a follow up email exchange with Peter Schwartz, the supervisor from Marshall District, he assured me that none of the five supervisors wanted this solution. But, the range owner had refused all attempts from Supervisor Trumbo to reach some sort of compromise, insisting that he had the right to do what he was doing. [PVC: As stated above, Jerry strongly disputes the statement that he didn’t try to compromise with his neighbors.] Obviously, the supervisors felt that along with rights we have a civic duty to respect the rights of others. Perhaps this point is the take away from the unfortunate chain of events.

—————————

Here is an article on the situation:

http://www.fauquier.com/news/article/fa ... ters_homes

or

http://tinyurl.com/qjrjr83


Fauquier board puts more distance between shooters, homes

Share on twitter Share on facebook Share on email More Sharing Services
Thursday, Jul. 9 | By James Ivancic

The Fauquier County Board of Supervisors by a 4-1 vote Thursday night approved a code revision to bar the discharge of a firearm within 200 yards of a regularly occupied structure without the permission of the owner or occupant within a portion of the New Baltimore Service District.

The distance remains 100 yards elsewhere in the county.

The measure was prompted by complaints from neighbors of Jerry Compton about a shooting range on his land used by friends and family, the frequency of the shooting, the noise it creates and concerns about stray bullets.

Opponents of the change cited Second Amendments rights, said the shooting is monitored and conducted in a safe manner, and said local government should not be getting involved in a dispute among neighbors that could perhaps be settled through mediation.

The 100-seat capacity of the meeting room of the Warren Green Building in Warrenton was full, with others standing in the lobby and some along the sides of the room. Supporters both for and against the measure came to a microphone to state their views during a public hearing that preceded the board's vote.

In the end, the sole vote against making the distance change was Cedar Run Supervisor Lee Sherbeyn, who said he didn't believe it was a safety issues noting the safety officers are present when shooting goes on. Rather it was a property rights issue.

“I can't regulate courtesy between neighbors,” he added.

Scott District Supervisor Holder Trumbo, whose district includes New Baltimore, said “we've had complaints for quite a while” about the shooting and that more than one neighbor tried to reach out to Compton to try to resolve the issue.

“I don't think anyone is blowing this out of proportion,” he said of the complainants.

“We could have gone the no-shoot route. This creates a scenario where neighbors are forced to work together,” Trumbo said, since the discharge of a firearm within 200 yards of a dwelling is allowed if the occupant consents.


**********************************************************
5. Nice to hear about Maine, but how do I get my guns up there to be able to carry?
**********************************************************

I am not an attorney and can’t give legal advice. The below is my lay understanding of the law:

I was amazed at how many questions like that I got after putting out the story on Maine getting Constitutional Carry starting sometime in October. It was just a reminder to me that we get new people on VA-ALERT constantly and that from time to time I need to review key information for everyone’s benefit.

The question is a good one. How do I get my guns from Virginia to Maine if I have to drive through the liberty-challenged enclaves of Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts?

The answer is federal law.

Under the Firearms Owner Protection Act of 1986 (FOPA), federal law protects you if you are transporting guns on a peaceable journey from any state where you can legally possess firearms to any other state where you can legally possess firearms.

So driving from Virginia to, say, Maine or Vermont, you are covered by FOPA if:

1. Your guns are unloaded and locked up out of reach and in a separate compartment, if possible, such as in the trunk of an automobile. If there is no separate compartment, such as an SUV, then the unloaded guns should be in a LOCKED container in the very back of the vehicle

2. Your ammunition is in a separate location or in a separate container from the gun

3. You are driving straight through the state, making no detours or stopping in the state for an extended amount of time. Short stops for fuel or food is OK.

NOTE: Some states view FOPA as an affirmative defense. That is, they can arrest you and when you go to court if you can show that you were within the FOPA guidelines, the charges will be dropped. I believe that the affirmative defense interpretation is baloney, but there it is. Finally, this begs the question - how will they even know you have guns in the trunk unless YOU tell them you do? When traveling under FOPA, if asked about weapons, don’t lie, but don’t tell either. Change the subject or simply don’t reply. Offering up information won’t win you any Brownie Points, but it certainly can get you into a legal morass.

Also, note that since you cannot legally possess guns while visiting a state like New York, if New York is your destination, FOPA will NOT protect you on the trip to and from New York.


**********************************************************
6. More feedback, good and bad, on permit renewals around the state
**********************************************************

On the bad side, I got this from a member in Waynesboro, about the Circuit Court Clerk’s office pushing it right to the end or perhaps beyond: :

"Thought I'd pass along that my concealed carry permit renewal took almost seven weeks for Waynesboro to process. They cashed my check almost immediately however.”

-

On the good side, here is one from a member in Fairfax:

"I'm new to VCDL and to VA as well. I relocated to the freedom hating state of MD in 2012 from Washington state. Realizing my mistake, I made the move to VA in April 2015.

"I see the occasional alert about good experiences with getting carry permits and wanted to share my experience at the Fairfax County Courthouse.

"I turned my application in on 5/19. I was told by fellow Alexandrians to expect it to take the full 45 days. One person even said his took 47 days in Loudoun county. When the very friendly woman at the counter asked for my SASE, I realized I had left it in the car. 'No problem,' she said as she slid an envelope to me. 'Just write your name and address here and I'll stamp it.' I thanked her and was even more happy and surprised that she didn't charge extra for the stamp.

"I'm happy to report I received my permit on 6/12. Hopefully we will see constitutional carry soon. But for now, I am very pleased with the service I received."

Of course, Circuit Court Clerks cannot require an SASE, so providing one when the person didn’t bring one is not surprising. Also, they can only charge up to $50, so they could not charge for the stamp, either, if that would exceed the $50 limit.

-

And other good one from EM Dave Knight, who sent me the following email, with him and two other family members receiving their permits within 2 to 3 weeks from application:

"I would like to compliment the Radford Circuit Court Clerk, Ann Howard (ahoward@radford.va.us), her staff and the Honorable Josiah T. Showalter Jr., Presiding Judge & Chief Judge, for their issuance of
CHPs (when warranted, of course) for both initial and renewal CHP applications submitted to their office, well in advance of the 45 day limit specified in 18.2-308.04.”

-

And this one from another member in Richmond:

"I would like to pay a complement to Donna Lythgoe in the Probate Office at the City of Richmond Circuit Court. She was very helpful and courteous. Checked my application before I left to see if it was complete. I did forget the SASE but she was kind enough to provide me with one.”

My previous comments about SASEs apply here as well.


**********************************************************
7. [DC] Why the media silence on horrendous public murder on the DC Metro?
**********************************************************

A few reasons that come to mind:

1. The victim was in favor of gun control but was killed in a vicious knife attack. Had he been shot, the media would be covering it 24/7 saying that if only there were universal background checks (or some other gun control measure) the murder could have been avoided
2. The media has no interest in black-on-white crime, but are obsessed with the reverse
3. Total gun control in DC didn’t prevent a horrendous and brazen murder. People cowering on both sides of the train car didn’t provide a positive image of being in a gun-free zone. So much for “safety in numbers"

Here is an article addressing the question. Thanks to member Mark Shinn for the link:

http://clashdaily.com/2015/07/former-de ... m-to-care/#

or

http://tinyurl.com/panv2pd


**********************************************************
8. [DC] Articles on the DC Metro murder, VCDL interviewed
**********************************************************

What a weird comment by the D.C. City Council Chairman. And there is some finger pointing. Phil Mendelson says the Metro wanted the gun ban, Metro says they asked for no such thing. A politician couldn’t possibly be lying, could he?


http://freebeacon.com/issues/gun-rights ... of-murder/

or

http://tinyurl.com/opayser

Gun Rights Groups Criticize Ban on Gun Carry on DC Metro in Wake of Murder
DC Council Chairman Phil Mendelson Says Metro Requested Ban
BY: Stephen Gutowski
July 10, 2015 5:00 am

Gun rights groups are criticizing part of the Washington, D.C., gun carry law that bans firearms on public transit within the city after a man was stabbed to death on a Metro train on Saturday.

The National Rifle Association (NRA), Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), and Virginia Citizens Defense League (VCDL) expressed their opposition to the ban in the wake of a 4th of July murder on the Metro’s red line. As the train approached the NoMa-Gallaudet station, Jasper Spires stabbed Kevin Joseph Sutherland as many as 40 times, killing him.

The NRA warned that the incident was likely to be repeated until D.C. removes the ban.

“With so many threats in the nation’s capital, the fact that the District of Columbia government continues to deny residents and visitors the right to protect themselves is a travesty,” NRA spokesman Lars Dalseide said. “We’ll continue to hear stories like this until the District of Columbia affords every law-abiding citizen their constitutional right to self protection.”

When asked if the city was reviewing its ban, a Metro Police Department spokesman referred the Free Beacon to D.C. Council Chairman Phil Mendelson (D.).

Mendelson told the Free Beacon that the Council has no plans to change the law, and appeared to place the burden for that decision on the Metro system, known officially as the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA).

“There are no amendments to the law being considered at this time,” said Mendelson in an email. “The law, as revised last fall, gives property owners the right to prohibit carrying on their premises. WMATA contacted the Council prior to our action on the legislation last fall to ask that their premises be off-limits to carrying. WMATA (busses, rail, etc.) was then added to the list. If we were to act to remove WMATA from the list, the effect would be unaffected.”

Mendelson did not respond immediately to a request for clarification about how removing Metro from the list of officially prohibited locations in D.C. law would leave the legal status quo unaffected, as his e-mail seemed to suggest.

The Second Amendment Foundation, which brought the case that forced D.C. to allow gun carry, said the Metro ban is a symptom of a larger problem.

“Gun free zones like the District of Columbia’s public transit system are really victim disarmament zones and a magnet for violent criminals to prey on unarmed people who have no means of protecting themselves,” SAF founder Alan Gottlieb said.

The Virginia Citizen Defense League, a leading gun rights group with a number of members that commute into the city for work, said bans such as this one encourage killings.

“Anytime a law-abiding citizen is denied the right to self defense, as D.C. has done in this case, it creates an environment ripe for such tragedies, as well as encouraging future mass killings,” VCDL president Philip Van Cleave said. “Gun-free zones are never gun-free for the criminals, who respect no laws, but only for the good, decent people, who are then setup to become victims.”

——

Here is a glimpse into pure evil. How do you survive such an attack? I think you know the necessary tool.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/cri ... rc=nl_buzz

or

http://tinyurl.com/pcyyeby


**********************************************************
9. [NM] More from Lynne Russell on the attempted murder of her and her husband
**********************************************************

Highlight from Lynne Russell’s interview (if she lived in Virginia, I’d love to have her and her husband as a speakers at one of our meetings once her husband is safely out of the hospital and life has gone back to normal for them both):

"Now, ask me how I feel about the right to bear arms.

"Here's the truth:

"1. Criminals will always have guns, this is not about them.

"2. Americans have a constitutional right to bear arms. Humans have a right to defend themselves. If we didn't have the Second Amendment, we would create it.

"3. You can't control everything; but if it makes you feel better, go with a simple law preventing violent offenders from buying firearms. Make it "violent" offenders rather than "white collar" offenders, or most of Capitol Hill won't be allowed to own them.

"4. Get a gun, get legal, be responsible, trust yourself. Don't trust yourself? Then don't carry. But for God's sake then, shut the f**k up about it, because that's where your involvement ends.”

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/07/ ... purse.html

or

http://tinyurl.com/nma7vlf


**********************************************************
10. [MO] Typical of the “Let’s all just get along” crowd: Anti-gunner verbally harassing an open carrier [VIDEO]
**********************************************************

A classic example of so many gun-grabbers. Obnoxious, overbearing, self-important, hot tempered, violent, and threatening. These are the very same people who claim that gun owners are time bombs just waiting to go off at the first provocation - a fender bender, bumped grocery carts, a meal served cold at a restaurant.

I’ve dealt with them firsthand. One minute they are telling a General Assembly committee about gun owners being that ticking time bomb, the next minute they are screaming in my face in the hallway, all the while knowing I was armed.

Something is mentally wrong with people like that. Seriously wrong. It is THEY who would kill YOU with just a slight provocation. They hate guns because they don’t trust themselves not to murder someone with one. And that fear is probably justified.

In the video below you see documented an encounter between an anti and an open carrier in Missouri. The gun owner is minding his own business, talking on a phone, as the anti starts his verbal assault. The anti is so full of adrenaline and vitriol that his camera is constantly shaking. He berates and insults the gun owner in an angry and very provocative manner. The gun owner remains cool and calm.

Here’s a glimpse into the other side. The anti had posted the video originally, but decided to take it down (gee, I wonder why?) Fortunately, someone else kept a copy and here it is:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QInH8o1jzyI


**********************************************************
11. Media gets it wrong yet again. Yaaawwwnnnn
**********************************************************

Here’s a surprise - the mainstream media providing false information on guns.

Member Craig Shelton sent me the link and this:

CNN loaded up this article today with the opening statement, "Background checks for gun sales spiked 11% in June compared to last year, making it the busiest June ever, according to the FBI's background check data."

However, in the very next sentence they then go on to spout the blatant lie:

"Last month the FBI conducted nearly 1.53 million background checks, which are required for all in-store purchases, but not for SALES AT GUN SHOWS or between individuals.” [PVC: Of course, contrary to anti-gun propaganda, there is nothing special about gun shows. The same laws about gun sales apply there as they do anywhere else, including in stores.]

Craig also opined that perhaps that spike also explains the unusual delays reported by some FFLs recently.

http://money.cnn.com/2015/07/07/news/gun-sales




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