VCDL's meeting schedule: http://www.vcdl.org/meetings.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Abbreviations used in VA-ALERT: http://www.vcdl.org/help/abbr.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
VCDL Update 3/3/10
1. VCDL meeting in Lynchburg - April 6
2. VCDL President interviewed on Freedom & Prosperity radio
3. Examiner.com - Radical anti-gun candidate flying under radar in Virginia special election
4. News from the Second Amendment March
5. Is open carry legal on the campus of GMU?
6. Examiner.com: New Orleans case should send chilling message to those who think 'only cops should have guns'
7. Why we shouldn't fear an end to the ban on guns in National Parks
8. Wolf Trap National Park plans to ban carry of firearms within a "lawn area"
9. Discussion on major travel website about guns in national parks
10. National Park gun law still a yawner
11. Who needs a gun while hiking in Hawaii?
12. Is Obama pro gun?
13. Sugerman at it again: Killings by concealed handgun licensees
14. 2010 Virginia PTA legislation priorities?
15. Serial home invasion?
16. LTE: Guns cost us
17. LTE: Constitution gives citizens the right to bear concealed guns
18. Anti-gun activists blast Virginia Legislature for "back-room dealing"
19. The sky will fall in Virginia!
20. Opinion: Guns, bars still a deadly combo
21. RT LTE: Don't punish those who abide by the laws
22. RT LTE: Poor idea to loosen gun restrictions
23. Sheriff says he'll undermine gun ban
24. Fearing Obama agenda, states push to loosen gun laws
25. LTE: VCDL member responds to NY Times article
26. Two shot, one arrested in school shooting near Columbine High
27. Another mass shooting, another national shrug in the NRA era
28. Video: I like guns
**************************************************
1. VCDL meeting in Lynchburg - April 6
**************************************************
VCDL will hold its first membership meeting in the Lynchburg area on
Tuesday, April 6!
The meeting will begin at 7 PM and is going to be held at:
Solid Rock Baptist Church
110 Church St
Madison Heights, VA
We will be discussing the legislative session and other things of
interest to Virginia gun owners.
VCDL will have a table there for those wishing to purchase some of
VCDL's "stuff"
As with all VCDL membership meetings, they are open to the public, so
bring your friends, family and coworkers!
Thanks to Pastor David Cash for letting us use the facility and to
Board member Al Steed, Jr. for coordinating.
I'll see you there!
**************************************************
2. VCDL President interviewed on Freedom & Prosperity radio
**************************************************
I was a guest on a segment of Freedom & Prosperity radio in early
February. The podcast and information about that show is below:
-
Tertium Quids' Freedom & Prosperity Radio Show:
More 2nd Amendment rights restored in Virginia?
Plus, a bill that could allow Virginia to tax "anything"
Could Virginia's General Assembly significantly restore our Second
Amendment freedoms and our right to self-protection, even when
Democrats control the Virginia Senate? Well, several Democrats sided
with Republicans to pass gun legislation that in previous years had
been blocked by the Senate. They also joined forces to defeat the
closing of the so-called "gun show loophole." Why? Is Virginia all of
a sudden turning Wild West on us?
Philip Van Cleave, president of the Virginia Citizens Defense League,
joins us to discuss the outlook for the Second Amendment in the
General Assembly.
Plus, we'll talk with our man in Richmond about a poorly written bill
that could allow the state government to tax "anything," another job-
killing tax the politicians refuse to get rid of, and the story of a
local government that wants to create a harassment law for citizens
who request "too much" information from their government!
Click here to listen to the podcast on our Web site or to download it
to your computer:
http://tinyurl.com/ykmpze9
**************************************************
3. Examiner.com - Radical anti-gun candidate flying under radar in
Virginia special election
**************************************************
http://tinyurl.com/yh747nz
http://www.examiner.com
By Mike Stollenwerk
February 26, 2010
SNIP
[Eileen] Filler-Corn . . . received endorsements from Jim
Brady,represented Handgun Control, Inc., and served as the vice-
president and legislativechairman of the Northern Virginia chapter of
the Million Mom March. . . .
Filler-Corn declared: "Every person is at risk from a citizen
carrying guns in malls, movie theaters, restaurants and on highways."
**************************************************
4. News from the Second Amendment March
**************************************************
http://tinyurl.com/yac8plx
Countdown to April 19, 2010
53 days until the march in D.C.!
Visit http://www.SecondAmendmentMarch.com for the latest updates!
SAM speakers announced!
Doc Thompson has already begun to build a following and says "I'm a
bit of an acquired taste but if you give it a few weeks you'll be
hooked because it is about YOU and it is all about fun!" He is very
happy to make Central Virginia home and hopes to be here for many years.
Being a Radio Broadcaster has taken Doc all over America. Most of his
career was spent in the Cleveland, Ohio area, which is where he was
raised. Throughout his 20 year career he has achieved an impressive
track record of successes including; winning 5 Marconi Awards (the
Academy Award of radio) for broadcast excellence. Doc has worked at
some of the most legendary radio stations in the country and even
hosted Clear Channel's syndicated Saturday show "The Weekend." He has
hosted shows from Capitol Hill and the White House.
The issues Doc is most passionate about on-air are immigration reform,
building a smaller government with American citizens having more
control, Tax reform, raising children properly and making fun of
ANYONE who screws up including himself.
Philip Van Cleave is the President of the Virginia Citizens Defense
League (VCDL), one of the largest statewide grassroots gun-rights
organizations in the US, with 5,000 dues paying members and 13,000
subscribers to VA-ALERT email alert system that the group runs.
VCDL has enjoyed considerable success in restoring the rights of gun
owners in Virginia, including spearheading such legislation as a
powerful firearms preemption bill that passed into law in 2004, wiping
out almost all local gun control. VCDL also organized a successful
national grassroots effort to change the National Park regulations to
allow for the lawful carry of firearms.
Philip has represented gun owners in the media with CBS's 60-Minutes
and ABC's Nightline, and countless times on local Virginia radio,
television and newspapers.
Philip has a Master's degree in Computer Science from Trinity
University in San Antonio, Texas and runs his own software company.
Philip also served for six years as a reserve Deputy Sheriff in Bexar
County, Texas.
SAM on YouTube
We are pleased to announce the official YouTube channel of the Second
Amendment March!
http://www.youtube.com/secondamendmentmarch
Be sure to subscribe so you don't miss any important videos!
Visit http://www.SecondAmendmentMarch.com for the latest updates!
**************************************************
5. Is open carry legal on the campus of GMU?
**************************************************
It is sad that future leaders and community figures are being taught
at a university to run and hide if they see someone with a gun.
Whenever a Fairfax County police officer that comes to the campus,
he'll be wondering why everyone around him is diving for cover. After
all, he is a person with a gun.
A VCDL member emailed me this:
--
http://tinyurl.com/ygk3tdr
I noticed the following poster on GMU's website.
http://ehs.gmu.edu/docs/EmergencyActionFlyer.pdf
I was disturbed when I read the following:
- If a person enters a building with a weapon immediately evacuate the
building.
- If a person is seen with a weapon outdoors, immediately seek shelter
in the nearest building.
- Contact University Police and provide as much information as
possible about the situation.
- Warn other people in the area, provide assistance as needed, and
remain calm.
- Locate a secure area or building and follow shelter in place
procedures (above).
- Follow instructions provided by emergency response personnel.
[PVC: And if that responding person has a gun, go back to the first
step above!
]Perhaps someone should remind the university that open carry on GMU's
campus is legal. Advising students to run inside and call 911 because
someone is carrying a firearm not only causes unwarranted alarm, but
also wastes resources that should be reserved for actual emergencies.
While I'm at it, I might as well mention this as well:
http://tinyurl.com/yj2tsq4
Note the recommended actions in response to a violent threat. I think
they forgot to add "blow whistle, induce vomiting" like Chicago has
recommended.
**************************************************
6. Examiner.com: New Orleans case should send chilling message to
those who think 'only cops should have guns'
**************************************************
http://tinyurl.com/yd4rdtm
http://www.examinier.com
By Dave Workman
February 25, 2010
SNIP
It became a national disgrace that prompted a landmark federal
lawsuit, and led to the passage of legislation in several states to
make sure nothing like this ever happened again on American soil: the
unilateral disarmament of law-abiding citizens in the wake of a
disaster.
And now the story has taken an even darker turn than it did in the
months following Hurricane Katrina's devastation of New Orleans, when
police and National Guard units illegally and unconstitutionally
seized, often at gunpoint, firearms held by private citizens who had
done nothing wrong. No police or public official has ever been held
accountable for that outrage, and that possibility will likely take a
distant back seat to holding several police officers responsible for
gunning down unarmed citizens on the Danziger Bridge on Sept. 4, 2005.
**************************************************
7. Why we shouldn't fear an end to the ban on guns in National Parks
**************************************************
http://tinyurl.com/ygeadt2
http://www.foxnews.com
By John Lott
February 22, 2010
This isn't the first time people have been able to carry guns in
national parks. They were allowed to do so for over two months last
year, from January through March, and absolutely no problems were
reported.
A two-decade-old ban on loaded guns in national parks ends today.
Loaded guns will be allowed in Yellowstone, the Grand Canyon, Great
Smoky Mountains, and other national parks. Guns will still be
prohibited in some areas in the parks, federal facilities that are
regularly staffed by National Park Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service employees, but everywhere else they will be allowed.
"You're raising the level of risk in the parks, and the chance that
people will use the parks less than they have in the past," Paul
Helmke, President of the Brady Campaign gun control group warned
during February 2009. As evidence for his claim, Helmke pointed to a
New York school teacher who said that she would cancel school trips to
national parks if guns were allowed. Helmke and others opponents have
largely focused on permitted concealed handguns again being allowed in
the parks.
Yet, despite the opposition of the Obama administration, the new
federal law is hardly radical, as it simply defers to state law. It
passed the Congress with about 2-to-1 majorities in both the House and
Senate. If a state allows people to carry permitted concealed
handguns, permit holders can carry their guns in the national parks in
that state.
Opponents worry about the possibility that permit holders will
accidentally shoot others or use their guns to commit crimes such as
poaching. But this isn't the first time people have been able to carry
guns in national parks. They were allowed to do so for over two months
last year, from January through March, and absolutely no problems were
reported. Nor are the proponents of the ban pointing to any problems
when guns were previously allowed in national parks during the 1980s
and earlier.
When concealed-handgun laws were originally passed, gun control
advocates then also warned that permit holders would lose their
tempers and there would be blood in the streets.
Obviously that never happened. We now have a lot of experience with
concealed-handgun permit holders. In 2007, about 5 million Americans
were permitted to carry concealed handguns.
Take Florida, for example. Between Oct. 1, 1987, and January 31, 2010,
Florida issued permits to 1,704,624 people, many of whom renewed their
permits multiple times. Only 167 had their permits revoked for a
firearms-related violation - about 0.01 percent. Over the last 14
months just one more permit has been revoked for firearms violations,
a rate among active permit holders of 0.00014 percent. The pattern is
similar in other states.
Given the very low rate that permit holders commit any type of crime,
it seems very doubtful that permit holders would engage in other
crimes such as poaching.
Even though the adoption of right-to-carry laws was highly
controversial in some states, the laws were so successful that no
state has ever rescinded one. Indeed, no state has even held a
legislative hearing to consider rescinding concealed-carry.
Everyone wants to keep guns away from criminals. The problem is that
law-abiding citizens are the ones most likely to obey the gun control
laws, leaving them disarmed and vulnerable and making it easier for
criminals to commit crime.
Police are extremely important in deterring crime - according to my
research, the most important factor. But the police almost always
arrive after the crime has been committed. In national parks, with
vast land areas and few roads, this problem is exacerbated. Even if
one can quickly reach park rangers by using a cell phone, it can be
hours before they can arrive at the crime scene.
Wild animals also sometimes do attack humans, and guns can come in
handy. According to a study by Professor Gary Mauser at Simon Fraser
University, guns were used about 36,000 times a year to stop animal
attacks in Canada.
Here is a prediction. Just like the ruckus over passing concealed
handgun laws, the fears about guns in national parks will soon be
forgotten.
**************************************************
8. Wolf Trap National Park plans to ban carry of firearms within a
"lawn area"
**************************************************
VCDL member Bill Heath emailed me this:
--
Philip,
Here is the article I referenced below:
http://tinyurl.com/ybg4grq
Here is the email I sent to the National Park Service:
-
Good morning,
I read the following in the Washington Post this morning:
In the Washington area, gun owners will be able to carry a firearm
into the Wolf Trap National Park for the Performing Arts, but not
beyond the ticketed entrances to the Filene Center, the park's
amphitheater.
"Whether you sit on the lawn or under the canopy, firearms are
prohibited," said Park Service regional spokesman Bill Line. Private
restaurants on the grounds will also ban weapons, Line said.
I am wondering what authority the park will be using to ban the legal
carry of firearms within the lawn area of the Filene Center. My
understanding is that firearms can only be banned within a federal
building. Having been to the Filene Center, I am well aware that the
lawn area is not a building.
Could you please explain how firearms can be legally banned within the
lawn area given the recent change in Federal law?
I will forward you their response if/when I get it.
Thank you,
Bill Heath
VCDL Member
**************************************************
9. Discussion on major travel website about guns in national parks
**************************************************
A VA-ALERT reader emailed me this. Clearly not written by someone who
understands self-defense or the fact that we carry guns because
criminals can strike at any time and any where. He says that gun
owners can already carry in plenty of places, so why do we need to
carry in National Parks?:
--
http://tinyurl.com/yzwgl5g
http://www.consumertraveler.com
By Chris Faust
February 22, 2010
Today, a change in the federal law allows people to carry handguns,
rifles and other firearms into national parks such as Yellowstone,
Yosemite and the Grand Canyon - provided that state's law OKs it.
If this sounds like a radical change, that's because it is. Visitors
have been prohibited from carrying firearms into national parks,
except a few in Alaska and a handful that allow hunting. The release
from the National Park Service doesn't exactly sound like a ringing
endorsement of the change, which was passed by Congress last year.
"For nearly 100 years, the mission of the National Park Service has
been to protect and preserve the parks and to help all visitors enjoy
them," National Park Service Director Jon Jarvis said in a press
release. "We will administer this law as we do all others - fairly and
consistently." Park websites are being updated with links to state
firearms laws so people can plan accordingly, the release also said.
A Los Angeles Times article today notes that "weapons won't be allowed
in buildings where federal employees work, such as the Statue of
Liberty and park visitors centers. But restaurants, hotels and gift
shops will be subject to the new gun law. Yosemite's historic Ahwahnee
hotel, for example, must allow visitors who are legally entitled to
carry weapons to bring them into the building."
The article goes on to note that the law is going to create all kinds
of regulatory problems, particularly as many national parks (and
national wildlife refuges - you can now bring guns there too) span
state lines. For example, the Appalachian Trail goes through 14 states
- all with different gun laws. For the record, it's still illegal to
shoot a gun in a national park (which then begs the question of why
you'd want to bring one with you in the first place).
So how did this legislation get passed - especially in a year when a
bad economy, plus Ken Burns' lyrical miniseries on National Parks,
sparked record attendance at some national parks, particularly among
cost-conscious families? A May 2009 Washington Post blog post from Ed
O'Keefe reveals that the provisions were slipped into the credit card
holder bill of rights, as a sop to Oklahoma Republication Senator Tom
Coburn. Apparently Coburn has long argued that the national park ban
made it hard for gun owners to travel between state and federal lands.
President Obama signed the bill.
As you might imagine, Second Amendment types are enthused about the
changes. The LA Times story says that gun rights advocates were
planning to hold armed cookouts in Gettysburg, Valley Forge and other
parks today. "Now it's a big sea of gun freedom," says Mike
Stollenwerk, co-founder of OpenCarry.org, which advocates legally
carrying holstered handguns in public, in the article.
Great, armed cookouts. That's exactly what I'd want my family exposed
to, the next time I visit a historic site. I'm of the opinion that
national parks are supposed to be safe havens, where you don't have to
worry about people carrying weapons. Rangers don't carry guns, after
all. I'm afraid that this change in the law exposes them to risk,
should they encounter some belligerent yahoo who has had too much to
drink at a campsite. Not to mention the dangers posed to wildlife from
possible poachers.
It seems to me that state laws allowed gun owners plenty of places to
bring their firearms. Many federal lands allow hunting, after all. Why
we have to open up our national parks - protected lands meant to
inspire us with their natural beauty and serenity - to people toting
guns is beyond me. I don't want to look over at the person next to me
on the rim of the Grand Canyon and see a gun in a holster. It changes
the experience in a negative way for the majority of the visitors.
At least that's my view. What do you think? Does this change in the
law bother you? Or are you fine with it?
**************************************************
10. National Park gun law still a yawner
**************************************************
http://tinyurl.com/y9rdxqy
http://www.newwest.net
By Bill Schneider
February 25, 2010
Now that the national park gun law is in effect, I predict, once more,
that park visitors won't really notice the difference, but the onus is
now on gun owners to make sure I'm correct.
As widely reported, an epic political victory for the gun lobby hit
the ground on Monday, February 22. The National Park Service (NPS) and
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) must now, in accordance with
applicable state laws, allow visitors to carry guns into most national
parks and wildlife refuges, including loaded firearms and concealed
weapons with a proper permit.
For the first time in decades, anybody who can legally carry a firearm
in a state can also carry it into national parks and wildlife refuges
in that state, but not into most "federal facilities" such as visitor
centers and administrative buildings, and federal law still prohibits
the use of firearms in most national parks.
I've written about this issue several times, and every time I do, I'm
reminded of a fantastic, nine-day backpacking trip in the mid-1990s to
Alaska's Gates of the Arctic National Park. While planning the trip, I
called NPS offices in Alaska to ask a few questions, and to my
surprise, the NPS recommended our group bring a gun. They even gave us
detailed advice, preferring a short-barreled 12 gauge pump loaded with
a rifled slug for the first shot followed by double-ought buckshot in
the rest of the magazine. The NPS even told us how to carry it--with
the safety off, but no shell in the chamber, so we could quickly pump
the first shell in for a fast shot, if a bear suddenly charged.
We took bear pepper spray instead and had a safe trip, but that
conversation stuck with me because, clearly, bringing guns into
national parks (at least in Alaska) was--and is--a culturally
acceptable no-big-deal. It can be in the Lower 48, too.
A Battle Worth Fighting
In an earlier commentary, I said the national park gun rule/law was a
waste of time and conservation groups and park retiree and ranger
nonprofits had bigger fish to fry. My reasoning was--and is--that
people have been taking guns into national parks for decades and will
continue to do so whether or not it's legal. Nobody really disputes
this fact, but the point is, though those decades, there has been
minuscule, if any, gun-related incidents in national parks.
Yes, I realize I'm not in Alaska any more, and western national parks
are a lot different than small, historical national parks back East.
Keep in mind, though, that state firearms laws continue to regulate
firearms in national parks where they exist. Guns laws in urban
America are likely to be more restrictive than in southern and western
states, and those laws will apply to national parks in highly
populated states.
I had to retract my waste-of-time commentary when it became clear that
the Battle of the National Parks was worth fighting. It turned into a
political war that told us who was Boss. The clear winner was the gun
lobby and the millions of gun owners it represents. It was sort of a
no contest, actually.
But my opinion about the real, on-the-ground, non-political
significance of the new law governing firearms in national parks
hasn't changed. To me, it's still a yawner. People will continue to go
to national parks doing the same things they always have, and the fact
that a few more people might be packing will have little impact on
anything.
Interestingly, I received several press releases from groups opposed
to the national park gun law with the same tired predictions of
impending disaster, but nothing from groups favoring the new law. The
firearms lobby could've been out in force flaunting and flag-waving on
February 22, but instead, pro-gun groups appropriately chose to let it
quietly happen.
Now, the onus is on gun owners to make sure the new law does indeed
turn out to a yawner--and keep me from having to eat my words. Be
discreet and respectful with open carries and honor the "Firearms
Prohibited" signs going up on visitor centers, park offices and other
federal facilities in national parks and refuges.
Also, know the applicable state laws, keeping in mind that thirty
national parks, such as Yellowstone, are located in more than one
state. Gun owners must be aware of the laws of the state they're in
because those are the same laws of the park or refuge they're in. In
Yellowstone, for example, the laws at the north entrance station in
Gardiner are different than the laws of Mammoth, five miles up the road.
Grizzlies and Guns
Fortunately, we still have grizzly bears, but unfortunately, it's the
reason many people take firearms into western national parks. Gun
owners must resist trigger itch when seeing a bear. A few untimely and
unnecessary dead bears from quick triggers could make the new law a
lot more controversial than gun owners want it to be.
We don't need any more documentation that bear pepper spray works
better than firearms during encounters with bears. Yes, all bears are
dangerous wild animals, but the threat of injury is minute at best.
Even though black bears pose as much--if not more--of a threat,
grizzlies grab the most attention. Montana's Glacier National Park,
for example, has one of the highest densities of grizzly bears ever
recorded. Over the past five years (2005-2009), almost ten million
people visited Glacier, but only three were injured by grizzly bears,
perhaps because none of the three used bear spray.
FWS statistics tell the same story. Since 1992, 50 percent of people
involved in grizzly encounters and defending themselves with firearms
suffered injury. Those defending themselves with bear pepper spray
escaped injury most of the time and those who were injured experienced
shorter attacks and less severe injuries. Pepper spray is a lot easier
on the bear, too.
We don't want even one trigger-happy tourist blasting away at a bear
walking by a campground in Yellowstone or feeding on Glacier lily
corns up on Going-to-the-Sun Highway and posing no threat to park
visitors. The media would go nuclear on any such incident, which would
not only result in a dead bear and a highly publicized citation, but
also validate claims currently being made by anti-gun groups. Any
inappropriate or dangerous firearms use in national parks could be a
game changer and a big shift in the currently high level of political
momentum the gun lobby enjoys.
So, gun owners, come through for me and millions of gun owners like me
who want this new law to turn out to be a big yawner. [PVC: We will.]
**************************************************
11. Who needs a gun while hiking in Hawaii?
**************************************************
Doug Welty emailed me this.
--
Who needs a gun..
...when you're on vacation in Hawaii, hiking in a state park?
http://tinyurl.com/ybq2ufo
http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com
By Jim Dooley
February 26, 2010
The man who savagely attacked two hikers on Koko Crater last year was
acquitted of attempted murder yesterday by reason of insanity and will
be locked up, perhaps for the rest of his life, at the Hawai'i State
Hospital.
The prosecution and defense agreed to that outcome of the case after
mental health experts who examined Benjamin Davis, 20, concluded that
he is a schizophrenic who lacked the ability to understand or control
his actions when he attacked hikers Nicholas Iwamoto and Guy Tanaka
Feb. 1, 2007.
The brief trial, which lasted slightly more than an hour before
Circuit Judge Michael Town, was taken up mostly by testimony from one
of Davis' victims, Iwamoto, 24.
Iwamoto was stabbed 18 times by Davis and then pushed off the rim of
the crater, falling 30 feet and then rolling another 70 feet to the
base of a ravine.
He was hospitalized for more than a month.
His injuries included a broken neck, fractured skull, broken ankle,
lacerated liver and diaphragm, collapsed lung and stab wounds to his
chest, abdomen, jugular vein and temporal artery.
Iwamoto said he has undergone eight surgeries and is in constant pain.
"I know it's a miracle that I'm still here," he told Davis in court.
Tanaka, a visitor from California, was stabbed in the back.
Police have said the attack was unprovoked, and Davis' friends said
they were mystified by his alleged actions.
Police found Davis naked in a tree after they had been searching the
area for several hours.
Tanaka had testified that he was at the top of the scenic trail
talking to his wife on a cell phone when Davis approached him from
behind and said, "You need to end the phone call right now."
Tanaka said he ran when he saw a knife in Davis' hand. He said he
jumped down to the trail, then felt an impact on his back.
Tanaka said he didn't realize he had been stabbed until he encountered
two hikers coming up the trail and warned them about a man with a knife.
**************************************************
12. Is Obama pro gun?
**************************************************
http://tinyurl.com/yln3dow
http://www.theatlanticwire.com
By Alex Eichler
February 19, 2010
Stumping in Virginia in September 2008, Barack Obama reassured a
crowd, "I believe in people's lawful right to bear arms. I will not
take your shotgun away. I will not take your rifle away. I won't take
your handgun away." More than year into his presidency, Obama has
proved as good as his word. The administration has had little to say
about personal firearms, except that they should be permitted in
national parks and on Amtrak trains. Obama's near-silence on gun
control has prompted a few analysts to try and triangulate his
position on the issue. With three years left in Obama's term, what can
gun owners expect?
* No Fear, predicts Chicago Tribune columnist and gun-rights advocate
Steve Chapman; Obama is too politically shrewd to risk losing
independent voters in a Second Amendment battle. "On this issue, he
took such a strong, clear position during the campaign that he has no
room to maneuver. That was not accidental. It was deliberate - the
equivalent of burning his ships to eliminate the option of retreat."
* He Just Hasn't Gotten Around To It Yet, thinks Warner Todd Huston at
Big Government. Huston scoffs at Chapman's naivete and points out that
Obama's had a busy year. Once his schedule clears up, and once he has
a bit more political capital to burn, there's no reason to think he
won't make gun control a priority. Huston writes, "Just because Obama
hasn't had the time to go after our gun rights doesn't really mean he
isn't inclined to do so."
* Perception Is Everything Politico's Ben Smith points out that
regardless of Obama's actual record, voters everywhere have the idea
that he wants to limit individual freedoms, among them firearm
ownership. Smith notes that "no matter how little Obama and Democrats
do on gun control -- and they couldn't do less -- there's still a
widespread view that he's doing a lot."
* The Biggest Friend to the Gun Industry True/Slant's F. Paul Wilson
bemusedly notes that in the first year of Obama's presidency,
"Americans bought a record 14 million+ guns. That's more than 21 of
the world's standing armies - combined." Based on this data, Wilson
half-jokingly nominates Obama for "NRA's Man of the Year."
**************************************************
13. Sugerman at it again: Killings by concealed handgun licensees
**************************************************
Carla & Dave Hicks emailed me this. With 6 MILLION CHP holders, even
IF the number of 139 is true (which I strongly doubt), you have a much
better chance of getting hit by lightening then being killed by a CHP
holder:
--
Same old pap.
http://tinyurl.com/y9jjfa4
http://www.huffingtonpost.com
By Josh Sugarmann
February 22, 2010
Killings by Concealed Handgun Licensees Hit 139 Since May 2007
The number of killings by concealed handgun permit holders since since
May 2007 has hit 139, according to the February update to the Violence
Policy Center's Concealed Carry Killers web site. Included in the
killings are nine dead law enforcement officers, 13 mass shootings,
and 11 murder-suicides.
Because the gun lobby has made it virtually impossible to discover the
details of crimes committed by specific license holders, the VPC is
forced to rely primarily on news reports. So the actual numbers of
homicides committed by concealed handgun permit holders is most likely
far higher. And, of course, no matter how high the number or how
grotesque the acts of violence committed by permit holders,
'ambassadors' from the concealed carry movement always have a ready
rationale to excuse virtually any act of violence.
According to an ad for the United States Concealed Carry Association
that appeared on the back cover of the National Rifle Association's
America's 1st Freedom magazine--
Carrying A Concealed Weapon Is the 2nd Amendment IN ACTION . Saying
you support the 2nd Amendment and actually supporting the 2nd
Amendment are Not the same thing. Anyone can donate money to an
association to do the talking for them. It takes a very patriotic
citizen though to not only do the talking for themselves, but do what
really matters... and that's take action. Concealed weapon carriers
know that the best way to support the 2nd Amendment is to never leave
their gun at home.
Except, of course, when that "very patriotic citizen" and CCW
instructor uses a gun to murder another "very patriotic citizen" --
his wife and fellow CCW instructor -- in cold blood and then opens
fire on police, as detailed in this new Texas homicide contained in
the February Concealed Carry Killers update.
On May 13, 2009, concealed handgun permit holder Ronnie Cook exchanged
gunfire with police in an hours-long standoff during which Cook wore a
bulletproof vest. The standoff began after Cook phoned a woman and
told her that he had killed his wife. The woman then called police.
When officers eventually entered Cook's home, they found his wife
Darlene dead in the bathroom with a single gunshot wound to the head.
Police also found at least five guns and significant amounts of
ammunition. According to the assistant district attorney for Anderson
County, authorities believed Cook shot his wife as she sat on the
toilet. He called the shooting a "cold-blooded and calculated murder."
In January 2010, Cook pleaded guilty to one count of murder and four
counts of attempted murder against the responding officers. Cook had
been a police officer in the 1970s and was an instructor for Cook's
Concealed Carry as was his deceased wife. The Cooks had taught
concealed handgun permit classes on their property using a mobile home
converted into an indoor firing range. Cook was still listed on the
Texas Concealed Handgun Association's directory of instructors after
he was sentenced to life imprisonment.
Did any of the Cooks' students have second thoughts after reading of
the murder of Cook's wife, his shootout with police, and his eventual
conviction? Probably not. It is, after all, "The 2nd Amendment In
Action." And who would dare argue with that?
**************************************************
14. 2010 Virginia PTA legislation priorities?
**************************************************
David Briggman emailed me this:
--
Good morning, Philip.
I was shocked to have received a document from the Rockingham County
School Board last night, within a packet of documents, which contained
the legislative priorities of the Virginia PTA.
Listed as priority #5 is the closing of the imaginary gunshow
loophole, which has no reference to anything having to do with the
schools...they also appear to be against vouchers, but that's a whole
other subject.
Thought you'd like to know...I'm waiting for a reply from my child's
PTA on where they stand.
Dave Briggman
**************************************************
15. Serial home invasion?
**************************************************
Carla & Dave Hicks emailed me this:
--
http://tinyurl.com/ydxxlrf
http://www.roanoke.com
By Amanda Codispoti
February 24, 2010
Four masked men bound and beat two men inside a Roanoke County house
in the second home invasion robbery in the area in four days, police
said.
The victims of the Sunday night crime, Larry Dunbar, 34, and Andrew
Mullen, 18, were treated at a hospital for injuries that police
described as not life threatening. Carilion Roanoke Memorial Hospital
treated Mullen and released him, said spokeswoman Allie Buth, who
didn't have information on Dunbar's treatment.
One of the robbers fired at least two pistol shots in the holdup
inside Dunbar's house in the 3300 block of Rutrough Road in the Mount
Pleasant section. No one was hit.
Vinton police reported several men burst into a house on Bush Farm
Drive on Feb. 17, then tied up and beat the occupants. Detectives are
investigating whether the crimes are linked, said Roanoke County Lt.
Chuck Mason. The victims of Sunday's crime were targeted by the
assailants, not chosen at random, said Mason. He wouldn't elaborate.
Victims of the Vinton home invasion also were targeted by their
attackers, police said.
Dunbar and Mullen told police the assailants burst into the house
about 11:45 p.m. Sunday. The intruders beat the men with weapons and
demanded cash, Mason said. The robbers tied up Dunbar and Mullen,
fired the shots and left with an undisclosed amount of cash, Mason
said. He said the robbers may have fled in a dark-colored SUV.
Dunbar and Mullen freed themselves and called for help from a
neighbor's house.
Anyone with information about the Roanoke County robbery is asked to
call police at 777-8641.
**************************************************
16. LTE: Guns cost us
**************************************************
If logic won't work to push gun control, try saying that guns being
misused by criminals is expensive. Of course that doesn't work
either, but nice try:
http://tinyurl.com/yg3e5as
articles.dailypress.com
February 24, 2010
The "Guns save lives" bumper stickers are grossly, factually wrong.
All studies by independent researchers published in the most rigorous
scientific journals show the opposite. Guns kept in the home are 12
times more likely to injure or kill a family member than be used in
self defense. A study in Washington state over seven years showed nine
self-defense uses, 12 accidental deaths, 41 criminal homicides and,
most shocking, 333 suicides. According to the Justice Department, far
more guns are stolen in burglaries than are used to defend property or
people.
Recently, Rao Ivatury, a physician and head of the trauma unit at
Virginia Commonwealth University Medical Center, reported that each
year more than 500 people with gunshot wounds are treated at his
trauma center. He noted that medical care for a gunshot victim costs
at least hundreds of thousands of dollars and some cost millions. At
just one hospital in our state, the cost is around $500 million a year
to treat gunshot victims. There is a great burden on society and the
families of gun violence.
When my son was a senior at Virginia Commonwealth University, he was
shot in the head while walking with friends near campus on July 4,
2006. Police say it was likely a stray bullet from a July 4
celebration. His medical care to date has been in the millions of
dollars, and he has been left severely disabled. Of the gunshot
victims I met while my son was in the hospital, alcohol was involved
in all of the shootings. [PVC: I'm sorry to hear about her son.
Sounds like she really should be pushing for a ban on alcohol, though.]
Sensible controls, like prohibitions on guns in bars and restaurants
that serve alcohol, will save lives. A tax on guns or bullets could
help offset the staggering cost to society of treating victims of gun
violence.
Kim Lambelet
Hayes
**************************************************
17. LTE: Constitution gives citizens the right to bear concealed guns
**************************************************
http://tinyurl.com/yfco5k8
http://www.newsleader.com
February 20, 2010
This is in response to Ms. Harrison's letter concerning the law that
will allow concealed handguns in restaurants. She stated "Why not let
people wear a holster with an exposed six-shooter like in the Long
Branch saloon on Gunsmoke." She may be surprised to know that Virginia
is an open-carry state. That means that you may carry a non-concealed
handgun just about anywhere in the state. The law that she is
referring to would only allow concealed handgun permit holders to
carry their concealed handguns into restaurants, along with anyone who
may want to carry a non-concealed handgun.
The last I checked, there is a little thing in the Constitution about
the right to bear arms. Tougher gun control laws only make it harder
for the "Good Guys" to acquire weapons. The "Bad Guys" will always get
their guns, one way or another.
JOHN OLIVER
Fishersville
**************************************************
18. Anti-gun activists blast Virginia Legislature for "back-room
dealing"
**************************************************
http://tinyurl.com/yfnee4e
http://www.personalliberty.com
February 19, 2010
A coalition of gun violence prevention groups in Virginia has
criticized the House Militia, Police and Public Safety Committee of
the Virginia General Assembly for holding a surprise subcommittee
meeting to pass HB 49, a bill that would repeal Virginia's one-handgun-
per-month law.
The bill was pre-filed in early January by Republican State Delegate
Scott Lingamfelter, who is a retired U.S. Army colonel and sits on the
Militia, Police, and Public Safety Committee. HB 49 would repeal the
state's law that limits Virginia residents to one handgun purchase
every 30 days.
According to the Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence, the
subcommittee had originally announced that it would conduct no further
meetings, leaving HB 49 unreported. However, on Feb. 10, it reconvened
late in the day giving only a few hours' notice to the public to
approve the piece of legislation.
"This is back-room politics at its very worst," said Andy Goddard,
president of the Richmond Chapter of the Million Mom March, adding
that the current law was designed to curb illegal gun trafficking in
the Commonwealth.
"Attempting to repeal this law under the cover of a blizzard, in a
surprise meeting, is reprehensible," he added.
Vagunforum.net says that only three other states ration handgun
purchases-California, Maryland and New Jersey.
**************************************************
19. The sky will fall in Virginia!
**************************************************
That might be just a little exaggerated, but you wouldn't know it
listening to the mainstream media report on the proposed repeal of the
restaurant carry ban.
http://tinyurl.com/y8h2te6
http://www.wtkr.com
Senate bill would allow concealed weapons in places alcohol is served
Virginia lawmakers are expected to pass a bill that would allow anyone
with a concealed-carry permit to bring their guns to restaurants that
serve alcohol.
Restaurant patrons may soon be allowed to bring concealed weapons
along when they go out to eat.
Restaurant managers do not like it because they don't expect most
customers to embrace the idea of bullets and booze. But the
combination is exactly what will be allowed in Virginia if Senate Bill
334 passes.
"I just don't think there's any reason for it to tell you the truth,"
said Manny Caralivanos, Kelly's Tavern.
"I think it could drop business down considerably because families
won't want to come out if they think there are people running around
with a gun on them."
Virginia law already allows for that - but guns have to be openly
carried. Senate Bill 334 would overturn a ban on concealed carry
enacted 15 years ago.
"We heard concerns about blood in the streets and all the other scare
tactics that are commonly used. But the firearms dealers of Virginia
certainly support this," said Robert Marcus, a Norfolk gun dealer.
Marcus says the bill is common sense second ammendment legislation,
all about self protection.
Virginia is one of only nine states that does not allow concealed-
carry at restaurants serving alcohol.
"I think people realize that ultimately they defend themselves. I'm
not hopeful for a restaurant manager to come forward and protect me
while I'm on his premises," Marcus added.
But then the question is: Protection from what?
NewsChannel 3 surveyed downtown Norfolk's bar and restaurant district,
and could not find anyone who would support the bill - especially not
on the premise of self defense from the dangers of eating out. [PVC:
They clearly didn't look very hard.]
"If you don't feel secure and safe in a restaurant then stay home and
cook. Don't know how to cook? Order out! It's that simple," said
Antoine Greene, Norfolk resident.
"It makes me nervous. I just don't think it's a good idea to have
alcohol involved with firearms, it's just a recipe for disaster," said
local resident ,Danielle Hall.
And there could be other issues for restaurants because the bill
allows only people who are not drinking to carry their concealed
weapons.
"We will have to check everyone who walks in the door before they walk
in. We need to see your permit and make sure you're not drinking,"
Caralivanos added.
"Are we going to pat everyone down at the front door before they walk
in? I don't think it's a good idea."
The bill has passed twice before, but was vetoed by former Governor
Kaine. [PVC: I'm so glad that Kaine has moved on to wreak havoc
elsewhere.]
Governor McDonnell is expected to sign off on the bill this time around.
**************************************************
20. Opinion: Guns, bars still a deadly combo
**************************************************
More of the same worn-out stereotypes from the anti's. Why don't we
hear of any "old west" shootouts from the forty-one states that allow
guns to be carried into restaurants?
http://tinyurl.com/yckqrxn
www2.neweraprogress.com
February 17, 2010
Virginia could be on the verge of celebrating the days of the old Wild
West. That's because a State Senate committee has approved legislation
that would allow bars to admit people carrying concealed weapons.
It's ridiculous.
Why? Because the mixture of alcohol with firearms is a deadly one.
Guns and alcohol, plainly and simply, don't mix.
The Senate Courts of Justice Committee last week narrowly approved the
bill on an 8-7 vote that would allow holders of concealed-weapons
permits into restaurants that serve alcohol.
But Sen. Emmett W. Hanger Jr., R-Augusta, injected maybe a jigger of
safety into the bill when he offered a measure that would make it a
misdemeanor offense to consume alcohol in a bar or restaurant while
carrying a concealed weapon.
That bill has come up before leading to the riddle about how can you
spot the guy at the bar carrying a concealed weapon.
He's the one drinking club soda.
Restaurant owners have lobbied against allowing concealed weapons in
their bars because they don't want to have to deal with the potential
for added danger in their establishments.
The owners said concealed weapons are allowed in the state's 11,000
restaurants that do not sell alcohol, and allowing them in those that
do could put bar owners in a predicament.
"It's going to be real hard for someone to determine whether that
person they are passing a beer or drink across the bar to if they have
a concealed weapon on them," said Robert McNulty, general manager of
Sine Irish Pub in Richmond.
Virginia law does allow restaurants to refuse to allow guns - whether
open or concealed - in their establishments.
"It's madness to allow guns in bars and it's very discouraging we
don't have the votes to stop it," said Sen. Janet Howell, D-Fairfax.
Similar legislation has passed the full General Assembly the past two
years. But it was sensibly vetoed by then-Gov. Timothy M. Kaine. Gov.
Bob McDonnell has indicated that he supports the legislation and would
sign it.
Kaine warned that allowing it to become law would put the public,
employees and public safety officers at risk.
The mixture of firearms and alcohol in the bars and on the streets and
sidewalks of Virginia makes no sense. As we have said here many times
before, it is nothing short of deadly.
Perhaps the new governor will see and understand that point of view.
If so, he could bring himself to veto the bill, which will surely land
on his desk this time around.
**************************************************
21. RT LTE: Don't punish those who abide by the laws
**************************************************
Carla & Dave Hicks emailed me this:
--
http://tinyurl.com/yj3zjpo
http://www.roanoke.com
February 25, 2010
Don't punish those who abide by the laws
I would be less worried about the person who has a concealed weapon
and is not drinking in a restaurant that serves alcohol than the
person who has been drinking and then leaves and gets behind the wheel
of a car.
I do not know what the statistics are, but I would bet a paycheck that
more people are killed or hurt by drunken drivers around the country
who have just left a bar than people in a bar with a concealed weapon.
Any takers?
Now I know there will be a few who will carry a concealed weapon in a
restaurant and have a drink, but I also know there will be a few who
have been drinking who will leave the restaurant, know that they have
had too much and still drive home.
What do we do? Shut down all the bars and restaurants that serve
alcohol? Punish the many for what the few do? I would hope not.
Let us continue to punish the few who choose to break the law and
leave the law-abiding people alone.
OPHUS A. HUTCHERSON III
GLADE HILL
**************************************************
22. RT LTE: Poor idea to loosen gun restrictions
**************************************************
Here's an anti in meltdown mode:
http://tinyurl.com/yenxf6z
http://www.roanoke.com
February 24, 2010
Poor idea to loosen gun restrictions
These insane gun laws on tap for the Virginia legislature complete
Gov. Bob McDonnell's pandering to the NRA during his campaign. Are all
these dudes striding into bars with concealed weapons going to order
sarsaparilla? I think not. Are bartenders going to frisk these cowboys
before they pour a beer or bourbon?
Anticipate the carnage when nowadays too many disputes are settled not
with fists but gunfire.
This is as crazy as allowing guns in cars and boats without a permit
and other proposed changes. The rest of us better buy armored vests
before we go out to our local bar, drive or visit the lake. A Second
Amendment without some logical restrictions is a recipe for disaster.
BETH COLLINS
ROANOKE
**************************************************
23. Sheriff says he'll undermine gun ban
**************************************************
Scott Cohen emailed me this. My kind of sheriff.
--
http://tinyurl.com/yj8ylbo
http://www.gazette.com
By Wayne Laugesen
February 23, 2010
The Colorado State University Board of Governors voted unanimously
Tuesday to place students at both of its campuses in harm's way with a
sweeping weapons ban law-abiding citizens will obey and criminals will
ignore.
Larimer County Sheriff James Alderden, outraged by the ban, told The
Gazette's opinion department he will undermine it in the interest of
student safety.
CSU-Fort Collins Police Chief Wendy Rich-Goldsmith, a relative
newcomer to the campus, supports the ban.
"I have told the CSU police chief I will not support this in any way,"
Sheriff Alderden told The Gazette. "If anyone with one of my permits
gets arrested for concealed carry at CSU, I will refuse to book that
person into my jail. Furthermore, I will show up at court and testify
on that person's behalf, and I will do whatever I can to discourage a
conviction. I will not be a party to this very poor decision."
Though each CSU campus has its own police department, Alderden issues
all cops on the Fort Collins campus a deputy sheriff's commission
card. He also runs the county's jail, which campus police use after
making arrests.
Alderden said ban advocates have been unable to cite a single study or
statistic to show that students will be safer as a result of a weapons
ban. He's convinced they will be much less safe as a result of the
ban, which will leave most students defenseless. The ban establishes
the campuses as "soft targets," meaning armed criminals will have a
reasonable expectation their intended victims aren't armed.
"There are volumes of statistical and anecdotal data that show
populations are safer when law-abiding citizens are permitted to carry
concealed weapons," Alderden said.
Six years after Alderden began issuing permits, he noticed the
homicide rate in his jurisdiction had dropped.
At CSU-Fort Collins, the ban includes pepper spray, in quantities
greater than an ounce, and Tasers.
"This ban, which is broad and encompassing, basically denies students
at the Fort Collins campus any defensive capacity at all," Alderden
said. "It's a weapons-free zone for law-abiding people, and it won't
do a single thing to keep armed criminals off of campus. It will only
ensure them a lot of defenseless victims. The people who did this are
lost in their own world of ideological liberalism. You would think
people involved in academia would want to deal in data and experience,
but this has been all about emotion."
Alderden said he realized the sentiment against self-defense is based
in emotion after speaking with a public school teacher who asked him
to stop issuing concealment permits. He showed her data that prove
concealed carry reduces crime. He told her concealed carry would help
reduce violent crime in Fort Collins and the rest of Larimer County -
a sentiment shared by El Paso County Sheriff Terry Maketa and a
growing number of ranking law enforcement officials regarding their
own jurisdictions.
"I made the whole case, based in provable facts. The teacher said, and
I quote, 'I don't care about the facts.' She only cared about her
emotional response," Alderden said.
The student Senate of the Fort Collins campus opposed the ban by a
23-1 vote. That means CSU governors, and administrators who pushed for
the ban, don't seem to care what their customers think. The Student
Senate at Pueblo approved the ban, only after administrators said
"weapons" did not include Tasers or pepper spray.
"God forbid we have something like the tragedy at Virginia Tech at one
of these campuses," Alderden said, referring to a notorious shooting
spree in which a lunatic wantonly killed for hours, while a gun ban
ensured him no students or faculty would shoot back.
Alderden questions the legality of the ban, saying the legislature
never discussed excluding college campuses when it passed a shall-
issue concealed-carry law in 2003. The law requires county sheriff's
to issue concealment permits to law-abiding residents without
felonies, misdemeanor domestic violence records, or other other
disqualifying conditions. Furthermore, he said students who ignore the
ban won't have legal problems if they don't get caught.
"If it's properly concealed, so that nobody sees the weapon, it
probably won't be a problem," Alderden said.
In the event a concealed weapon is needed for defense of self or
others, it would become evident to law enforcement. In that unlikely
event, Alderden said, safety trumps legal concerns.
"They say it's better to be judged by 12 than carried by six,"
Alderden said.
That's the advice of a lawman with a record of reducing crime. The ban
is the work of academic ideologues, who theorize about safety and
crime. Hope and pray the academicians don't find themselves begging
forgiveness someday, in the wake of a horrible crime.
**************************************************
24. Fearing Obama agenda, states push to loosen gun laws
**************************************************
I know they are up in New York, but couldn't they have done more
research. Groups like VCDL have been pushing hard to remove gun laws
long before Obama was even a blip on anybody's radar scope. Nothing
has changed for us - we keep moving forward as we always have:
http://tinyurl.com/yl6gaq5
http://www.nytimes.com
By Ian Urbina
February 23, 2010
When President Obama took office, gun rights advocates sounded the
alarm, warning that he intended to strip them of their arms and
ammunition.
And yet the opposite is happening. Mr. Obama has been largely silent
on the issue while states are engaged in a new and largely successful
push for expanded gun rights, even passing measures that have been
rejected in the past.
In Virginia, the General Assembly approved a bill last week that
allows people to carry concealed weapons in bars and restaurants that
serve alcohol, and the House of Delegates voted to repeal a 17-year-
old ban on buying more than one handgun a month. The actions came less
than three years after the shootings at Virginia Tech that claimed 33
lives and prompted a major national push for increased gun control.
[PVC: This been on our agenda every year since 1997.]
Arizona and Wyoming lawmakers are considering nearly a half dozen pro-
gun measures, including one that would allow residents to carry
concealed weapons without a permit. And lawmakers in Montana and
Tennessee passed measures last year - the first of their kind - to
exempt their states from federal regulation of firearms and ammunition
that are made, sold and used in state. Similar bills have been
proposed in at least three other states.
In the meantime, gun control advocates say, Mr. Obama has failed to
deliver on campaign promises to close a loophole that allows
unlicensed dealers at gun shows to sell firearms without background
checks; to revive the assault weapons ban; and to push states to
release data about guns used in crimes.
He also signed bills last year allowing guns to be carried in national
parks and in luggage on Amtrak trains.
"We expected a very different picture at this stage," said Paul
Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, a gun
control group that last month issued a report card failing the
administration in all seven of the group's major indicators.
Gun control advocates have had some successes recently, Mr. Helmke
said. Proposed bills to allow students to carry guns on college
campuses have been blocked in the 20 or so states where they have been
proposed since the Virginia Tech shootings. Last year, New Jersey
limited gun purchases to one a month, a law similar to the one
Virginia may revoke. [PVC: Nice job knocking liberty out of the
window, Mr.Helmke.]
But recent setbacks to gun control have been many.
Last month, the Indiana legislature passed bills that block private
employers from forbidding workers to keep firearms in their vehicles
on company property.
Gun rights supporters also showed their strength last year by blocking
legislation to give District of Columbia residents a full vote in
Congress by attaching an amendment to repeal Washington's ban on
handguns.
Asked by reporters about the Brady group's critical report on the
Obama administration, a White House spokesman, Ben LaBolt, pointed out
that the latest F.B.I. statistics showed that violent crime dropped in
the first half of 2009 to its lowest levels since the 1960s.
"The president supports and respects the Second Amendment," Mr. LaBolt
said, "and he believes we can take common-sense steps to keep our
streets safe and to stem the flow of illegal guns to criminals."
Still, gun rights groups remain skeptical of the administration.
"The watchword for gun owners is stay ready," said Wayne LaPierre,
chief executive of the National Rifle Association. "We have had some
successes, but we know that the first chance Obama gets, he will
pounce on us."
That Mr. Obama signed legislation allowing guns in national parks and
on Amtrak trains should not be seen as respect for the Second
Amendment, Mr. LaPierre said. The two measures had been attached as
amendments to larger pieces of legislation - a bill cracking down on
credit card companies and a transportation appropriations bill,
respectively - that the president wanted passed, Mr. LaPierre said.
Regardless of Mr. Obama's agenda, gun dealers seem to be reaping the
benefits of fears surrounding it.
Federal background checks for gun purchases rose to 14 million in
2009, up from 12.7 million in 2008 and 11.2 million in 2007. But from
November 2009 to January 2010, the number of background checks fell 12
percent, compared with the same months a year earlier.
In Virginia, the success of new pro-gun laws is partly a result of the
Republican Party's taking the governor's office after eight years of
Democratic control.
A major setback for state gun control advocates was this week's House
vote repealing the one-gun-per-month law, which was passed in 1993
under Gov. L. Douglas Wilder, a Democrat, and has long been upheld as
the state's signature gun control restriction.
Supporters of limiting gun purchases to one a month said the law was
important to avoid Virginia's becoming the East Coast's top gun-
running hub. Opponents dismissed the concern.
"We shouldn't get rid of our Second Amendment rights because some
people in New York City want to abuse theirs," Robert G. Marshall, a
Republican delegate from Manassas who supported repeal of the one-gun-
a-month limit, told reporters.
Gun control advocates hoped to win new restrictions after the Virginia
Tech massacre on April 16, 2007, in which a student, Seung-Hui Cho,
shot and killed 32 people before turning a gun on himself.
After the shooting, Gov. Tim Kaine, a Democrat, pushed for stronger
gun control measures. But last year the legislature rejected a bill
requiring background checks for private sales at gun shows and
repealed a law that Mr. Kaine had supported to prohibit anyone from
carrying concealed weapons into a club or restaurant where alcohol is
served.
In previous years, the guns-in-bars bill cleared both chambers but was
vetoed by Mr. Kaine. But the new governor, Robert F. McDonnell, has
said he supports the measure.
Virginia is also considering a measure adopted in Montana and
Tennessee that declares that firearms made and retained in-state are
beyond the authority of Congress. The measure is primarily a challenge
to Congress's power to regulate commerce among the states.
The Montana law is being challenged in federal court, and the United
States Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has sent a
letter to Tennessee and Montana gun dealers stating that federal law
supersedes the state measure.
**************************************************
25. LTE: VCDL member responds to NY Times article
**************************************************
Michael Dixon emailed me this:
--
This is in regard to an article that you published on page A1 of the
New York Times on February 24, 2010 entitled "Fearing Obama Agenda,
States Push to Loosen Gun Laws."
Link: http://tinyurl.com/yl6gaq5
Dear Editor:
This article is misleading in at least two ways, both of which the NYT
either knew when they published it, or should have known.
1) There are no bars in Virginia. Period. Not one. They are illegal.
There are restaurants that happen to sell alcohol, but there are no
bars.
2) The NYT skews this article strongly to make it seem as if Virginia
is changing the law to allow weapons into bars (that don't exist) and
restaurants that serve alcohol, for the very first time.
Wrong again!
Anyone who is legally permitted to own a firearm is legally permitted
to walk into any restaurant in Virginia that serves alcohol with a gun
on their person, as long as it is visible to others (what is called
"open carry"). They have had this right for years. I have not been
seeing the reports about the daily shoot-outs that some people seem to
fear.
Furthermore, people are currently allowed to drink alcohol while they
are openly carrying their firearm.
What this new law does -- the law that the NYT seems to think is so
terrible -- is allow people who have been granted by a Virginia court
a license to carry a concealed handgun -- after a background check
with the police and the FBI, and a training course on gun safety and
gun laws -- to keep their firearm with them when they go into a
restaurant, rather than leave it in their car -- if, and only if, they
do not consume any alcohol in the restaurant.
This bill is an important step forward for Virginia. It allows for the
protection against criminals (who will carry concealed weapons
wherever they want, whenever they want, regardless of the law) for all
patrons at a restaurant by concealed-carry permit holders, who
statistics show are one of the single most law-abiding groups of
people on the planet earth.
It also provides increased protection for concealed-carry
permitholders from a) having their firearms stolen from their vehicle
while they try to enjoy a meal, and b) being robbed and/or injured by
a criminal in the parking lot outside the restaurant (something more
likely now because a criminal currently knows that patrons leaving
restaurants that serve alcohol can not carry concealed).
I am proud to have lobbied both my elected representatives in the
Virginia legislature in favor of its passage, and I look forward to
the Governor signing it.
It's just too bad I can't look forward to the NYT reporting honestly
on such an important issue, knowing that they choose instead to
willfully stir up emotions with what they know to be misleading
reporting.
Michael Dixon
Alexandria, Virginia
**************************************************
26. Two shot, one arrested in school shooting near Columbine High
**************************************************
The bad guy, who was a felon and couldn't own any guns, was taken down
by an unarmed teacher. Hats off to that brave teacher, but the state
should never have disarmed him.
Carla & Dave Hicks emailed me this:
--
For me, this reinforces an important point: bad guys do not heed "no
guns/firearms" signs, rules, or laws.
http://tinyurl.com/ydlo4yd
http://www.fox40.com
By Matthew Keys
February 23, 2010
DENVER
Two children have been shot at a middle school in Littleton, Colorado
near the site of the infamous Columbine High School shooting.
According to an eyewitness speaking with FOX40 affiliate KDVR-TV in
Colorado, a man with blond hair wearing a black hat and jacket shot
two students outside Deer Creek Middle School.
One student was wounded in the chest, while another was wounded in the
arm. Medical officials say their injuries are non-life threatening.
The man was taken into custody by the Jefferson County Sheriff's
Department. His connection with the students and his identity are not
immediately known.
Deerk Creek Middle School is about three miles away from Columbine
High School, where the infamous Columbine High massacre took place
over a decade ago. Fifteen people died in the Columbine High shooting,
including twelve students, one teacher and the two perpetrators, who
were themselves fellow students.
**************************************************
27. Another mass shooting, another national shrug in the NRA era
**************************************************
Take out the emotion in the story below and there isn't much left:
http://tinyurl.com/yjwptrg
http://www.politicsdaily.com
By Bonnie Erbe
February 20, 2010
Yes, this was just another week in the gun culture wars. An Alabama
professor with a long history of public outbursts and involvement with
guns, a bomb -- even killing her brother with a shotgun many years ago
-- is charged in a mass shooting on campus. Three fellow academics
died and three others were wounded.
Half a nation away, the Virginia House of Delegates (my home state's
legislature, regrettably) weakens a lengthy list of gun control laws,
including the state's unconscionable, 17-year-long prohibition on the
freedom to purchase more than one handgun per month.
There was a time, not that long ago, when mass shootings provoked
massive reactions. Today they inform a couple of days of media
headlines and then evanesce into the atmosphere, as do so many
particles of yesterday's news. Is the era of gun law common sense
over? Do state legislators now eschew rational legislation -- like
bills to create jobs during a recession -- and replace it with
nonsense legislation allowing residents to buy multiple handguns per
month? Apparently we have slipped those surly bonds of practicality.
Let's examine why.
First, there's no longer a party of gun control. Democrats, in their
never-ending pursuit of the middle ground and fear of taking strong
stands, hardly ever raise it as part of their national agenda. A few
past Democratic presidential candidates have spent more time
slaughtering ducks to brandish high-testosterone, pro-firearms
reputations than they have comforting family members who've lost loved
ones to needless gun violence.
Republicans, on the other hand, sit in the lap of the the National
Rifle Association, having their heads stroked and feasting on doggy
biscuits (in the form of campaign contributions) every time they
obstruct any type of reasonable gun control bill, no matter how
trivial its impact might be.
The gun control war has ebbed and flowed over time, as have all
culture wars. There are times when gays are up and religious
fundamentalists are down or abortion-rights advocates behind and the
pro-life lobby ahead. This is an era in which the NRA's claimed 4
million members run the country's gun agenda and the other 304 million
of us just sit back and get shot at, literally and figuratively. (A
Pew Research survey last year did show a near-equal split on the
issue, with 49 percent of Americans saying it was more important to
control gun ownership than to protect the right to own firearms -- 45
percent said the opposite. A year earlier, the split was 58-37.)
How did we get here? Remember the assassination attempt on Ronald
Reagan and his press secretary, James Brady (who suffered debilitating
wounds) by John Hinckley Jr.? That produced the so-called Brady Law,
which nationalized background checks and a five-day waiting period for
handgun purchases. Then there was Columbine in 1999. The Senate took
steps to enact more stringent national gun control laws, but the House
put the kibosh on that. As NPR reported, "Then-Vice President Al Gore
cast a tie-breaking vote in the Senate to require background checks
for firearms purchases at gun shows and to include safety devices,
notably trigger locks, for new guns that are sold. The measure
[stalled] in the House after a series of compromises left people on
both sides of the issue disappointed."
In 2002 John Allen Muhammad, the so-called D.C. sniper, and his
accomplice killed 10 people, but no major push for gun control ensued.
The assault weapons ban, signed into law by then-President Clinton in
1994, expired in 2004 and has not been renewed.
In 2007 a mentally disturbed Virginia Tech student was able to
purchase two handguns. He later used them to open fire on campus,
killing 32 and wounding 24 others. Congress' response was to push
through a law, signed in 2008 by President Bush, aimed at preventing
the severely mentally ill from purchasing handguns. Woohoo -- what a
victory!
Republican Paul Helmke now runs the Brady Center to Prevent Gun
Violence. This former mayor of Indianapolis and onetime U.S. Senate
candidate is not as disheartened as I am by the gun lobby's seemingly
overwhelming power. He calls the NRA "a bit of a paper tiger" and
cites as proof a recent federal victory for his side. The gun control
lobby stopped North Dakota Republican Sen. John Thune from passing a
national concealed-carry initiative last year. This would have allowed
citizens of one state that permits the carrying of concealed weapons
to do the same in other states. Helmke says that was the first time
the NRA lost on a "scored" vote in five years. (In a scored vote, the
NRA lists and "scores" senators and House members for their positions
on gun related legislation.) Pardon my lack of enthusiasm, but this is
a push-back rather than a full-tilt-ahead in the progress department.
In October 2006, a milk truck driver rounded up kids in an Amish
schoolhouse and massacred five young girls for no discernible reason
other than that he could. It made me think about the NRA's emphasis on
constitutional freedoms. But how free are we, when peace-loving Amish
children and thousands of others are slaughtered? How free are we when
30,000 Americans die by gunfire each year?
Are we in an era of progress on gun control? Hardly. We've done
nothing but move backward since 1994. [PVC: YES!!!!!!!!!!!]
**************************************************
28. Video: I like guns
**************************************************
William Gimbel emailed me with a link to this Youtube video. I've also
included a link to Steve Lee's video "I Like Guns", which is the song
featured in the first video.
I Like Guns 2 - http://tinyurl.com/yzcwfdf
Steve Lee's video - http://tinyurl.com/yelb2yx
***************************************************************************
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/]