VA-ALERT: VCDL Update 4/21/10

Post by **OakRidgeStars** » Wed, 21 Apr 2010 10:27:56

----------------------------------------------------------------------
VCDL's meeting schedule: http://www.vcdl.org/meetings.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Abbreviations used in VA-ALERT: http://www.vcdl.org/help/abbr.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------

VCDL Update 4/21/10

1. Reminder: VCDL meeting in Fairfax on April 21
2. Trust but verify -- Herndon festival
3. Three congressmen urge checks at gun shows
4. DC Voting Rights Act is back, and so are the "antis"
5. AZ now has Alaska carry!
6. Cuccinelli, gun rights advocates rally in Richmond
7. Cuccinelli praises gun-rights activists
8. Videos from Richmond 2A march
9. Was gun rally important for Cuccinelli?
10. Three years after Virginia Tech shooting, college gun bans prevail
11. Brady Campaign: Sad Week Ahead for Those Supporting Sensible Gun Laws
12. Daily Press hit piece on background checks
13. LTE: Gun Group Misses The Obvious Point
14. Daily Show open carry spoof
15. Jim Crow: Guns, Too?
16. See Mayor Bloomberg....no gunshow loophole
17. NFS in NC = gun trap
18. Gov't report sees increase in campus violence
19. Two things my kids know about guns
20. Charlton Heston's "A Torch With No Flame"

**************************************************
1. Reminder: VCDL meeting in Fairfax on April 21
**************************************************

Bruce LaPorte, candidate for Fairfax County Supervisor, will be speaking at the next VCDL meeting at the Mason District Government Center in Fairfax on April 21 (today).

The meeting is open to the public, so bring friends, family and coworkers! The meeting starts at 8 PM. Fellowship begins at 7:30 PM.

Afterwards we will adjourn and head to a local restaurant for continued fellowship. Open carry at the restaurant will be required for those choosing to carry, as the restaurant serves alcohol. (Starting on July 1 it will be up to you as to how you wish to carry at the restaurant!)

Directions can be found on our meeting page:

http://www.vcdl.org/meetings.html

See you there!

**************************************************
2. Trust but verify -- Herndon festival
**************************************************

Geoff Bricker emailed me this:

--

Hi Mr. Van Cleave,

Last year I wrote to you about 9 Herndon cops surrounding me at the Herndon Festival for open-carrying my firearm. You stated that this year, you wish to "Trust but Verify" that the Chief of Police and Town Attorney would keep to their word about the wrong-doing of those officers. Here is the link regarding the festival:

http://tinyurl.com/yy9qwbf

It is scheduled for June 3-6th (1 Day after my 24th Birthday). I hope that VCDL can have a turn-out to show all of those in attendance that a right not exercised is a right soon lost.

**************************************************
3. Three congressmen urge checks at gun shows
**************************************************

Elections for the Congress are coming in November. Looks like 3 Democrats are itching to be voted out by supporting a federal "gun show loophole" bill. Mark Myers emailed me this:

--

http://tinyurl.com/y5hmxgz

http://www.wset.com

Three Congressmen Urge Checks at Gun Showsposted 04/16/10 10:35 am producer: Amy Foster

Richmod, VA - Three Virginia congressmen are asking their colleagues to support closing the so-called gun-show loophole.

Democrats Jim Moran, Bobby Scott and Gerald Connolly sent a letter to members of the House of Representatives Thursday asking them to support a bill to require private sellers to perform background checks on buyers at gun shows.

The letter went out a day before the third anniversary of the shootings at Virginia Tech, where a student gunman killed 32 others and himself. The congressmen also mentioned the shootings at Columbine High School that killed 12.

The families of victims in both tragedies have fought to require the checks. Colorado has changed its laws, but Virginia has not.

A bill was introduced in Congress last May, but has yet to be heard in committee.

**************************************************
4. DC Voting Rights Act is back, and so are the "antis"
**************************************************

If the DC Voting Rights bill is passed with the firearm amendment, DC will lose most of its gun control!

Some stories on this, sent to me by Deborah Jane Anderson:

_______________________________________________________
http://wamu.org/news/

Sen. Says He Will Block D.C. Vote Bill
April 15, 2010 - WASHINGTON (AP) Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch says he will block a bill to give D.C. a voting member of Congress if lawmakers don't alter a provision that would also grant his state an additional seat in the House.

The Republican senator doesn't like the way the House bill would elect the new Utah member. It would have all Utah citizens vote on the new member, the state's fourth. Hatch says only citizens of a newly created district should pick their representative. He said in a statement on his Web site that he would filibuster the bill in the Senate if it passes the House unchanged.

The bill adds a seat for the heavily Democratic district and one for Republican-leaning Utah, which was just shy of getting another seat during the last census.

_______________________________

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 03637.html

Deal on D.C. vote in House to be revived on Capitol Hill

By Ann E. Marimow
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, April 15, 2010

Congressional leaders intend to resurrect a D.C. voting rights bill as early as next week, despite opposition from many city leaders to an amendment that would eliminate most of the District's gun-control laws.
THIS STORY
*
Deal on D.C. vote in House to be revived
*
Q&A, Transcript: Post Politics Hour

The final details of the bill were being worked out Wednesday, but House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) said he expects the legislation to clear the House and to include some version of the pro-gun language that has bogged down the measure since last year.
Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D), the city's non-voting House member, and congressional leaders said they are negotiating to weaken the gun amendment language. But Norton said she is unwilling to sacrifice the opportunity to win a long-sought voting seat for the District by insisting on a stand-alone bill.
"This is the best chance we've had to get a House vote for D.C. in my lifetime," Norton said. "Nobody would leave it on the table because it's not at all clear when there will be another chance."

The time is right, Norton and other advocates said, because the bill's prospects could diminish if the Democratic majority narrows after this year's midterm elections and if the release of 2010 Census figures undercuts the legislative deal.

A year ago, the Senate passed a D.C. voting rights bill for the first time since 1978, but lawmakers attached language that would wipe out most local gun laws and restrict the D.C. Council's power to enact new ones. House leaders shelved the legislation when it became clear that it would be difficult to block the gun amendment.

Under the measure, the House would add two members: one to the overwhelmingly Democratic District and the other, temporarily, to Republican-leaning Utah. That seat would then go to the state next in line for a representative based on the 2010 Census.

Last year, many city leaders, including Norton, fiercely opposed loosening the District's gun laws. And on Wednesday, council member Mary M. Cheh (D-Ward 3) denounced the possibility of a trade-off. "It's wrong, it's undemocratic and it's insulting, and we should not kneel down on our basic principles just to get this bill through," she said. "It's way too bitter a pill that we should be forced to sacrifice our public safety."

A spokeswoman for council Chairman Vincent C. Gray (D), who is running for mayor, said he would not support the initiative if it removes the council's right to legislate firearms restrictions. "He believes the majority of our citizens would have our gun laws remain, not be weakened," spokeswoman Doxie McCoy said.
Mayor Adrian M. Fenty (D), however, said he told Norton Wednesday that he would help her move the bill, even if it includes what he considers objectionable gun language. "We've had great momentum on voting rights, and we need to move forward," Fenty said in an interview with NewsChannel 8.

A recent Washington Post poll finds broad support (83 percent) among District residents for legislation that would give the city a full voting member in the House. Support spans differences in race, sex, age and geography, dipping below 80 percent only among conservatives (71 percent) and those in the lowest income and education categories, according to the poll, conducted in January.

Nationally, almost six in 10 respondents said they favor D.C. voting rights legislation in a 2009 Post-ABC poll.

After the legislation stalled last year, Norton relaxed her position and tried to negotiate a compromise that would save sections of local gun laws. But she was unable to get city officials to sign off on a deal. She was criticized privately and publicly last summer for appearing to hold out for unanimity among District leaders.
But in an interview this week, Norton said it had become clear that she would not get a vote on a stand-alone voting rights bill. As important, she said, the strength of the National Rifle Association, particularly among conservative Democrats, made it increasingly likely that the pro-gun lobby would be able to repeal local gun laws with or without a voting rights bill.

Former representative Tom Davis, the Virginia Republican who originally drafted the D.C. vote bill, said the window for passage is closing because Republicans could make gains in the November elections and because the political compromise could deteriorate with the reapportionment of House seats based on the census.

"You're never going to get the perfect bill," Davis said. "This is a one-time opportunity that expires at the end of this Congress."

Ilir Zherka, executive director of nonprofit DC Vote, agreed with Davis. He said that anytime a District-related issue goes to the floor, there are attempts to weaken the city's powers of self-government known as home rule.
"The threat or reality of whatever amendments might be offered are not enough for us to back down," he said. "That can't be a reason for us not to move forward."

Joshua Horwitz, executive director of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, said that if the gun amendment affects new city restrictions passed in response to the landmark 2008 Supreme Court ruling on handgun possession, he expects council members to push back.
"The city deserves a representative in Congress absolutely," Horwitz said. "But they also deserve the right to pass their own laws regarding public safety."

If the measure is successful in the House this time, there are differences with the Senate version that must be reconciled.

The vote also could be complicated by a Justice Department report last year that concluded that the measure is unconstitutional. But Attorney General Eric H. Holder, who supports the effort, obtained a second opinion that the bill could be defended.
First lady Michelle Obama said President Obama backs the bill. In an interview with WRC-TV (Channel 4) news, she said the president "is a supporter of the rights of citizens here in D.C. to have the vote, and I don't think there's much convincing that you have to do there. We just have to get it done."

Polling analyst Jennifer Agiesta contributed to this report.
__________________________________
http://dcist.com/2010/04/voting_rights_ ... k_to_l.php

D.C. Voting Rights Bill Stirring Back to Life
Photo by Mark Poblete
The Washington Post is reporting the long-stalled bill that would finally grant the District a voting seat in the House of Representatives may be re-introduced as early as next week.

According to the Post, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer today indicated that details are still being ironed out, but the bill will likely have some version of the original gun amendment that stalled it last summer. The amendment, supported by various Republicans and conservative Democrats, would do away with the city's existing gun laws. (A similar amendment was added to a Senate version of the legislationpassed last year.)

D.C. Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, who has fiercely opposed any version of the gun amendment, seems to have changed her tune, telling a gathering of the Georgetown Democrats yesterday that while any such amendment is "odious," she's just trying to keep as many of the city's gun laws intact as she can. And to the Post, Norton said: "This is the best chance we've had to get a House vote for D.C. in my lifetime. Nobody would leave it on the table because it's not at all clear when there will be another chance."

Mayor Adrian Fenty has expressed support for moving the legislation forward with the amendment, but it remains to be seen what mayoral challenger and D.C. Council Chair Vincent Gray and other officials will have to say about this development. With the South Capitol Street quadruple homicide fresh in people's minds and a recent court ruling that the District's gun restrictions are constitutional, it's likely that some members of the council will continue to oppose any amendment that limits future action they can take against guns.

And if we may, allow us to apply the brakes here just a bit. Hoyer and (especially) Norton have routinely made excessively optimistic projections about the future of this bill over the last year, only to see nothing actually happen. Plus, the House Rules Committee still has no indication of a date for when the bill might be brought to the floor, according to a senior staffer we spoke to today.

The news does coincide nicely with D.C. Emancipation Day, which takes places this Friday. The D.C. government and a variety of local groups have organized a number of related events, including a rally and march at Franklin Square at 11 a.m. DC Vote, which has pushed for the voting rights bill over the last three years, is also hosting an Advocacy Day on Friday.
By Martin Austermuhle in News on April 14, 2010 5:40 PM

**************************************************
5. AZ now has Alaska carry!
**************************************************

Great news! Huge Kudos to the Arizona Citizens Defense League for getting "Constitutional Carry" passed (no permit required for either open or concealed carry). We need to start pushing that envelope here. Steven Newman emailed me this:

--

FYI -- There's still hope in America.

http://tinyurl.com/y7jxcz6

http://news.yahoo.com

Arizona to allow concealed weapons without permit

By PAUL DAVENPORT and JONATHAN J. COOPER, Associated Press Writers
Fri Apr 16, 7:39 pm ET

PHOENIX - Favoring the constitutional right to bear arms over others' concerns about gun safety, Gov. Jan Brewer on Friday signed into law a bill making Arizona the third state allowing people to carry a concealed weapon without requiring a permit.

The measure takes effect 90 days after the current legislative session ends, which likely puts the effective date in July or August.

"I believe this legislation not only protects the Second Amendment rights of Arizona citizens, but restores those rights as well," Brewer, a Republican, said in a statement.
Alaska and Vermont now do not require permits to carry concealed weapons.

By eliminating the permit requirement, the Arizona legislation will allow people 21 or older to forego background checks and classes that are now required.
Supporters say the bill promotes constitutional rights and allows people to protect themselves from criminals, while critics worry it will lead to more shootings as people with less training have fewer restrictions on carrying weapons.
Some police officials are concerned the law will lead to more accidental gun discharges from people untrained in firearm safety, or that shooters in stressful situations will accidentally strike innocent bystanders with stray bullets.
"I know a lot of 21-year-olds; the maturity level is gravely concerning sometimes," said El Mirage Police Chief Mike Frazier, an Arizona Association of Chiefs of Police board member. "If you're going to be carrying a weapon you should know what the law is and how to use it."

However, the measure was supported by police unions representing rank-and-file officers, who said their best friend on the streets is a law-abiding citizen equipped to protect themselves or others.

The police chiefs group initially opposed the bill but then took a neutral stance after some provisions were changed at their request. Brewer's office also participated in negotiations on changes to the bill.

A Democratic leader, Rep. Kyrsten Sinema, of Phoenix, said the bill deprives law enforcement of a tool "to separate good guys from the bad guys." With a permit requirement, police encountering a person with a concealed gun but no permit had reason to suspect that person was not a law-abiding citizen, she said.

The Arizona Citizens Defense League, a gun-rights group that lobbied for passage of the "constitutional carry" bill, said gun owners foregoing permits still should get training. "The heaviest thing about wearing a firearm is the responsibility that comes with it," the group said.

Arizona's permissive gun laws gained national attention last year when a man openly carried a semiautomatic rifle to a Phoenix protest outside a speech by President Barack Obama.

Nearly all adults can already carry a weapon openly in Arizona, and supporters of looser laws argue that gun owners shouldn't face additional restrictions just because they want to hide the weapon.

Currently, carrying a hidden firearm without a permit is a misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail and a fine of up to $2,500.

Forty-five other states require permits for hidden guns, and two states -- Illinois and Wisconsin -- prohibit them altogether.

Federal law requires anyone buying a gun from a licensed dealer to undergo a background check, but that requirement does not apply to sales by individuals who aren't dealers. Arizona's law won't change that.

Under the Arizona legislation, people carrying a concealed weapon will be required to tell a police officer that if asked, and the officer can temporarily take the weapon while communicating with the person.

More than 154,000 people have permits to carry a concealed weapon in Arizona.

The bill acted on by Brewer was the first attempt to lift the permit requirement to reach an Arizona governor's desk.
Brewer's predecessor, Democrat Janet Napolitano, in 2007 vetoed two related bills. One would have reduced penalties for carrying a concealed weapon without a permit. The other would have allowed a person without a permit to carry a gun largely concealed as long as any part of it or its holster was visible.

Brewer in 2008 signed into law a bill allowing a person with a permit to take a gun into a restaurant or bar serving alcohol as long as the establishment doesn't prohibit it and the person isn't drinking alcohol. Napolitano vetoed a similar bill in 2005.

**************************************************
6. Cuccinelli, gun rights advocates rally in Richmond
**************************************************

http://tinyurl.com/y3ay5xb

http://www.washingtonpost.com

Cuccinelli, gun rights advocates rally in Richmond

More than 100 gun rights advocates, many of them wearing handguns on their hips, rallied in Capital Square in Richmond today, urging expansion of gun rights in Virginia and beyond.

Members of the crowd sported orange stickers that read "Guns Save Lives." A few held yellow "Don't Tread on Me" Gadsden flags that have become associated with the Tea Party movement.

Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli addressed the crowd, praising them for their efforts on behalf of guns rights. Standing on a makeshift speaking platform, he opened with a joke: "We've been in office less than three months. It's been kind of boring."

"Okay," he conceded, "Not so much."

Cuccinelli has quickly become of the nation's best-known advocates for conservative activism, with pending lawsuits against the federal government over health care and the EPA's regulation of greenhouse gases, and his presence at the gun rally had drawn a bank of television cameras. Cuccinelli told the crowd that no one in Virginia should be surprised by his stands.

"Anyone who watches what we're doing in office in the first three months, who paid attention during our campaign, shouldn't be surprised at all. We talked very clearly about reining in government power. We talked very clearly about being aggressive in protecting the Constitution, as it was written. What a concept," he said.

"And that's all we've done, in suing the EPA, in suing over the health-care bill: Exactly what we said we were going to do. As clear and blunt as we were last year about choosing this course, if you vote for Ken Cuccinelli, this is the course you get. And we got more votes for attorney general than any one in the history of Virginia."
"Virginians support protecting the constitution aggressively," he concluded.

Other speakers praised the Virginia General Assembly for passing a bill to allow concealed weapons permit holders to carry their guns in restaurants that serve alcohol, provided they do not drink.
But the leadership of the Democratic-controlled state Senate came in for criticism for creating a special committee to kill 15 other pieces of gun-related legislation. Philip Van Cleve with the Virginia Citizen Defense League called on rally participants to replace the "anti-Constitution, anti-freedom, anti-gun" leadership of the state Senate.

One crowd member not impressed: Lori Haas, a gun control advocate whose daughter Emily was injured in the 2007 Virginia Tech shootings. Haas often attends such events, standing silently in the crowd. She called the gun rights lobbyists a "small, loud interest group" that pushes state lawmakers to positions that most Virginians oppose.

By Rosalind Helderman | April 12, 2010; 4:17 PM ET

**************************************************
7. Cuccinelli praises gun-rights activists
**************************************************

http://tinyurl.com/y7fprpb

http://www.timesdispatch.com

Cuccinelli praises gun-rights activists
By JIM NOLAN
Published: April 12, 2010
Updated: April 12, 2010 3:03 PM

More than 100 people -- many of them openly carrying firearms -- gathered at the Bell Tower in Richmond's Capitol Square this afternoon to express support for the rights of gun owners and drum up interest in an upcoming national Second Amendment March to be held in Washington next Monday.
Those gathered heard Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli hail them as "people, who as I do, love the Constitution." Cuccinelli pressed his case for using his office and what he describes as his constitutional duty to defend Virginia from the overreaching federal government. He said that the best way to ensure the state and its people retain their constitutionally guaranteed rights is through the ballot box. He said it was easier to "change your electeds than to change your electeds' minds."

The rally comes less than a month after the Virginia General Assembly recessed after having passed legislation to allow gun owners to carry concealed firearms into restaurants that serve alcohol. But gun rights advocates said much more needs to be done to protect the rights of Virginians who wish to own weapons.

Philip Van Cleave of the Virginia Citizens Defense League will be leading a busload of like-minded advocates to Washington next week and defiantly challenged the "anti-Constitution, anti-freedom, anti-gun" leadership of the Democrat-controlled Virginia Senate to change their position regarding gun control legislation.
He ended his remarks with playing the Tom Petty song, "I Won't Back Down."

**************************************************
8. Videos from Richmond 2A march
**************************************************

David Porter emailed me this:

--

Video #1:
http://tinyurl.com/y48hevk

http://www.wric.com

Video #2:
http://tinyurl.com/y5nrpa4

http://www.timesdispatch.com

**************************************************
9. Was gun rally important for Cuccinelli?
**************************************************

The rabidly anti-freedom News Advance is having a hissy fit over the Second Amendment March rally at the Virginia Capitol last week. Josh Kellogg emailed me this:

--

http://tinyurl.com/y2mofq5

http://www.newsadvance.com

Was Gun Rally Important for Cuccinelli?
The News & Advance
Published: April 15, 2010

One would think that with all the duties assigned to the attorney general of Virginia, he would find little time to speak to a small rally of gun-rights supporters in Richmond.

But there he was. Ken Cuccinelli took the time away from his job as the state's top legal officer to speak to a gathering at the Bell Tower in Capitol Square. Many of those attending openly carried firearms holstered on their hips. They wore fluorescent-orange stickers proclaiming "Guns Save Lives."

The event was held to drum up support for a national "Second Amendment March" in Washington next week. As Media General News Service reported, a few gun-control activists stood silently observing the proceedings.
Cuccinelli talked about his love for the Constitution and said that Virginians have "been very good about protecting" constitutional rights, such as the right to bear arms. But, he said, "every year is a battle."
One of those "battles" came during the General Assembly this year when the gun supporters finally pushed a measure through that would allow folks with concealed weapons to take those weapons into bars. Opponents argued correctly that the mix of guns and alcohol is a deadly one, but Gov. Bob McDonnell has said he will sign the legislation.

Cuccinelli also made reference to his earlier efforts to "defend the Constitution" by filing lawsuits against the federal government challenging global-warming research and legislation that provides health care for millions of Americans who would not otherwise receive it.

Among those at the rally was Philip Van Cleave of the Virginia Citizens Defense League who criticized "anti-Constitution, anti-freedom, anti-gun" Senate Democrats in the Assembly for killing a number of pro-gun bills in a special subcommittee.

So anyone who is opposed to the free flow of guns throughout society is opposed to freedom and the Constitution? Van Cleave probably knows better than that, but it makes for good rhetoric at a gun-rights rally. He added that he wanted to tell the Assembly that Second Amendment rights are non-negotiable.
Which is fine. He certainly has the right to speak his position. And he has the right to carry a pistol, if he wants. And he has the right to gather at a public rally at the Capitol.

But that doesn't explain why Cuccinelli would take the time to lend his support to such a rally. Wasn't his appearance political pandering at its worst to the rabid gun crowd -- pandering that helped create the perception that the government is out to get them and their guns?

Of course it was. Are gun rights all that important to the attorney general? Would he like to see guns strapped on every hip in Virginia? That's the clear impression he left with those who read and heard about his appearance at the gun rally.

One would hope that Cuccinelli picks his battles a little more carefully in his months to come as Virginia's attorney general.

**************************************************
10. Three years after Virginia Tech shooting, college gun bans prevail
**************************************************

Bruce Jackson emailed me this:

--

http://tinyurl.com/y724ue5

http://www.csmonitor.com

Three years after Virginia Tech shooting, college gun bans prevail

Gun rights activists argued that concealed carry laws may have been a
protection during the Virginia Tech shooting. But states have not
moved to allow concealed weapons on college campuses, though student
groups continue to lobby to lift gun bans.

By Will Buchanan, Contributor / April 16, 2010

The mass shooting at Virginia Tech, which killed 32 people three years
ago Friday, touched off an intense debate over whether colleges should
remain gun-free zones, or whether allowing students and faculty to
carry concealed weapons might have resulted in fewer deaths. Though
the debate continues, so far colleges have generally declined to move
to allow concealed guns on campus - and most state legislatures have
not forced them to do so.

Today 26 states prohibit conceal and carry on college campuses, and 23
states leave the decision to the schools, according to the nonpartisan
Project America. In these 23 states, a large majority of colleges
prohibit conceal and carry.

Only Utah has a 2004 law requiring publicly funded schools to permit
students over 21 with conceal and carry licenses to carry guns on
campus.

"After Virginia Tech, we faced a push by the gun lobby to expand
conceal-and-carry rights at colleges," says Andy Pelosi of the
Campaign to Keep Guns Off Campus. "But we have been trying to raise
awareness, and more and more people are joining our cause."

This year at least 10 state legislatures are considering bills dealing
with guns on campus, he says.

Gun rights proponents argue that colleges should allow students and
faculty to carry concealed weapons as a deterrent and as a means of
protection in situations such as the Virginia Tech shooting, in which
a student with a history of mental illness went on an extended rampage
against fellow students and faculty before shooting himself. Gun
control advocates respond that allowing students to carry concealed
weapons would create more violence, not less.

Since the Virginia Tech tragedy, states have voted down legislation to
expand conceal-and-carry rights on college campuses 34 times, The Wall
Street Journal reported in July 2009. No laws allowing conceal and
carry on campuses have passed since then, says Mr. Pelosi.

Last year, Texas, Tennessee, and Louisiana each voted on measures
similar to Utah's. The votes in Texas and Tennessee were close, but
the bills failed. Louisiana voted the measure down 86 to 18.

"Texas was a huge win, but we knew they'd be back," says Pelosi,
referring to gun rights groups and their allies in the legislature.

Students who support broad gun rights are mobilizing. Last week,
Students for Concealed Carry on Campus reported holding "Empty Holster
Protest" events at dozens of college campuses. Participants wore empty
holsters to show they are legal gun owners forbidden to carry
concealed firearms at their schools.

"We call gun-free zones 'disarmed victim zones,' " Steve Khemthong, a
participant in the Empty Holster Protest and a student at Central
Connecticut State University, told the New Britain Herald. Mr.
Khemthong's gun club hosted "NRA University," a two-hour seminar
discussing US gun laws and the work of the National Rifle Association.
During the seminar, the NRA's Seth Waugh encouraged various forms of
pro-gun activism, such as communicating with state legislators and
volunteering for a campaign, the Herald reported.

Despite legislative setbacks, gun rights advocates have achieved some
success in the courts. On Thursday, a Colorado appellate court ruled
in favor of Students for Concealed Carry on Campus, finding that the
University of Colorado's rule prohibiting conceal and carry violates
the state's 2003 Concealed Carry Act.

The university is considering appealing to the Colorado Supreme Court,
spokesman Ken McConnellogue told the Associated Press. If the school
does not appeal, gun-control proponents in the legislature are
expected to try to rewrite the law in question - the Concealed Carry
Act of 2003.

**************************************************
11. Brady Campaign: Sad Week Ahead for Those Supporting Sensible Gun Laws
**************************************************

Bruce Jackson emailed me this:

--

http://tinyurl.com/y43xced

http://www.opposingviews.com

Sad Week Ahead for Those Supporting Sensible Gun Laws
Opinion by Brady Campaign
(1 Hour Ago) in Society / Guns
By Paul Helmke

To those of us who think we make it too easy for dangerous people to
get dangerous guns, this is a somber week ahead.

Friday marks the third anniversary of the massacre at Virginia Tech.
Thirty-two innocent lives were taken by a dangerous young man who had
easy access to guns. Four days later, Tuesday, April 20 marks the 11th
anniversary of the deaths of 13 at Columbine High School in Littleton,
Colorado, because two young men had easy access to guns.

Sandwiched between these painful anniversaries, two gun lobby
gatherings are planned in the Washington D.C. area on Monday, April 19
- on the anniversaries of the battles of Lexington and Concord, the
bombing of the Oklahoma City Federal Building and the conflagration of
the Branch Davidian complex in Waco, Texas. Organizers say they're
fighting to restore gun rights in America.

At this time in our history, gun toters can go into a Starbucks in
more than 40 states with a loaded firearm. Brady background check
records must be immediately destroyed. Congress is poised to
eviscerate all of the gun laws in our nation's Capital. Gun victims'
access to the courts has been curtailed. And Wayne LaPierre, the
president of the NRA, says "the guys with the guns make the rules."
Nevertheless, the gun extremists say that gun rights in the United
States are facing tremendous threats.

It's hard to consider this paranoia about gun privileges being at risk
with a straight face. We need civility in our gun policy debate in
America, and I make a concerted effort to be polite and open to those
who disagree with sensible gun laws every day. But in America, the
guys with the guns don't make the rules - and that, whether Wayne
LaPierre likes it or not, is one of the foundations of our democracy.
Gun privileges at risk? Lori Haas helped nurse her daughter, Emily,
back to health after she was wounded at Virginia Tech. Does Lori
think gun rights are at risk in America?

"Are you serious?" Lori responded. "When firearms sales have
skyrocketed in the last 18 months? There is absolutely nothing that
prevents law abiding citizens from purchasing firearms. There is no
threat. On the contrary - they, along with criminals, the mentally ill
and others who are legally ineligible from purchasing firearms can
walk into any gun show in most states and buy all the firearms they
want - no questions asked. I can't quite fathom those so-called law
abiding citizens wanting people the law has deemed unsuitable to be
able to purchase firearms. It makes no sense."

The organizers of the "Second Amendment March," near the Washington
Monument in Washington and the armed "Restore the Constitution Rally"
make a point of assuring us that they don't intend to use their events
as a springboard to a violent assault on the U.S., Government. "If we
planned to overthrow the government," wrote one of the organizers of
the Virginia event, Daniel Almond, "we wouldn't invite so many of them
to join us here on the lawn, we wouldn't announce our intention
beforehand, and we wouldn't meet up on the wrong side of the river."
If you want to simplify this issue, read these names.

Friday is the anniversary of the deaths of Ross Abdallah Alameddine,
Ryan Clark, Daniel Perez Cueva, Caitlin Hammaren, Emily Jane Hilscher,
Matt La Porte, Jarrett Lane, Henry Lee, Juan Ortiz, Mary Karen Read,
Reema Samaha, Leslie Sherman, Maxine Turner, Erin Peterson , Jeremy
Herbstritt, Daniel O'Neil, Brian Bluhm, Michael Pohle, Austin Cloyd,
Waleed Shaalan, Julia Pryde, Matthew Gwaltney , Nicole White, Rachael
Hill, Lauren McCain, Partahi Lombantoruan, Minal Panchal, Christopher
James Bishop, Dr. Kevin P. Granata, G.V. Loganathan, Dr. Liviu
Librescu and Jocelyne Couture-Nowak.

Tuesday is the anniversary of the deaths of Rachel Scott, Daniel
Rohrbough, William David Sanders, Cassie Bernall, Steven Curnow, Corey
DePooter, Kelly Fleming, Matthew Kechter, Daniel Mauser, Isaiah
Shoels, John Tomlin, Lauren Townsend and Kyle Velasquez.
I urge everyone to remember Virginia Tech and Columbine.

One of the reasons all the victims died was our lack of sensible gun laws to keep dangerous people from getting dangerous weapons.

**************************************************
12. Daily Press hit piece on background checks
**************************************************

Jonathan Evans emailed me this:

--

http://tinyurl.com/y6pmzhm

http://www.dailypress.com

Gun buyers will have to pay a little more if they want faster background checks
April 13, 2010

Maybe you can have your cake and eat it, too. But in this economy, you cannot have your low-level user fees and your high-level user service.

Not if what you're looking for is a fast transaction when it comes to buying a gun.

In Virginia, some gun buyers are experiencing delays. One of the consequences of the General Assembly's wringing billions of dollars out of the state budget is that it wrung out some jobs. Some were in unit at the State Police that processes background checks on gun purchasers.

This is the centerpiece of Virginia's attempt to keep guns out of the wrong hands. It goes only so far because the criminals know the "street market" doesn't do background checks. And it's always possible to take advantage of the loophole for unlicensed sellers at legitimate gun shows.

The background check requires consulting several databases in order to weed out the people prohibited by law from purchasing guns. That list includes those who have been convicted of or are under indictment for a felony or convicted of some serious misdemeanors; are subject to a protective order for harassing, stalking or threatening an "intimate partner" or child; have been found by a court to be incompetent or mentally incapacitated or involuntarily committed to a psychiatric hospital; were dishonorably discharged from the armed forces; are illegal immigrants; or have, within 36 months, been convicted twice of possession of marijuana or a controlled substance (once is no barrier).

The public, understandably, would agree that none of these people should have guns.

Gun buyers, understandably, would like their applications processed quickly, so they can finish their purchases and be on their way.

As law-abiding citizens, they should expect good service. But recently, it has been taking longer. That's due to a combination of greater demand -- the number of checks in 2009 was up 7 percent from 2008, itself a record year -- and less supply on the checking end. The number of staff to do background checks is down from 28 to 17.

But gun buyers, collectively, had a choice about this. The 2009 General Assembly considered a bill to raise the background check fee from $2 to $5, which the State Police says would be sufficient to staff the unit. You have to wonder how someone who found the extra $3 onerous could afford a gun and ammunition. But pro-gun groups worked to defeat the bill.

So some gun buyers are delayed, and gun dealers say the delays are costing them sales.

Those are the consequences. But there's no way to justify taking general tax money to subsidize this process when the money is needed for law enforcement and other critical services.

This basic lesson about getting what you pay for had one winning moment. Philip Van Cleave of the activist Virginia Citizens Defense League wins the "Over The Top, 'Round The Bend And Back Hyperbole Award" for this statement: "A person experiencing a death threat and who is denied a lawful gun purchase overnight would be left helpless at the hands of an assailant."

More than 287,000 background checks were run in Virginia last year. If the scenario Van Cleave laid out is anything but a rarity, if many of those 287,000 involve death threats, then we need to call up the National Guard, mobilize the militia, bar the doors and hide the women and children.

Here's a fun fact: The State Police in 2008 denied about 1 percent of the requests because the applicants were disqualified from owning a gun. And in the process of conducting background checks, 78 people who were wanted on criminal charges were identified and arrested. The process works.

And it was worth $5.

**************************************************
13. LTE: Gun Group Misses The Obvious Point
**************************************************

http://tinyurl.com/y4nugnu

http://www.timesdispatch.com

Letters To The Editor
By STAFF REPORTS
Published: April 12, 2010

Gun Group Misses The Obvious Point
Editor, Times-Dispatch:
Philip Van Cleave of the Viginia Citizens Defense League finds it "not acceptable" to wait four hours for a clearance for a gun purchase. His seeming lack of comprehension that this hourly decrease was brought on by a 40 percent reduction in staff that handles these transactions -- and the refusal of his group to increase the fee from $2 to $5, which would enable the hiring of personnel to expedite transactions -- suggests the mental acuity of that group.

Walter Zadan.
Williamsburg.

**************************************************
14. Daily Show open carry spoof
**************************************************

EMs John Pierce and Mike Stollenwerk, as well as Board member Dennis O'Connor appear in a spoof on open carry on the John Daly show. The antis, true to form, are having cows, taking the whole thing seriously. The laugh was on both side of the issue, but Brady's president Helmke played right into Daily's hand with his attack on gun owners:

--

http://tinyurl.com/y6uwl23

http://www.snowflakesinhell.com

**************************************************
15. Jim Crow: Guns, Too?
**************************************************

Mack emailed me this:

--

Gee, look -- somebody actually gets it and makes exactly the same argument I've been making for years:

http://tinyurl.com/y2jgmgj

http://www.timesdispatch.com

Jim Crow: Guns, Too?
By STAFF REPORTS
Published: April 16, 2010

Critics equate Bob McDonnell's approach to the restoration of voting rights for felons to Jim Crow. There is more to the story.

In a piece for National Review, Hans von Spakovsky reports that felons forfeit more than the right to vote. The details may vary by state, but felons generally lose the right to serve on juries, to hold public office, or to work in certain professions. Perhaps the most explosive instance relates to the right to own firearms. Felons cannot own guns.

Now, if the serving of time settles a felon's debt to society and if the restoration of voting rights is to occur automatically upon completion of sentence, then restoration must apply to all other lost rights as well. Should a felon convicted of armed robbery be able to buy a weapon immediately after release? Supporters of gun control probably would say no. Yet as long as gun-ownership remains legal -- as long as the Second Amendment remains in place -- then those who blast McDonnell on voting rights need to decry the loss of gun rights as similarly reflective of Jim Crow.

***Although, absent a full gubernatorial pardon, a felon should lose his Second Amendment rights, it also is absolute demagogy to blast McDonnell on voting rights while ignoring a felon's permanently lost right to own firearms.*** [emphasis added]

. . .

Speaking of African-Americans and firearms: In its Dred Scott decision that upheld the Fugitive Slave Act, the Supreme Court concluded that if the "persons of the negro race" had the "privileges and immunities of citizenship" they would enjoy the right "to keep and carry arms wherever they went." Roger Taney and his concurring colleagues said slaves lacked these rights when the court affirmed the constitutionality of a statute that effectively nationalized slavery. Gun-ownership by blacks clearly was something to be feared.

Is the denial of gun rights to felons an example not only of Jim Crow but of slavery itself? We think not, and we suspect those maligning McDonnell would agree. The point is that history can be messy, and that allegations of Jim Crow can invite unflattering precedents.

--------

http://tinyurl.com/y3q4rnr

http://www.nationalreview.com

APRIL 15, 2010
The Washington Post's Disgrace
Playing the race card for felons.
By Hans A. Von Spakovsky

[SNIP]
The real disgrace is the newspaper's shameful racial demagoguery. The Post unfairly calls McDonnell's proposal and Virginia's individualized review of every felon's application "Jim Crow by another name."

Interestingly, however, while the Post talks about "the terrible legacy of people being excluded from the voting booth," its editorial writers are silent on the "terrible legacy of people being excluded" from owning a gun, serving on a jury, or freely practicing whatever profession they want. Why should anyone automatically and always trust felons to vote but never to own a gun or serve as a teacher in a public school? Perhaps they are just interested in expected liberal votes, not the actual and complete rehabilitation of felons?

--------

http://tinyurl.com/y34sbpn

http://www.heritage.org

Restoring Voting Rights of Convicted Felons and H.R. 3335
Published on March 23, 2010 by Hans von Spakovsky

[SNIP]
Thank you for the invitation to testify before the Subcommittee on the subject of felons and the rights of states to prevent convicted criminals from voting.
I am Hans A. von Spakovsky, a Senior Legal Fellow and Manager of the Civil Justice Reform Initiative in the Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at the Heritage Foundation (http://www.heritage.org

). I was a Commissioner on the Federal Election Commission for two years and, of particular relevance to the subject of this hearing, I am a former career Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Justice. I am also a former member of the Board of Advisors of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission as well as the Registration and Election Board of Fulton County, Georgia. I currently serve on the Electoral Board of Fairfax County, Virginia, and on the Virginia Advisory Board to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. All of the views and opinions I express in my testimony are my own and should not be construed as representing any official position of the Heritage Foundation or any other organization.

Various consequences attach to a criminal felony conviction. First, there may be (and usually are) prison or jail sentences. Second, there are other direct penalties such as fines, court costs, restitution, and possible probation and parole requirements. Finally, there are various disabilities such as the inability to own a gun, to work as a police officer, to serve in certain elected offices or to serve on a jury. In short, the initial time in prison is not, and has never been, the only way a felon pays his debt to society for breaking the law and endangering his fellow citizens and the public.

**************************************************
16. See Mayor Bloomberg....no gunshow loophole
**************************************************

http://tinyurl.com/y28amf5

http://news.oldva.org

See Bloomberg....NO GUNSHOW LOOPHOLE

A big pat on the back for the Administration of Showmasters Gunshow and the gun owners in Virginia.

At yesterdays show at the Raceway, two people from New York came into the show. They went to several vendors and at least one private seller, trying to buy a gun. They were turned away each time.

One private seller went to the show manager and asked if it was legal to sell to them. When he was told no, he returned to the people and said no way. After the man had been turned down by Dark Sun, the woman tried to buy a gun from them.

By that time the police had been notified and they questioned the couple. Apparently there wasn't enough to charge them, at least yet.

I understand a third New York car came in after the episode and left rather quickly.

Were these Bloombergers or just Carpetbaggers ?....whatever they were, they found out there isn't a loophole and buying illegal guns is hard in Virginia.

There was an announcement on the PA about this and and the whole place applauded.

April 11th, 2010 | Category: Blogroll, Firearms & Personal Safety

**************************************************
17. NFS in NC = gun trap
**************************************************

National forests are not national parks when it comes to gun rights

Carla and Dave Hicks emailed me this:

--

You might want to post this for folks traveling to NC.

http://tinyurl.com/y5jon7g

http://www.ncwildlife.org

[SNIP]
news releases
CONCEALED CARRY PERMIT FOR FIREARMS PROMPTS QUESTIONS

RALEIGH, N.C. (April 14, 2010) - A change in federal law that allows firearms in many national parks does not include state parks and forests or other state recreational areas, including game lands.

According to the National Park Service of the U.S. Department of Interior, people who can legally possess firearms under federal and state law can now possess those firearms in the national parks in that state. This pertains to anyone with a concealed carry permit.

National parks should not be confused with national forests. In North Carolina, the Nantahala, Pisgah, Uwharrie and Croatan national forests are also designated as game lands.

"Concealed carry permits do not supersede the other regulations that apply," said Maj. Keith Templeton, with the Law Enforcement Division of the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission. "It is up to the individual with a valid concealed carry permit to know the law and obey it."

Under game land regulations, it is unlawful to possess a firearm or bow and arrow on a game land at any time, except:

**************************************************
18. Gov't report sees increase in campus violence
**************************************************

Bruce Jackson emailed me this:

--

http://tinyurl.com/yyjtmcb

http://www.google.com

Gov't report sees increase in campus violence
By PETE YOST (AP) - 15 hours ago

WASHINGTON -- Targeted college campus violence, from serious assaults
to the mass shootings at Virginia Tech in 2007, is up sharply over the
last two decades.

The number of cases rose from 40 during the 1980s to 79 in the 1990s
and 83 since 2000, says a study issued Friday by the FBI, Secret
Service and Education Department.

The cause of the increase is unknown, though the report noted a
dramatic rise in college student enrollment in the past 20 years.

Violence on or near college campuses is hardly new. The report cited,
for example, a murder-suicide in 1909. In that incident 101 years ago,
a man shot and killed a student on her college campus and then killed
himself, reportedly after the student rejected his marriage proposals.

"For years, colleges and universities have worked to address this
challenge -- to create safe campuses where academic and personal growth
can flourish," says the study, "Campus Attacks." "In the wake of the
Virginia Tech tragedy, many universities were confronted with the
troubling reality that one person can, in a few brief moments,
devastate a college community through an act of targeted violence."

The report was released on the third anniversary of the shooting
rampage by Virginia Tech student Seung-Hui Cho, who killed 32 students
and faculty members and took his own life. The report comes as a
result of recommendations from a federal panel that studied that
tragedy.

In the 272 incidents of targeted violence studied for the report, 281
people were killed 247 injured. Of those deaths, at least 190 were
students and at least 72 were employees.

Targeted violence is defined as cases where attackers select a victim
beforehand or randomly choose victims because they fit some
predetermined profile or relationship. It excludes violence that
breaks out spontaneously, such as during an argument.

The study found that:

_Factors relating to an intimate relationship were a motivating or
triggering factor in a third of attacks and academic stress or failure
was a factor in one out of 10 attacks.

_Sixty percent of those who engaged in targeted campus violence were
current or former students at the school where the violence took
place.

_Firearms were used in more than half the incidents and knives or
weapons with a blade were used in over 20 percent.

_Over 90 percent of those who committed such attacks were male.

In nearly three-quarters of the incidents studied, the attacker
appeared to have targeted one or more specifically named individuals.
But sometimes it appeared that random people were targeted along with
specific victims.

Understanding what motivates an attacker to go solely after random
victims "remains a complex and difficult challenge," the report said.

The report included 52 acts of violence in areas surrounding college
campuses, saying that to exclude nearby locations would neglect the
role of campus safety departments and campus threat assessment teams
in securing the general area.

The report is a preliminary step in gaining a better understanding of
targeted campus violence.

The next phase of the work -- a collaboration between the FBI and the
Education Department -- will examine case files and investigative
records from campus attacks, with a focus on factors such as past
behavior and mental illness by those who carry out such crimes.

The research is expected to help threat assessment teams made up of
professionals from a wide range of campus departments. The teams
created in the aftermath of the Virginia Tech killings identify
individuals whose behavior causes concern or is disruptive and assess
whether the person has the intent or ability to carry out an attack.

**************************************************
19. Two things my kids know about guns
**************************************************

Bob Johnson emailed me this:

--

http://tinyurl.com/y4fvp3g

http://thesurvivalmom.com

Two Things My Kids Know About Guns

We took the kids to the shooting range again yesterday, along with a reporter and photographer from the Arizona Republic, and once more I felt so grateful that my kids are confident, yet cautious, around guns. Just the day before, a 10 year-old boy in our city accidentally shot himself with his stepfather's handgun and died. I don't know the family, nor do I have any details about the tragic incident, but I have to wonder if the young man had ever been educated in gun safety or if he had ever had the chance to learn to shoot.
From the beginning, my husband and I wanted our kids to know two very important things about guns.

#1 A gun is no big deal.

Remember the scene in, "The Sixth Sense", when a boy says to the main character, "Wanna see my dad's gun?" He turns toward the bedroom and you see a huge gunshot wound in the side of his head. In our home, we don't want guns to be mysterious forbidden fruit. After all, what is more alluring to a child? Something they're not allowed to see and touch or something so ordinary that it's no big deal?

I am not precluding the possibility of either of our children doing something stupid someday while around a firearm, but if they do, it certainly won't be because they view a gun as something exciting and glamorous. Any parent who thinks their kids don't watch and plan for an opportune time to do something sneaky behind their backs isn't living in the same world as me! The last thing I want my kids to do is wait until we are gone from home and then seek out a hidden gun to, "play with."
So, our kids have been taught how to shoot. Both have shot a thousand rounds or more from their .22 rifles. Daughter is sniper material. Son just loves using his trigger finger and hits the target on occasion and both are happy to leave our firearms alone once we get home. In fact, both have been known to groan and roll their eyes when they see Dad loading up the truck for another trip to the range.

The NRA is a great resource for materials to teach your child gun safety, and their Eddie Eagle GunSafe Program is available to individuals, schools, and groups and priced affordably. Eddie Eagle's four basic rules for kids to remember if they ever see a gun are:

Stop!
Don't touch!
Leave the area.
Tell an adult!

In addition to training and practice, our guns are kept secured in a safe place away from the kids. We believe in layers of security, and education is just one layer.
The second thing our kids have learned about guns is,

#2 A gun is a huge deal!

A gun can take a life. That's a huge deal, the biggest, really, and it makes owning a firearm a serious responsibility. Our kids have been taught to never put their finger on the trigger until they are ready to shoot. They know to always keep the barrel of the gun pointed in a safe direction, which is never at another person, and guns remain unloaded until we are actually at the range.

A challenge parents face in this process is helping kids understand the difference between the glorified gun fights they see on TV and in the movies and what a real gun can do to a person. When a person is shot, there is no, "Take two!" The injured person doesn't pop up so they can appear in the next scene. Gunshot injuries are real, painful, and can cause massive injuries and death.

Sooner or later, most kids will encounter a real, live gun somewhere. The gun may or may not be supervised by an adult. It may or may not be loaded, and my kids may or may not be inclined to use the common sense God gave them. As parents, we increase the chances our kids will do the smart thing and stay safe when there's a gun around when we train, educate and remind, remind, remind.

**************************************************
20. Charlton Heston's "A Torch With No Flame"
**************************************************

http://tinyurl.com/yyoz6rz

[VIDEO]

http://la-gun.com

***************************************************************************
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/