VCDL's meeting schedule: http://www.vcdl.org/meetings.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Abbreviations used in VA-ALERT: http://www.vcdl.org/help/abbr.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is an open letter that I have sent to Attorney General Cuccinelli. If he would like to respond and defend himself, I will be glad to share his response with all 14,000 of you:
Dear Attorney General Cuccinelli,
I am very disappointed in your brief filed with the Supreme Court in reference to DiGiacinto v the Rector and Visitors of George Mason University, which challenges GMU's gun ban in their library and other buildings, especially as it applies to a non-student.
Since GMU is a state entity, I understand that the Virginia Attorney General's office has to defend against this lawsuit.
As a candidate for Attorney General you said at a VCDL meeting on
December 18th, 2008 that GMU's gun ban was indefensible. (A link to
the video and a transcript are at the end of this letter.)
But what is really indefensible is the gratuitous, fear mongering aimed at gun owners in that brief.
I can understand making your argument that the GMU ban is valid based on some legal theory, since you are stuck defending GMU. The brief does some of that, BUT the brief then goes clean off the reservation into a gratuitous attack on gun owners, with a heavy does of fear
mongering and even squeezes in a Clintonesque "for the children"
emotional argument:
"Without the regulation [banning guns], the University community's safety is seriously compromised. Unquestionably, the vast majority of gun owners are law-abiding citizens. Nevertheless, a rejected student applicant could walk into the Dean of Admissions office with an openly visible sidearm to discuss why the university rejected his application. An expelled student could do the same while he met with the Dean of Students to discuss his appeal of his expulsion. A disgruntled ex-boyfriend armed with a large hunting knife mounted on his side could enter the student residences to speak to his former
girlfriend where she lived. Finally, any person who wishes to enter
Fenwick Library with a sidearm, could not only frighten students and minors, such as preschoolers, but also expose them to unnecessary risks, such as an accidental discharge"
That looks like something that Sarah Brady would write!
While you might not feel that you can win his case based on legal merits, using made up, emotional scenarios to influence the Supreme Court is unconscionable.
You ran a campaign on putting principles first. But all that fear mongering in this brief has nothing to do with principles and everything to do with winning the case AT ALL COSTS.
You were right the first time, Mr. Attorney General: principles DO matter and that brief has thrown those principles in the trash.
Finally, the argument in the brief that colleges and universities are "sensitive places" is not tenable. Truly sensitive places would be guarded like a fortress - higher education schools are not, with the public having easy access to them.
Here is the brief (the offensive language is on the bottom of page 7 and top of page
:http://www.virginia1774.org/RVGMUBrief.pdf
Your statement that GMU's ban is indefensible can be seen and heard by skipping forward 5 minutes and 30 seconds into this video:
Here is a transcript of your comments in the video:
"I heard the college question - you know, ***they don't have the legal authority to pass the regulations they are passing that trump what the General Assembly has said.*** Now one way to deal with that is for an individual to simply challenge it in court and say, 'Hey, I want to go walk at George Mason and this blocks me, so I have standing.' But, the problem with doing it at the legislative level is that you have got to succeed. Because, and I say, and it sounds funny, but if you don't you end up setting the reverse precedent that the courts will interpret as meaning taking the side of the university. That's the danger we have in that area."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
VCDL ACTION ITEM
Let's contact the Attorney General's office and POLITELY let him know that fear mongering against gun owners is not a principle that he should be standing on. Click here to go to his web mail address:
http://www.vaag.com/ContactUsForm/ContactForm.aspx
Suggested subject: Stick to the law and do not smear gun owners!
Suggested message:
Dear Attorney General Cuccinelli,
I am very disappointed that your brief on DiGiacinto v the Rector and Visitors of George Mason University contains gratuitous fear mongering against gun owners, even going so far as to say that preschoolers would be at RISK from gun owners carrying at a public university! I would expect such a low blow from the Brady Campaign, but not an Attorney General who ran on principles and being pro-liberty.
***************************************************************************
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/]
