Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

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

I repeat, do NOT tell me Lobby Day doesn't matter!

The full Militia, Police and Public Safety committee met this morning and the following bills passed and are now on their way to the House Floor for a vote next week. All passed by wide margins:

HB 171, Delegate Pogge, prohibits employers and others from banning firearms left in locked vehicles in parking lots. Gives employers immunity if such guns are misused. The bill was amended to add a few
exceptions - STRONGLY SUPPORT

HB 79, Delegate Ware, prohibits Circuit Court Clerks from divulging CHP applicant information to anyone but police in performance of their duties - STRONGLY SUPPORT

HB 885, Delegate Athey, allows a non-CHP holder to have a loaded gun in an unlocked compartment or container in a personal motor vehicle or boat - STRONGLY SUPPORT

HB 1070, Delegate Athey, allows CHP holders to carry in an emergency shelter - STRONGLY SUPPORT

HB 49, Delegate Lingamfelter, repeals one handgun a month - STRONGLY SUPPORT

HB 870, Delegate Cline, repeals the option for localities to fingerprint first time CHP applicants - STRONGLY SUPPORT

HB 26, Delegate Wright, clarifies exactly what paperwork is required from a CHP applicant - STRONGLY SUPPORT

HB 8, Delegate Carrico, clarifies that a CHP holder can renew through the mail - STRONGLY SUPPORT

HB 108, Delegate Cole, requires localities auction guns purchased in a gun buy-up - STRONGLY SUPPORT

HB 236, Delegate Janis, allows someone to shoot a gun within 1/2 mile of a subdivision if they do so safely - STRONGLY SUPPORT

HB 109, Delegate Cole, repeals a state law that allows localities to tax and collect information about handgun sales - STRONGLY SUPPORT

HB 1191, Delegate Griffith, allows judges to approve Circuit Court Clerks to issue CHPs - STRONGLY SUPPORT

HB 490, Delegate Lingamfelter, authorizes the State Police to come up with a plan to issue lifetime CHPs - STRONGLY SUPPORT

HB 69, Delegate Carrico, Virginia Firearms Freedom Act (10th Amendment protection for guns made and sold in VA) - SUPPORT

HB 1217, Delegate Lewis, allows school boards to offer firearms safety programs - SUPPORT

HB 1092, Delegate Crockett-Stark, allows retired police officers to be able to carry without a CHP - NEUTRAL

HB 637, Delegate Armstrong, waives CHP fees for boarding officers of the U.S. Coast Guard - NEUTRAL

HB 1379, Delegate Sickles, allows Fairfax and nearby localities to required that firearms in child-care facilities be stored in a state specified fashion - NEUTRAL

-

These bills look like they are headed for a "pocket veto" by the Speaker, as they were not heard today and if they not heard before crossover next week (very unlikely) are dead:

HB 475, Delegate Carrico, allows a CHP holder to be able to carry in K-12 school parking lots - STRONGLY SUPPORT

HB 489, Delegate Lingamfelter, reorganized the CHP laws - STRONGLY SUPPORT

HB 106, Delegate Cole, allows a CHP holder to carry in restaurants or, with permission, in a church during a meeting - STRONGLY SUPPORT

HB 54, Delegate Cole, allows handguns to be carried in courthouses after hours if the courthouse is being used for a non-judicial event - STRONGLY SUPPORT


-

This bill was carried over until next year:

HB 995, Delegate Nutter, allows a CHP or military ID to be used to purchase "assault firearms." - STRONGLY SUPPORT


--

Notes:

On the repeal of one handgun a month the Chairwoman allowed both sides time to speak in front of the full committee. Delegates Barlow (against the repeal) and Lingamfelter crossed swords. I though
Lingamfelter did an excellent job in presenting the bill, covering the vast majority of important points about the need for the repeal.

File this under "sometimes its great when the other side speaks:" one anti-freedom woman, when asked why Virginia is supposedly number 6 in gun-running WITH the one handgun a month law currently in place, she said it was because CHP holders are exempt from the one handgun a month law and are running guns!!!!

Oh, no! Our SECRET is OUT!

I had to bite my lip to keep from breaking out into laughter. Whatever credibility she had with the committee took a nosedive, as you can imagine.

The vote was taken and the bill passed 15 to 6, broken down thus:

Pro-freedom:

Sherwood, Griffith, Wright, Carrico, Lingamfelter, Nutter, Athey, Cline, Gilbert, Merricks, Morefield, Edmunds, Cox, J.A., Shuler, Lewis

Anti-freedom:

Jim Scott, Barlow, Paula Miller, Tyler, James, Keam

Delegate Cleveland wasn't present to vote as he was attending a sick family member.


-------------------------------------------
***************************************************************************
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
***************************************************************************

And speaking of good news.....

----

VA-ALERT: Restaurant Ban Repeal passed the House!

**********************************************************
Restaurant Ban Repeal passes the House Floor!
**********************************************************

YES! HB 505, Delegate Gilbert's restaurant ban repeal bill, has just
passed the House by 67 to 27 and now heads to the Senate!! The Senate
version (SB 344 - Senator Hanger) will be voted on early next week.

Keep your fingers crossed!

The repeal of the restaurant ban is looking better and better each day.

Any idea when they will hear the castle doctrine????

I haven't heard anything yet, but as soon as we have more information it will be on the VCDL's Legislative Tracking tool as well as the VA-ALERT.

http://www.vcdl.org/static/2010leg.html

Thanks Jay !!!!!!!!

We appreciate your updates...this is some good stuff. I can feel my concealed gun digging into my love handles as I slurp noodles or dig into a nice steak at the most liberal joint in town...

Being newer to the gun world and just starting to understand what is involved in the passing of a bill, can you humor me with a dumb question? If the senate passes the bill, does that mean its now the law, or are there additional steps neccesary?

nickf829 wrote:Being newer to the gun world and just starting to understand what is involved in the passing of a bill, can you humor me with a dumb question? If the senate passes the bill, does that mean its now the law, or are there additional steps neccesary?

No problem Nick. Once the senate hopefully passes this bill it will go to the governor to be signed into law. When it becomes effective depends on how they implement. Usually there is a waiting period.

zephyp wrote:

nickf829 wrote:Being newer to the gun world and just starting to understand what is involved in the passing of a bill, can you humor me with a dumb question? If the senate passes the bill, does that mean its now the law, or are there additional steps neccesary?

No problem Nick. Once the senate hopefully passes this bill it will go to the governor to be signed into law. When it becomes effective depends on how they implement. Usually there is a waiting period.

That's not exactly true. The house and senate both have to pass bills that mirror one another. If they do not, they have to go to reconciliation. If at first they both pass matching legislation it goes to the governor to become law. If it goes to reconciliation, a committee will work out differences and vote on a new bill. Which will then go on to be signed.

allingeneral wrote: Anti-freedom:

Jim Scott, ...

This guy is my delegate, but he doesn't represent me. I need to get him unelected...

P99 wrote:

zephyp wrote:

nickf829 wrote:Being newer to the gun world and just starting to understand what is involved in the passing of a bill, can you humor me with a dumb question? If the senate passes the bill, does that mean its now the law, or are there additional steps neccesary?

No problem Nick. Once the senate hopefully passes this bill it will go to the governor to be signed into law. When it becomes effective depends on how they implement. Usually there is a waiting period.

That's not exactly true. The house and senate both have to pass bills that mirror one another. If they do not, they have to go to reconciliation. If at first they both pass matching legislation it goes to the governor to become law. If it goes to reconciliation, a committee will work out differences and vote on a new bill. Which will then go on to be signed.

True. But, if the senate passes the same bill thats not required and it goes straight to the governor. Same thing as at the federal level.

LFS wrote:

allingeneral wrote: Anti-freedom:

Jim Scott, ...

This guy is my delegate, but he doesn't represent me. I need to get him unelected...

Amen, brother.

zephyp wrote:The repeal of the restaurant ban is looking better and better each day.

Any idea when they will hear the castle doctrine????

It was heard Monday afternoon (16th) around 3:00 pm. Not sure of the outcome. I had to go home.

guitarpicva wrote:

zephyp wrote:The repeal of the restaurant ban is looking better and better each day.

Any idea when they will hear the castle doctrine????

It was heard Monday afternoon (16th) around 3:00 pm. Not sure of the outcome. I had to go home.

Thanks. I just picked up in a news article that it was moved forward....whoo hoo!!!!!

Some liberal twit talking about being able to shoot an old girlfriend in the head because she slapped him...give me a break.

zephyp wrote:

guitarpicva wrote:

zephyp wrote:The repeal of the restaurant ban is looking better and better each day.

Any idea when they will hear the castle doctrine????

It was heard Monday afternoon (16th) around 3:00 pm. Not sure of the outcome. I had to go home.

Thanks. I just picked up in a news article that it was moved forward....whoo hoo!!!!!

Some liberal twit talking about being able to shoot an old girlfriend in the head because she slapped him...give me a break.

That was the "gentleman" from Henrico! Remember that come election time folks!

zephyp wrote: Some liberal twit talking about being able to shoot an old girlfriend in the head because she slapped him...give me a break.

From here:
http://www2.newsadvance.com/lna/news/lo ... lls/24140/

A bill by 26-year-old freshman Del. James W. “Will” Morefield that would allow deadly force against intruders from whom “bodily injury” is reasonably feared left Morrissey incredulous. And Morrissey grilled him, invoking scenario after scenario in which people not reasonably likely to inflict serious injury or death could enter another’s home and be shot dead without legal recourse against the shooter.

In one hypothetical scenario, Morrissey described “Jessica,” a spurned girlfriend, showing up at the home of ex-boyfriend, “Tony,” to find him with a new girlfriend. “She goes to slap Tony in the face, and Tony pulls out his Glock and shoots her in the head,” Morrissey said. “Under your statute, can Tony be prosecuted?”

“Jessica should not have been dating Tony,” Morefield replied as the House chamber dissolved in laughter.

Morrissey pressed again, only to have Morefield respond, “You don’t deal with hypotheticals.”

I'm only going by this article so please correct me if I'm wrong.
If you ask me, this was a legitimate questions to ask: "With the new law can you shoot an ex in your house who slaps you?"

Unfortunately, based on the article, the freshman Delegate didn't do a very good job at answering it and even made a really dumb comment: "“Jessica should not have been dating Tony". WTF??

I haven't read the law they are voting on but I would bet that with the castle law bill you still need to be in immediate fear of life or limb before using deadly force. It would have to an extremely unusual circumstance for a slap to come close to that level of threat. This is an important law and the Delegate should have been prepared to answer the question(s) properly or allow someone who is more experienced to answer. It certainly wasn't justified to make a joke about murdering someone.

Am I wrong?

MountainCat wrote:

zephyp wrote: Some liberal twit talking about being able to shoot an old girlfriend in the head because she slapped him...give me a break.

From here:
http://www2.newsadvance.com/lna/news/lo ... lls/24140/

A bill by 26-year-old freshman Del. James W. “Will” Morefield that would allow deadly force against intruders from whom “bodily injury” is reasonably feared left Morrissey incredulous. And Morrissey grilled him, invoking scenario after scenario in which people not reasonably likely to inflict serious injury or death could enter another’s home and be shot dead without legal recourse against the shooter.

In one hypothetical scenario, Morrissey described “Jessica,” a spurned girlfriend, showing up at the home of ex-boyfriend, “Tony,” to find him with a new girlfriend. “She goes to slap Tony in the face, and Tony pulls out his Glock and shoots her in the head,” Morrissey said. “Under your statute, can Tony be prosecuted?”

“Jessica should not have been dating Tony,” Morefield replied as the House chamber dissolved in laughter.

Morrissey pressed again, only to have Morefield respond, “You don’t deal with hypotheticals.”

I'm only going by this article so please correct me if I'm wrong.
If you ask me, this was a legitimate questions to ask: "With the new law can you shoot an ex in your house who slaps you?"

Unfortunately, based on the article, the freshman Delegate didn't do a very good job at answering it and even made a really dumb comment: "“Jessica should not have been dating Tony". WTF??

I haven't read the law they are voting on but I would bet that with the castle law bill you still need to be in immediate fear of life or limb before using deadly force. It would have to an extremely unusual circumstance for a slap to come close to that level of threat. This is an important law and the Delegate should have been prepared to answer the question(s) properly or allow someone who is more experienced to answer. It certainly wasn't justified to make a joke about murdering someone.

Am I wrong?

I actually listened to that exchange via the audio feed of the proceedings. What you wrote above is accurate. The Morrissey comments were ignorant of the wording of the bill for the most part, and as you pointed out, the "defender" has to be in real danger, not just some lover's spat.

The more you listen to these General Assembly proceedings, the more you see that how these guys operate when debating the legislation is usually just trying to get the other guy to say something stupid or inflammatory. It comes across really childish and immature. You wouldn't believe the manure I have heard in committee meetings that you'll never see or hear about in the news. They get downright nasty in some cases.

guitarpicva wrote:I actually listened to that exchange via the audio feed of the proceedings.

Where would one find this audio feed? Sounds interesting, if not entertaining.

I had no idea that such a feed existed. Here's one there must be more.

http://legis.virginia.gov/streaming/sov ... tream.html

MountainCat wrote:I had no idea that such a feed existed. Here's one there must be more.

http://legis.virginia.gov/streaming/sov ... tream.html

I usually start here: http://www.va10thamendment.org (shameless, plug) and find the House and Senate video streams at the right hand side. Then you can select the audio stream from either page if you prefer.

guitarpicva wrote:I usually start here: http://www.va10thamendment.org (shameless, plug) and find the House and Senate video streams at the right hand side. Then you can select the audio stream from either page if you prefer.

Is that your website guitarpic?