VCDL's meeting schedule: http://www.vcdl.org/meetings.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Abbreviations used in VA-ALERT: http://www.vcdl.org/help/abbr.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
VCDL Update 3/10/10 (A huge update - talk on guns continues to rage in
the press and that's good for our cause!)
1. Lynchburg VCDL meeting -- Post-meeting supper location
2. Old Va: Guns in State Forests V, The Public Hearing
3. Second Amendment March -- special sale and petitions
4. VCDL EM's three second cameo in CBS video
5. VERY GOOD Op Ed -- Richmond Times
6. One gun a month dueling opeds
7. Women and guns in Va. [Videos]
8. LTE by Anti: Gun laws will dictate where I spend money
9. Upcoming Christian Security Network workshops
10. Bill would allow concealed guns in restaurants
11. Columnist: Guns and booze bad mix
12. EDITORIAL: Guns in the saloon
13. Restaurant ban repeal story
14. Concealed Carrying and Drinking- Who Will Enforce New Law?
15. WSJ New Poll - What should retailers in open-carry states do about customers who display guns?
16. Restaurant ban repeal story on Winchester TV
17. Reader response: Senate restaurant ban repeal passes House!
18. TV coverage in Richmond of the Senate's NEW death star subcommittee
19. Only two Senators listening to bills toward end of Senate's new
death star subcommittee
20. Bill to repeal 1-gun-a-month rule fails to advance
21. RTD anti-gun LTEs
22. New tool for finding ammo
23. What NOT to do when a business asks you to leave
24. Sentara Hospitals
25. Newspapers are split on McDonald v Chicago; Rasmussen says
majority supports gun rights
26. The unlikely liberal case for gun rights
27. Correction
28. Gun rights and SCOTUS: Chicago will lose and the nation will win
29. Analysis: 2d Amendment extension likely
30. Starbucks re-affirms its commitment of tolerance regarding open-
carry
31. Starbuck's interview [Video]
32. Gun lovers in the U.S. test law by wearing weapons to Starbucks
33. Starbucks lauded for best business practice on customer gun carry
34. Starbuck's poll on The Consumerist
35. More articles on Starbucks
36. Buzz and bullets: Gun fans cheer Starbucks' policy
37. Woodbridge man gets life sentence in murder of woman, 80, reading
in park
38. Bill allows gun safety class for school children
39. Wyoming: CORRECTION
40. LTE: How can fewer guns equal more safety?
41. LTE pokes fun at Post's one gun a month repeal "mayhem fallacy"
42. Anti-gun Organizations Join Forces To Boost Advocacy Efforts
**************************************************
1. Lynchburg VCDL meeting -- Post-meeting supper location
**************************************************
Member Joe Seiffert lined up a gun-friendly restaurant for us to go to
after our membership meeting in Lynchburg on Tuesday, April 6th:
Monte Carlo
3230 Old Forest Road
Lynchburg, VA.
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. Old Va: Guns in State Forests V, The Public Hearing
**************************************************
Clint Kritzer emailed me this:
--
Pro-gun Old Virginia News offers some pics and short commentary from
the forestry hearing last week.
http://tinyurl.com/yamj5y3
http://news.oldva.org/
**************************************************
3. Second Amendment March -- special sale and petitions
**************************************************
Leyla Myers with the Second Amendment March emailed me this:
Friends -
I hope you are planning to attend Second Amendment March in Richmond
on April 12 and the D.C. March on April 19. Mr. Van Cleave will be a
speaker at both marches, along with other great speakers. We look
forward to seeing you all at both Marches.
Meanwhile, please support our efforts by donating what you can. We
have a great special deal for everyone - Front Sight Firearm Training
Institute donated limited number of certificates that are good for any
one of their six classes -- at an amazing price of $199! That's a
fraction of their actual value of $2,000. (* they are only valid for
first time training at Front Sight. Not valid for returning
students.) To purchase certificates, please visit our store at
http://tinyurl.com/yacvlbd
Almost three months ago, VA-ALERT included an announcement that we
were collecting signatures on petitions that were addressed to the
U.S. Congress and the Virginia General Assembly. I received a large
number of emails from you requesting the blank forms, and I replied to
every single one of those requests. I hope that you were able to
collect signatures from your family, friends, gun shows and gun stores
that you frequent. If you don't have the forms, please email me at
leyla.myers@secondamendmentmarch.com
.
For those of you who have been collecting signatures, I wanted to ask
you to complete the forms and mail them before March 15 to PO Box
listed at the buttom of the form. Thank you!
Leyla Myers, SAM
http://www.secondamendmentmarch.com
**************************************************
4. VCDL EM's three second cameo in CBS video
**************************************************
VCDL EM Mike Stollenwerk gets some airtime near the end of this CBS
news story:
http://tinyurl.com/ydknhyo
**************************************************
5. VERY GOOD Op Ed -- Richmond Times
**************************************************
http://tinyurl.com/ykle245
http://www.roanoke.com
A voice for gun rights
Bill Henderson
Henderson, of Roanoke, is a retired associate warden of the Federal
Bureau of
Prisons.
I wish to be respectful to your opposing view on gun rights, but your
editorial staff and reporters have the unfair advantage of choosing the
articles favoring your side of this argument. In that regard, I can
only say
shame on you for using the freedom of the press to unjustly mock the
citizens
who have taken on the serious responsibility of their own protection.
Recent articles went too far in describing citizens with concealed
permits as
irresponsible and dangerous Wild West gunslingers if given the right
to carry
firearms in places serving alcohol.
The Roanoke Times staff does not have the right to keep up this campaign
against Second Amendment supporters using their own rights guaranteed
in the
Constitution.
Of the 27 Amendments to the Constitution, the Second Amendment, which
enumerates the right to keep and bear arms, was one of the original 10
proposed and ratified. Why did The Times find only four common folks
in the
Roanoke Valley who have opinions about the change -- 3 to 1 against
("Voices
of the Valleys: What do you think of the bills that would expand gun
rights in
Virginia," Feb 28)? Couldn't they find an equal number of opinions to
balance
the story? Readers would find that to be honest reporting.
Also, why can you accommodate a majority of liberal university
professors and
national columnists print space to write opposition pieces on this one
amendment? Doesn't The Times look for an opinion from Second Amendment
supporters in these professions? This is unfortunate, since it would
build
support for your paper from folks like me.
My firearm is like my home's smoke detectors; I hope they will never be
needed, but they can and do save lives when used as intended. The
rules are
already written -- you cannot consume alcohol and carry a concealed
weapon or
you risk losing that right and face possible criminal charges. It is
that
simple. Concealed carry permits are a privilege that is not easy to
acquire.
Permit holders are held to strict training and compliance.
Chicago and Washington, D.C., where gun ownership has been banned for
residents for years now, have higher gun-related robberies and murders
than
any other similarly populated city in America. Those statistics speak
volumes
in regard to gun control laws.
Listening to an opinion contrary to your own with an open mind can be
very
difficult at times. Having the power to censor those with an opposing
opinion,
and utilizing that power in an unfair and unethical propaganda
fashion, is not
what the Founding Fathers intended for future generations when they
proposed
all the amendments.
The Times would well serve itself by providing its readers with fair and
unbiased reporting -- giving the same amount of time and space to all
views on
any particular subject. You utterly fail your readers by not doing so.
The Times staff should watch the cable TV series "I Survived." Watch the
real-life stories of victims of crimes who survived life-and-death
scenarios.
Perhaps only then will you understand the trauma a crime victim goes
through
and the difference that a responsible Virginian carrying a concealed
firearm
can have on the outcome.
**************************************************
6. One gun a month dueling opeds
**************************************************
VCDL president vs. former Richmond mayor
VCDL President Philip Van Cleave:
http://tinyurl.com/ya4cojt
http://www.timesdispatch.com
One Handgun A Month: Violates Our Liberties
PHILIP VAN CLEAVE TIMES-DISPATCH COLUMNIST
Published: February 28, 2010
Updated: February 28, 2010
Back in 1993, Virginia passed a bill for then-Gov. Douglas Wilder to
limit gun owners to purchasing only one handgun every 30 days.
That heralded something unusual: ration ing a civil right. There has
never been a law to limit people to reading only one book a month or
going to church only once a month. But Virginia did that to our right
to keep and bear arms, something specifically enumerated and protected
in the Bill of Rights! Surely our Founding Fathers are spinning in
their graves.
Gun control isn't based on logic and reason, but on emotion. The one-
handgun-a-month law is a textbook example. The law was passed under
the guise of preventing gun trafficking from Virginia to New York. So
let me get this right: Restricting the rights of citizens here in
Virginia was supposed to affect the behavior of criminals up in New
York? Under federal law, only citizens of Virginia can buy handguns in
Virginia anyway.
In fact, the law was passed under media pressure and hysteria without
having any factual support that it would succeed in doing anything
about crime.
Instead of guns, what if it had been a one-book-a-month law? Imagine
if you finally found a rare book that you had been searching for and
found it at an incredibly cheap price, but couldn't buy it under
penalty of law because you had bought another book 25 days before --
or was it 30 days? Good luck remembering -- and if you are wrong, you
could be arrested on the spot.
That gives you an idea of the silliness that gun owners in Virginia
have had to put up with for the past 17 years -- and for what? You
would think that New York would have been grateful to Virginia for
putting Virginia's citizens through this mess.
But you would be wrong. New York continues to blame Virginia for guns
unlawfully ending up in that state. One-handgun-a-month didn't stop
criminals from disobeying the law. Gee, who would have thought?
The truth is that most guns used in crime are acquired illegally --
theft being the most common way. Guns that are actually purchased
directly from dealers and acquired by criminals are obtained through
"straw purchases," using someone with a clean background to complete
the background-check paperwork and hand the gun over to the criminal
once the sale is approved by the state police. Often the straw
purchaser is a spouse, friend, or relative of the criminal.
Such purchases, which are a felony, are virtually impossible to stop
and criminals know it. However, for a volume purchase that the one-
handgun-a-month is supposedly addressing, an additional safeguard is
now in place under current federal law: If a dealer sells more than
one handgun to an individual within a five-day period, the sale is
reported to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives,
automatically red-flagging it for critical review.
The real problem is New York criminals who bring their illegal drugs
into Virginia and exchange them for stolen guns. If New York would
keep its criminals and illegal drugs in New York, it would have less
to complain about and Virginia would have a lower crime rate to boot.
The time has come to repeal this useless, feel-good infringement on
our right to keep and bear arms, and I thank Del. Scott Lingamfelter
for putting in a bill to do so. Perhaps New York would do better by
passing a "one-illegal-drug-a-month" law or, better yet, simply
enforcing its own laws for a change. Virginians are tired of giving up
our rights for New York's failures.
Philip Van Cleave is president of the Virginia Citizens Defense
League. Contact him at (804) 639-0600 or president@vcdl.org .
--------
Douglas Wilder, Former Richmond Mayor:
http://tinyurl.com/yat5lan
http://www.timesdispatch.com
One Handgun A Month: It Was Right Then. Still Is.
L. DOUGLAS WILDER TIMES-DISPATCH GUEST COLUMNIST
Published: February 28, 2010
Updated: February 28, 2010
was in a store last week to pick up a prescription when a woman came
up to me and asked in an angry tone, "What are you going to do about
these people in the legislature wanting more guns?" I asked her
whether she was aware that I had led the effort to enact the present
one-handgun-a-month law. She replied that she was, but that I "needed
to do more now." I asked her whether she had contacted her
representatives in the General Assembly. She let me know she had "gone
down there!"
I left the store to attend the chapel services honoring the
"Thalhimers 34" at Virginia Union University. We were commemorating
the 34 VUU students who, 50 years ago, refused to abide by the era's
segregation laws and held one of the nation's first sit-ins at the all-
white Thalhimers lunch counter..
Upon leaving the chapel, I was chided by a person -- long identified
with the Democratic Party -- who felt my criticism of Tim Kaine as the
wrong man to lead the Democratic Party was justified, but that I was
not critical enough of the Republicans. I asked him where he was last
year when Democrats were not at all critical of their candidate for
governor, Creigh Deeds, when he signed a pledge to repeal the present
one-handgun-a-month law. The gentleman admitted that he had been
silent. Growing up in Richmond's Church Hill, I had always been taught
"silence means consent."
Well, I have never been accused of being silent, and I won't sit
silently now in relation to Virginia's one-handgun-a-month law.
When we enacted this measure into law in 1993, I was assisted by one
of the commonwealth's foremost legal minds, Richard Cullen. At the
time Cullen was the U. S. attorney for the Eastern District of
Virginia. He later went on to serve the commonwealth as its attorney
general. Cullen is also a stalwart Republican.
In his role as U. S. attorney, Cullen could do nothing unless and
until he received permission from the Justice Department of President
George H. W. Bush. With the acquiescence of that Republican
administration, Cullen brought to the fore the cooperation and
influence of many law-enforcement agencies and Republicans. Polling
was done, and no area of Virginia showed less than 70 percent support
for the handgun limit.
The federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms; the Virginia
State Police; and the Virginia Bar Association all supported the
measure -- which, I hasten to note, does not apply to sport-shooting
rifles.
To my knowledge, none of that support has been withdrawn.
What were the results of the law? Prior to its passage, many crimes in
this nation's Northeast involved weapons that could be traced directly
back to purchase in Virginia. An unforgivable number of people died
because we had not been proper and responsible stewards of the
constitutional right to keep and bear handguns. One study in 1995
showed after the one-handgun-a-month law was passed, "[T]he odds of
tracing a gun originally acquired in the Southeast to a Virginia gun
dealer . . . dropped by 71 percent for guns recovered in New York, 72
percent for guns recovered in Massachusetts, and 66 percent for guns
recovered in New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and
Massachusetts combined."
No one will ever convince me that the reasonable -- and constitutional
-- legislation we passed in 1993 wasn't right for this commonwealth,
and for the people of this nation. It still is.
Shortly after I had been elected mayor of the City of Richmond,
Congressman Frank Wolf and I met in his office to discuss the
spreading influence of gangs in Virginia. I was surprised at how they
have spread into rural areas from metropolitan and suburban areas. I
was informed that the gangs believe enforcement of gun laws is not as
stringent in those areas.
I am presently informed that these gangs prey upon 21-year-olds, who
the gangs know can easily pass an instant-background check. They have
these young people purchase a large number of guns for transport to
other areas of the country -- and the fee for the exchange usually is
illegal drugs.
Virginia used to be known as the "Gun Capital" of America. Our capital
city, Richmond, used to be known as the crime capital of the nation
because of record murders and assorted crimes. Those statistics have
been remarkably reduced since we passed one-handgun-a-month.
As a matter of a fact, the crime rate in Richmond fell to the lowest
in 30 years due to a number of law-enforcement reforms, of which one-
handgun-a-month was the first and most important.
We hear a cacophony of voices loudly babbling about other laws --
supposed new laws -- now being on the books that negate the need for
one-handgun-a-month. What laws? They can't cite any and claim they are
being 100 percent honest with the people. The laws these legislators
put forward can't and won't stop gun-running. These mythic "other
laws" just don't -- but one-handgun-a-month does. Ask a prosecutor.
Ask a sheriff. Ask a police officer.
While I am honored that many people think of this measure as "Wilder's
one-gun-a-month law," getting it passed was a broad, bipartisan
effort. I was right there with Cullen leading the charge, but we had
the support of the Virginia State Police Association, the Virginia
Association of Chiefs of Police, the Virginia Fraternal Order of
Police, the Virginia Sheriffs' Association, and the Virginia
Association of Commonwealth's Attorneys.
In addition, corporate Virginia was by our side: Bruce Gottwald of the
Ethyl Corp., Justin Moore of VEPCO (now Dominion), and philanthropist
Lawrence Lewis, among others. And, of course political leaders from
across the ideological spectrum: Sen. John Warner, Sen. Chuck Robb,
former Sen. Bill Spong, former Gov. Mills Godwin, former Gov. Linwood
Holton, Norfolk Mayor Paul Fraim -- in addition to bipartisan
majorities in both the Virginia Senate and the House of Delegates.
It has been said that victory has a hundred fathers. Well I was one of
them -- but the one-handgun-a-month victory truly did have a hundred
bipartisan fathers.
Why aren't there more people like the woman who stopped me in the
pharmacy voicing opposition to repealing this law? Where is the
opposition from the people who represent her in the Assembly? Where
are the groups that normally stand up for those most affected by gun
violence? Why is there so much deadening silence -- except from the
narrow few extremists calling for repeal?
As a matter of fact, have Virginians been consulted? Who is pushing
this repeal? Not the vast moderate middle that represents the majority
of this commonwealth. The people of this state don't want this. I have
not talked with Gov. Bob McDonnell about this measure since the
election, but I would be surprised if he is now looking forward to
signing any bill placed on his desk calling for a change in the
present law.
Repealing the present gun limit would send several messages. To the
criminals: "We're open for gun-running again." To the citizens: "We
don't have to be eternally vigilant as far as your public safety is
concerned."
With public distrust of government growing, and cynicism increasing
among the people, we have an obligation to ensure that our laws should
not be changed "for light and transient reasons."
L. Douglas Wilder served as governor of Virginia from 1990 to 1994,
and as mayor of Richmond from 2005 to 2009.
**************************************************
7. Women and guns in Va. [Videos]
**************************************************
EM Patricia Webb emailed me this:
--
Ch. 8 ran a 2 part piece on women learning to shoot. It was pretty
well done, although the disclaimer at the end was unnecessary IMHO.
http://tinyurl.com/y9r8esc [Women CCWs in Va., part I]
http://tinyurl.com/yawm77k [part 2]
-Pat
**************************************************
8. LTE by Anti: Gun laws will dictate where I spend money
**************************************************
Michael Chen emailed me this:
--
http://tinyurl.com/yeooy3w
http://www.alextimes.com
Gun laws will dictate where I spend money
THURSDAY, MARCH 4 2010
By Jane Slatter
To the editor:
Virginia legislation allows people to carry handguns openly in public.
Today,a woman told me that when she recently had lunch at a local
restaurant, the person sitting at the next table displayed a gun,
holstered at his side. She said it "creeped her out." As a victim of
a mid-afternoon assault with a weapon on an Old Town street, I can
understand why.
As I understand the legislation, each establishment can decide whether
it will allow entry to people who openly carry guns. I would be very
interested to know which Alexandria restaurants, bars, shops and the
like allow people to openly carry guns into their establishments.
Would the Times please publish a list of the policies of local
establishmentsso that we can decide where we want to eat andto spend
our money? [PVC: Leave it to the antis to ask that kind of dumb
question.]
-- Jane Slatter
Alexandria
**************************************************
9. Upcoming Christian Security Network workshops
**************************************************
Jeff Koke emailed me this about some security seminars being held:
--
Jeff Koke
Kingdom Life Ministries
Chesapeake VA
http://www.kingdomlifeministries.cc
Kingdom Life Ministries in Chesapeake, VA is hosting multiple security
related seminars on April 9th and 10th, 2010. These national-level
seminars are facilitated by the Christian Security Network (CSN).
Jeffrey A. Hawkins serves as Executive Director of CSN and is past
Chief Security Officer for a world-wide Christian ministry. He is a
senior public safety/security professional with almost 30-years of
diverse experience working for profit, not-for-profit and government
organizations on a local, regional, and global level.
Following is a brief description of each of the three workshops:
"Security & Emergency Planning for Christian Organizations" This full-
day seminar covers all the key introductory topics to put a working
plan in place for churches, schools, ministries and missionaries.
Topics covered include: Risks and Liability, Risk Assessment,
Background Screening, Establishing a Safety Team, Crisis Management
Team, Five key emergency plans for every organization, Physical,
Electronic and Procedural security, Top Five Emergency Plans, and
Security Awareness.
"Armed Safety Team Workshop" This full-day workshop covers topics
relevant to the Christian church's armed safety/security team, whether
it is already established, just forming, or is something that is being
planned for the future. This workshop will be divided into half-day
classroom and half-day practical scenarios. This is not all about how
to shoot a gun; it is about the legalities, awareness, tactics to
defuse a situation, as well as worst-case scenarios involving a
rapidly escalating violent confrontation.
Attend either full-day seminar or attend both and receive a discount.
Discounts are also available for multiple attendees from the same
organization and CSN Subscribers.
"Safety for Christian Women" This one and a half hour seminar covers
security and safety insights for the home, at work, while traveling,
on the Internet, and young adult considerations. The Christian
Security Network's Executive Director, Jeff Hawkins has been teaching
woman's safety courses for over 20 years to thousands of women. He
brings his experience as a law enforcement officer, crime prevention
specialist, martial arts instructor, and criminal justice college
professor to this topic in a spiritual, practical way. This is a must
for every young and adult Christian woman, and those who love them.
Recommended for those 16 years and older.
FOR MORE INFORMATION AND REGISTRATION: http://www.christiansecuritynetwork.org
or 800.805.7126 (MF, 9am to 5pm EST)
**************************************************
10. Bill would allow concealed guns in restaurants
**************************************************
http://tinyurl.com/ye2nlmg
http://hburgnews.com
Bill would allow concealed guns in restaurants
posted by Alex Sirney
The Virginia Senate passed a bill Tuesday that would remove the
restrictions prohibiting gun owners with concealed carry licenses from
carrying in restaurants and would allow police officers to drink while
carrying.
The current law forbids concealed carry in restaurants, though it
allows guns to be carried openly. It is legal to drink while carrying
openly, though intoxication is illegal for all citizens. Senate Bill
334, referred to as the "Guns-in-bars" bill, would change that to
allow concealed carry in restaurants, though forbidding those carrying
concealed firearms from drinking. The bill will amend Section 18.2-308
of the Code of Virginia (deletions are struck out and additions are in
bold):
JJ3. No person shall carry who carries a concealed handgun onto the
premises of any restaurant or club as defined in Section 4.1-100 for
which a license to sell and serve alcoholic beverages for on-premises
consumption has been granted by the Virginia Alcoholic Beverage
Control Board under Title 4.1 of the Code of Virginia; however,
nothing herein may consume an alcoholic beverage while on the
premises. A person who carries a concealed handgun onto the premises
of such a restaurant or club and consumes alcoholic beverages is
guilty of a Class 2 misdemeanor. ?[ A person who becomes intoxicated
while carrying a concealed handgun on the premises of such a
restaurant or club is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. ?] ?However,
nothing in this subsection shall prohibit any sworn apply to a
federal, state, or local law-enforcement officer? [ or any retired law-
enforcement officer who meets the definition of a "qualified retired
law-enforcement officer" pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ? 926C and is carrying
the identification required by such statute? ] . from carrying a
concealed handgun on the premises of such restaurant or club or any
owner or event sponsor or his employees from carrying a concealed
handgun while on duty at such restaurant or club if such person has a
concealed handgun permit.
Bills with similar provisions were passed but vetoed under Gov. Kaine,
but Gov. McDonnell is expected to sign the bill into law. There are
officially no bars in Virginia - all establishments serving alcohol
must have at least 45 percent of their sales come from food and non-
alcoholic drinks. Restaurant owners will retain the right to put in
place their own policies restricting open or concealed carry in their
establishment.
Local restaurant owners and managers reacted with caution to the
change in the law, expressing concerns over enforcement and safety.
"Personally, I think it's a bad idea to allow citizens [with concealed
weapons] into places where people are consuming alcohol," Sean Pugh,
co-owner of the Joshua Wilton House, said. "It's a bad idea." Pugh is
active in the Downtown Dining Alliance, and said that they have not
yet discussed the implications of the law.
"Different restaurants are going to have a different feel about [the
law]," he said. "We're going to be less likely to encounter an issue
than some place people go to drink and party."
Chris Clark, owner of the Artful Dodger, and Mickey Arafaine, general
manager of the Blue Nile - both popular nightspots - expressed
concerns over security, though both expected patrons to act responsibly.
"I want to believe that [the law] will not affect anything. People are
generally aware of their level of safety and we [at the Artful Dodger]
feel that we provide that," Clark said.
Arafaine said, "I don't know how much it will change in practice.
Unless you do something, no one will even know you have [a concealed
gun]."
"I don't think people will react to it unless there's an incident."
Neither Arafaine nor Clark anticipated adding any additional security
measures beyond what they have currently in place. Neither has had any
serious incidents with customers carrying guns, though both have asked
patrons to leave in different circumstances. They both said the change
would increase the need for staff to be more aware of who was in the
restaurant.
The question of security is tied closely to the law's enforcement.
"I think the biggest problem is enforcing it. What's stopping any
person from bringing a gun into a bar right now?" Craig Moore, owner
of the Local Chop and Grill House, said. "How do you know someone with
a concealed gun is drinking?"
"You've got to be caught to enforce it."
He said that he would not be searching patrons because it is "a
tremendous invasion of privacy."
"I hope this doesn't lead to other things where the burden is on the
establishment," Moore said. Arafaine expressed similar sentiments.
"The burden is on the restaurant and it should be on the person," she
said.
Philip Van Cleave, president of the Virginia Citizen's Defense League,
Inc., a gun rights lobbying group, said that the security concerns
aren't anything new or different.
"Restaurant owners always have the trespass onus on them," he said,
calling the security issue a trespass issue at its root. "It's nothing
unusual."
According to Van Cleave, Virginia banned concealed carry in
restaurants in 1995, and with the passage of this bill would join
approximately 40 states that currently allow concealed carry in
restaurants and bars.
This bill will give restaurant owners more options, Van Cleave said.
He has had experiences where, as the holder of a concealed gun
license, he has had to carry openly in restaurants to comply with the
current law. He sees this as potentially distracting to other
customers, and has been asked to conceal his gun by restaurant owners,
which he legally had to refuse to do.
"This empowers restaurant owners to make their own policy," he said.
His focus on the law's application was on scenarios where license
holders were dining in restaurants. He said late-night drinking
scenarios were unlikely.
"One can sit down and picture all kinds of things that could happen,
but we have to look at practice," he said. "Are permit holders going
into that environment in practice? I don't think so."
"One should not strip away our freedoms because of what might happen."
Lori Haas, spokesperson for the Virginia Center for Public Safety, a
pro gun control lobby group, argued strongly against the bill.
"Guns and alcohol don't mix," she said. "A small, vocal group of gun
owners wants any gun, any time." She also expressed concerns about
enforcement and said that the VCPS supports responsible gun ownership
and gun control laws.
"Restrictions are not mutually exclusive with the second amendment,"
she said.
Both supporters and detractors will soon take a back seat to reality,
however, once Gov. McDonnell signs the bill into law as expected. What
reaction can we expect from the Harrisonburg community once the law
goes into effect?
Note: Local gun rights activist and NRA member Jon Ritenour,
representatives from Jack Brown's, Finnigan's Cove, Clementine, Dave's
Taverna, the Downtown Dining Alliance, the Virginia Hospitality and
Travel Association and the Harrisonburg Police Department were
unavailable for comment as of posting. Update expected early next week.
**************************************************
11. Columnist: Guns and booze bad mix
**************************************************
Columnist advances new "guns and booze don't mix" argument. You can
always tell where an article is headed when they use words like
"toting," "booze," "six-shooter," "watering hole," "OK coral," "wild
west," "saloon," etc., etc.
Bruce Jackson emailed me this:
--
My comment - may not get published...
Poor, poor uninformed and ignorant of the law Tamara. The current rule
in the general Assembly is you can carry concealed OR open if you have
a permit. The CURRENT law on restaurant carry is you cannot conceal
but you CAN drink as long as you do not get drunk. This new bill on
its way to becoming law says you can conceal but you CANNOT drink.
So, if your main point is "Guns and booze a bad mix" you should be
dancing all the way to happy hour. Oh, and just to help you get a
slightly better perspective on this, the sky is not falling....
http://tinyurl.com/ye9dbdx
http://weblogs.dailypress.com
Guns and booze a bad mix
Bad things can happen when you mix guns and booze: Your judgment could
be just as bad as your aim.
Even the NRA's Web site cautions against it, because alcohol is
"likely to impair normal mental and physical bodily functions."
So why isn't the NRA putting the hammer down on the Virginia
legislature passing a law to allow concealed handguns in places that
serve alcohol?
The fear for gun activists is that some armed lunatic will start
shooting up unarmed bar customers like ducks in a barrel of Bud Lite.
But, given the rarity of such a situation, the more likely scenario
under this new law is that some armed lunatic will start shooting at
armed customers - who will also be mentally and physically impaired.Or
that mentally and physically impaired customers will elevate simple
bar fights into the OK Corral.
Let the drunken shootouts begin.
Gun owners worry that being forced to leave their weapons in their
vehicles before entering a bar risks those weapons being stolen.
Personally, I'm all for owning handguns for self-defense. Shotguns,
too. Hunting rifles. I'm all for concealed carry.
But I'm not for carrying them everywhere in society.
It's interesting that the General Assembly which jammed this bill
through still forbids concealed firearms in the State Capitol and
legislators' offices.
They used to welcome all law-abiding citizens and their firearms, but
a few years ago restricted it to those with concealed carry permits.
Even then, they must carry openly, not concealed.
In other words, lawmakers don't trust their constituents enough to let
them carry concealed weapons into THEIR workplace, where booze is -
presumably - not even served. Yet they have no problem exposing
everyone else to concealed weapons, and in places where booze most
definitely is.
What's also interesting that the only dangerous guy with a gun in the
Capitol complex is a legislator who shot up a bulletproof vest in his
own office four years ago.
Del. Jack Reid, R-Henrico County, couldn't explain how on earth he
discharged his .380 handgun inside his own office. During work hours.
"I really don't know," he sheepishly said later.
And this is an avid gun-owner, presumably sober, who supposedly knows
not to put his finger on the trigger of a loaded firearm.
I guess you don't need booze, after all, to have impaired judgment.
But, sure as shootin', it won't help.
**************************************************
12. EDITORIAL: Guns in the saloon
**************************************************
Actually, this article uses "saloon" in the title, but is pro-gun -
pretty rare:
http://tinyurl.com/yfgwb2g
http://www.washingtontimes.com
EDITORIAL: Guns in the saloon
Virginians have a right to defend themselves
By THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Someone who is drunk shouldn't be handling a gun, but that doesn't
justify a ban on concealed carrying in all places that serve alcohol.
On Tuesday, the Virginia House of Delegates joined the state Senate
and voted 72-to-27 to overturn this ban. Gov. Robert F. McDonnell's
signature is all that stands in the way of getting rid of this
dangerous restriction.
Over the past two decades, a sweeping wave of freedom has allowed more
citizens to carry concealed handguns. States have realized that there
is little reason to restrict the carrying of concealed handguns by
those who have received permits. Forty states currently allow
concealed handguns to be carried in places that serve alcohol. None of
the states that have allowed this freedom has cause to reverse the
decision.
The facts are clear. Despite misleading claims to the contrary by the
Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence and the Violence Policy Center,
permit holders are law-abiding individuals who are extremely careful
with their guns. This general rule applies in states that allow
concealed handguns in bars. Permit holders simply haven't been getting
liquored up and harming others through irresponsible conduct. Virginia
hasn't had any problem with open carry in restaurants, so it's hard to
understand why anyone thinks there could be a problem with concealed
handguns.
Take Florida and Texas, two states that allow concealed handguns in
bars. Between Oct. 1, 1987, and Jan. 31, 2010, Florida issued permits
to more than 1.7 million people. Only 167 have had their permits
revoked for any firearms-related violations. That is a minuscule
0.0098 percent revocation rate. The vast majority of those revocations
were not for violence, but merely for accidentally carrying a gun into
a gun-free zone. During the past 16 months, there was only one
incident involving a firearms-related violation.
The numbers are similar in Texas. Over the five years from 2002 to
2006, the average rate at which permit holders were convicted of a
misdemeanor or a felony was 0.04 percent. In 2006, the most frequent
reason for revocation involved permit holders carrying a concealed
handgun without keeping their licenses on them. The forthcoming third
edition of "More Guns, Less Crime" shows that in other right-to-carry
states, permit holders are just as law-abiding. That book finds no
evidence that revocation rates are any higher in states that allow
permitted handguns in taverns.
What gun prohibitions do is create dangerous gun-free zones - places
where criminals intent on harming others feel confident they can
commit crimes with impunity. A criminal who takes his gun into a
gun-free zone knows that the good law-abiding citizens, his victims,
are sitting ducks. A government that maintains laws like that is not
looking after the interests of its citizens.
It's past time for the commonwealth to take aim at counterproductive
laws that endanger Virginians. With a flick of his pen, Mr. McDonnell
can correct this problem and modernize Virginia's right-to-carry law.
**************************************************
13. Restaurant ban repeal story
**************************************************
At the end of this article, Delegate Morrissey, a Democrat, talks
about profiling gun owners by the way they look and is taken down to
the mat by one in his own party. Hats off to Delegate Pollard for
that move:
--
http://tinyurl.com/yhmqmhq
http://www.newsadvance.com
House passes bill to allow concealed handguns in bars
The Associated Press
Published: March 2, 2010
RICHMOND -- Virginia lawmakers gave final approval Tuesday to
legislation that allows people to carry concealed handguns into bars.
On a vote of 72-27, the House of Delegates approved a Senate bill that
allows concealed handgun permit holders to go armed inside places that
serve alcohol, but forbids them to drink.
Then in swift succession, the House approved measures that allow
Virginians to renew their concealed handgun permits by mail for the
first time and that make it legal to carry handguns locked in glove
compartments of cars or boats even without a concealed handgun permit.
All three bills now head to Gov. Bob McDonnell, who plans to sign
them, said spokesman J. Tucker Martin.
Tuesday's votes and the House passage last month of legislation that
repeals Virginia's limit of one handgun purchase per month represents
a strong surge by gun-rights interests in the most ambitious pro-gun
agenda in years.
The guns-in-bars bill was vetoed for several years by Democratic Gov.
Timothy M. Kaine. Now, assured of enactment, gun rights advocates were
overjoyed.
"It's about time," said Philip Van Cleave, president of the Virginia
Citizens Defense League. "We've tried to get this for 13 years now.
We've gotten it as far as the governor's desk the past three years,
and Kaine vetoed it the past two."
Van Cleave and his organization said the requirement that people who
hold the permits either lock their guns in their cars or display them
openly when they enter restaurants was a problem. Leaving them in
vehicles invited theft, he said.
"This is ideal. Now you get up in the morning, put your gun on and go
about your business," he said.
Opponents argued that allowing people to bring guns into places that
sell alcohol to crowds of varying degrees of sobriety invites a tragic
end.
"I was just wondering how that works -- if an individual was carrying
a concealed weapon into a bar and drinks, how do we enforce or
otherwise police that? Would there be, like, concealed gun police in
the bar?" asked Del. Joseph Morrissey, D-Henrico.
"I assume it's the same way we can catch the criminals, felons and
mentally ill people who are already carrying weapons into restaurants
around the commonwealth," Del. Todd Gilbert, R-Shenandoah, replied.
"This bill is aimed at allowing law-abiding people to continue to
avail themselves of a right they enjoy everywhere else in society."
By even more comfortable margins, the House approved the Senate bills
allowing motorists to carry handguns locked in a compartment of their
automobiles, and to allow concealed gun permit holders to get them
renewed by mail rather than appear in person before a court clerk,
which is now required.
The guns-in-cars bill passed on a 74-25 vote without debate.
The mail-in permit renewal bill prevailed on an 81-18 vote.
Morrissey argued that eliminating the requirement to appear personally
before a court staffer bypassed the last chance to spot a troubled
person, and he invoked the name of Christopher Speight, the man
accused in the shooting deaths of eight people in Appomattox in
January, to make his point.
"When you run into another individual like a Christopher Speight, who
did not go before a court, who did not go before a deputy clerk, or
the clerk of the court, there would be no opportunity to observe that
person's behavior and his mannerisms," Morrissey said.
Speight did go before the court in 1995, 1997, 1999 and 2004 to
receive and renew his concealed handgun permit.
The attorney for Speight's family, Harry Devening, said Speight had an
apparent learning disability and history of mental problems, and that
he had suffered a breakdown in 2007. But there was no indication that
Speight got mental health treatment or would otherwise be disqualified
from buying a gun or getting a concealed handgun permit.
Further, Virginia court personnel have no discretion to deny a permit
to anyone who affirms there are no mental illnesses, substance abuse
problems or criminal convictions in his past, making Morrissey's point
about an applicant's look or demeanor moot.
Del. Albert Pollard, a fellow Democrat from rural Lancaster County,
also challenged Morrissey on his point.
"Would the gentleman suggest that someone should be denied their
Second Amendment rights because they might not look right?" Pollard
demanded, evoking appreciative whistles and hoots, particularly from
Republicans.
**************************************************
14. Concealed Carrying and Drinking- Who Will Enforce New Law?
**************************************************
Notice the photo accompanying the article is the usual inflammatory
junk from the media.
--
http://tinyurl.com/yekzmyn
http://www.wtvr.com
[SNIP]
But as the bill awaits Governor McDonnell's signature- it already
passed the House and Senate with heavy support- some opponents wonder
whether the provision banning drinking can actually be enforced.
"How do you monitor that," asked Del. Joe Morrissey, D-74th. "***Where
is the bar policeman***? Is he going around from patron to patron
saying, 'I see you drinking, do you have a concealed weapon?'"
Hanger said violators will face a Class 2 misdemeanor and the
revocation of the their concealed permit.
"There is a substantial penalty," he said, "because they can lose the
right to carry- most people jealously guard that right that they've
acquired."
CBS 6 contacted Virginia State Police and the Richmond Police
Department to find out how the agencies would enforce the law.
Both groups declined to comment on pending legislation, until it
becomes finalized. [PVC: What a colossal waste of time that would
be for police to be doing nothing by trying to catch a CHP holder
drinking while carrying concealed!]
**************************************************
15. WSJ New Poll - What should retailers in open-carry states do
about customers who display guns?
**************************************************
Edward Griffin emailed me this:
--
Hi Philip,
Thought you might want to know of this poll. I did a quick search and
did not see it listed as a new poll on OpenCarry.org.
http://tinyurl.com/y9rr8c9
**************************************************
16. Restaurant ban repeal story on Winchester TV
**************************************************
Harlan Williamson, a gun store owner in Frederick County, emailed me
this. He is in the story below.
There is one problem in that Harlan says, "Virginia currently allows
its residents to carry fire arms in restaurants and bars..." That is
incorrect. Virginia does NOT PROHIBIT carrying of firearms by ANYONE
(not just residents):
--
http://tinyurl.com/yhjqdg7
**************************************************
17. Reader response: Senate restaurant ban repeal passes House!
**************************************************
Richard Duncan emailed me this article by John Lott:
--
http://tinyurl.com/ybfzdle
http://www.foxnews.com
Updated March 01, 2010
Will the Supreme Court Recognize the Truth About Chicago's Handgun Ban?
By John Lott - FOXNews.com
What the crime data show is that gun laws primarily disarm law-abiding
citizens, they do not make them safer.
In the 2008 "Heller" decision, the Supreme Court struck down
Washington, D.C.'s handgun ban and gunlock requirements.
Unsurprisingly, gun control advocates predicted disaster. They were
wrong. What actually happened in our nation's capital after the Heller
decision ought to be remembered tomorrow as the Supreme Court hears a
similar constitutional challenge to the Chicago handgun ban.
When the Heller case was decided, Washington's Mayor Adrian Fenty
warned: "More handguns in the District of Columbia will only lead to
more handgun violence." Knowing that Chicago's gun laws would soon
face a similar legal challenge, Mayor Richard Daley was particularly
vocal. The day that the Heller decision was handed down, Daley said
that he and other mayors across the country were "outraged" by the
decision and he predicted more deaths along with Wild West-style
shootouts. Daley warned that people "are going to take a gun and they
are going to end their lives in a family dispute."
But Armageddon never arrived. Quite the contrary, murders in
Washington plummeted by an astounding 25 percent in 2009, dropping
from 186 murders in 2008 to 140. That translates to a murder rate that
is now down to 23.5 per 100,000 people, Washinton's lowest since 1967.
While other cities have also fared well over the last year, D.C.'s
drop was several times greater than that for other similar sized
cities. According to preliminary estimates by the FBI, nationwide
murders fell by a relatively more modest 10 percent last year and by
about 8 percent in other similarly sized cities of half a million to
one million people (D.C.'s population count is at about 590,000).
This shouldn't be surprising to anyone who has followed how crime
rates change after gun bans have been imposed. Around the world,
whenever guns are banned, murder rates rise.
Washington's murder rate soared after its handgun ban went into effect
in early 1977 (there is only one year while the ban was in effect that
the murder rate fell below the1976 number and that happened many years
later -- in 1985). Its murder rate also rose relative to other cities.
Washington's murder rate rose from 12 percent above the average for
the 50 most populous cities in 1976 to 35 percent above the average in
1986.
Chicago fared no better after the 7th Circuit Appeals court upheld its
ban on new handguns in late 1982. Over the next 19 years following the
ban, there were only three years where the murder rate was as low as
in 1982. As shown in the forthcoming third edition of my book "More
Guns, Less Crime," before the ban, Chicago's murder rate was falling
relative to the 9 other largest cities, the 50 largest cities, the
five counties that boarder Cook county, as well as the U.S. as a
whole. After the ban Chicago's murder rate rose relative to all these
other places. For example, comparing murder rates among the 50 most
populous cities, the murder rate went from equaling the average for
the other cities in 1982, to exceeding their average murder rate by 32
percent in 1992, to exceeding their average by 68 percent in 2002.
The failures of gun bans in the U.S. are frequently blamed on lax gun
restrictions in other states. But the experiences of other countries,
even in island nations that have banned handguns and in countries
where borders are easy to monitor, do not support this claim. For when
handgun bans were enacted in Ireland and Jamaica, in 1972 and 1974,
respectively, murder rates doubled over the following decade. And take
the more recent example in England and Wales, where handguns were
banned in 1997: deaths and injuries from gun crime more than doubled
over the next seven years.
The benefits of guns are not lost on Chicago's politicians. Chicago
Tribune columnist John Kass wrote in 2008 that there are two types of
people who are allowed to have handguns in Chicago: "The criminals.
And the politicians." The politicians use their pull to either "become
deputized peace officers so they can carry" or "often go around
surrounded by armed bodyguards on the city payroll." It is just that
the politicians don't want to extend those benefits to the citizens
they are supposed to represent. This includes Mr. Otis McDonald, the
lead plaintiff in the Chicago case. He is a 76-year-old black man
living in a neighborhood infested with drug dealers. McDonald's home
has been burglarized three times, and he would like to possess a
handgun that he can easily access next to his bed.
Chicago's fate will be decided on constitutional issues. The decision
ultimately comes down to whether the Second Amendment applies to the
states in the same way that the 14th Amendment has been applied to
most of the Bill of Rights. It would seem to be a no-brainer,
especially since the 14th Amendment was in large part passed to
protect newly freed blacks from Southern states passing laws to disarm
them. Nevertheless, how one sees guns affecting crime seems to color
interpretation of the Constitution. The brief submitted by the city of
Chicago to the Supreme Court repeatedly emphasizes the claim that more
guns cause more crime. They argue: "a handgun ban and stringent
firearms regulation will best address the very serious problem of
handgun crime and violence in their communities."
Despite Chicago's ban, criminals still have managed to get their hands
on guns. During the first 10 months of last year Chicago police
confiscated or recovered 7,234 guns, which is about one gun for every
14 gang members in Chicago and surrounding suburbs. And police found
just a small fraction of the guns. What the crime data show is that
gun laws primarily disarm law-abiding citizens, they do not make them
safer. Even restrictions on guns, such as laws that mandate that
citizens store shotguns and rifles locked and unloaded, defeat the
very purpose of guns and often make the guns no more useful than sticks.
John R. Lott, Jr. is a FoxNews.com contributor. He is an economist and
author of "More Guns, Less Crime" (University of Chicago Press). The
book's third edition of which will be published in May.
**************************************************
18. TV coverage in Richmond of the Senate's NEW death star subcommittee
**************************************************
http://tinyurl.com/ye6x8cq
**************************************************
19. Only two Senators listening to bills toward end of Senate's new
death star subcommittee
**************************************************
Anti-gun subcommittee members not even present to vote down bills.
Theron Keller emailed me this:
--
In case you didn't see this yet... Roanoke Times article blurb:
"By the end of Thursday's meeting, the Senate subcommittee was voting
down bills with as few as two members in the room. Absent senators
left proxies to record their votes."
http://tinyurl.com/yd2ltna
http://www.roanoke.com
Senate subcommittee votes down handgun bill
A panel dominated by Democrats rejected a bill to lift a limit on
handgun purchases.
By Michael Sluss
Friday, March 05, 2010
RICHMOND -- A hastily formed Senate subcommittee voted Thursday to
defeat legislation that would repeal Virginia's one-handgun-per-month
law, likely killing the proposal for the year.
The Democrat-dominated panel took the extraordinary step of voting
down several pro-gun bills that had been passed by the Republican-run
House of Delegates, keeping the bills from getting a hearing in the
full Senate Courts of Justice Committee. The committee's chairman,
Sen. Henry Marsh, D-Richmond, said he won't put the bills on the full
committee's docket when it holds its final scheduled meeting Monday.
Marsh appointed the five-member subcommittee just Monday, stacking it
with Democrats who favor gun control. Marsh said he formed the panel
because the full committee already had devoted significant time to gun
legislation this year.
Republicans and gun rights advocates said Marsh's move was an end run
around the full Courts of Justice Committee, where bills could have
picked up support from pro-gun Democrats.
"I think in my alert I will call this The Ides of Marsh," said Philip
Van Cleave, the president of the Virginia Citizens Defense League,
musing about the headline he would put on his electronic newsletter.
While Marsh declared the rejected bills dead Thursday, one Republican
senator did not rule out making an effort to revive them in the full
committee.
"I don't think it's the end of the road for these bills," said Sen.
Mark Obenshain, R-Harrisonburg.
Senate subcommittees typically don't kill legislation and merely make
recommendations to full committees. Senators have grumbled about
established House of Delegates rules that enable House subcommittees
to effectively kill bills, including measures passed by the Senate.
By the end of Thursday's meeting, the Senate subcommittee was voting
down bills with as few as two members in the room. Absent senators
left proxies to record their votes. Sen. Frederick Quayle of Suffolk
was the only Republican on the subcommittee.
The Marsh-appointed subcommittee voted 4-1 against a bill (House Bill
49) that would repeal Virginia's law limiting handgun purchases to one
per month. The 1993 law was a signature initiative of former Gov. Doug
Wilder, who pushed it as a means of reducing illegal gun trafficking.
The subcommittee also rejected a bill that would exempt firearms and
ammunition made and used in Virginia from federal laws. House Bill 69,
sponsored by Del. Bill Carrico, R-Grayson County, has been embraced by
10th Amendment advocates who criticize the reach of the federal
government.
But gun rights advocates have still scored victories in this session.
Both houses have passed legislation that would allow gun owners with
permits to take concealed handguns into restaurants that serve
alcohol. They also have passed a bill that would let individuals
without concealed carry permits store firearms in locked vehicle
compartments.
Other bills defeated by the subcommittee Thursday included a measure
that would deny public access to concealed carry permit records kept
by local circuit courts. And it rejected a bill that would require
localities with gun buy-back programs to resell the weapons to
licensed firearms dealers rather than destroy them.
**************************************************
20. Bill to repeal 1-gun-a-month rule fails to advance
**************************************************
http://tinyurl.com/yaqtcg5
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com
Bill to repeal 1-gun-a-month rule fails to advance
By: DENA POTTER
Associated Press
03/04/10 7:10 PM EST
RICMOND, VA. -- A Senate subcommittee created to block pro-gun
legislation voted Thursday to shoot down numerous proposals to loosen
the state's gun laws, including a measure to repeal Virginia's ban on
buying more than one handgun per month.
Republicans and gun rights advocates cried foul when the subcommittee
was created earlier in the week and given the authority to kill bills
without a vote of the full committee. Though the practice is common in
the House, the Senate rules call for subcommittees to make
recommendations to the full committee.
One likened the effortless rejection of 10 pro-gun bills to the "Ides
of March," the fateful day Julius Caesar was assassinated. Republicans
suggested they would try to demand a full committee vote on Monday.
"If the Senate can't follow their own rules you start wondering why
people should follow the Senate's rules?" said Philip Van Cleave,
president of the pro-gun Virginia Citizens Defense League.
Brushing off complaints, Senate Courts Committee Chairman Sen. Henry
Marsh said he would not put the bills on the docket for a vote.
"I don't make my decisions based on criticism," Marsh said after the
meeting. "I make my decisions based on what I think is right."
It was Democrats' only hope of killing some of the measures because
even though they have a 10-5 majority on the full committee. At least
three party members regularly vote with Republicans to approve pro-gun
bills.
For Democrats and gun opponents, the major victory was killing Del.
Scott Lingamfelter's repeal of the one-gun-a-month law, enacted in
1993 as Virginia had a reputation as an East Coast armory for violent
criminals and homicide rates in the capital city soared.
Lingamfelter argued that technology has improved since then, with
instant background checks keeping guns out of criminals' hands. He
said exemptions carved out of the law for everyone from the state's
214,000 concealed handgun permit holders to those who report their
guns stolen within 30 days of purchase have "neutered" the law,
rendering it useless.
Criminals don't go to gun stores to buy guns, he argued, leaving only
law-abiding citizens to be burdened by the law.
"I don't think we should ration our Second Amendment rights any more
than we ration our First Amendment rights," said Lingamfelter, R-
Prince William.
Only Virginia, Maryland, California and New Jersey limit the number of
handguns that can be bought each month. South Carolina repealed its
one-gun-a-month law in 2004.
Other proposals rejected by the subcommittee include:
_Exempting from federal law any gun manufactured or sold in the state.
_Shielding from public record information on concealed handgun permit
holders.
_Prohibiting localities from destroying weapons acquired in gun
buyback programs without offering them at auction to licensed gun
dealers.
_Allowing gun owners to lock weapons in their vehicles on private
property against property owners' objections.
_Directing the Virginia State Police to come up with a plan to issue
lifetime concealed handgun permits instead of requiring renewal every
five years.
_Prohibiting court clerks from asking for any information not required
on a concealed handgun permit application.
_Allowing concealed handgun permit holders to take guns into emergency
shelters.
_Prohibiting localities from banning hunting near subdivisions.
The bills were part of one of the most ambitious legislative packages
in years.
The General Assembly already has passed bills that will allow
concealed guns in bars as long as carriers do not drink alcohol, allow
renewal of permits by mail and allow gun owners to lock their firearms
in vehicle or boat glove boxes even if they do not have a concealed
handgun permit.
Earlier in the day, another Senate committee advanced a bill to
require the State Board of Education to develop a program of firearm
safety education for elementary education students.
The guns-in-bars bill passed the legislature twice before but was
vetoed by former Gov. Timothy M. Kaine, a Democrat. Republican Gov.
Bob McDonnell has said he would sign the bill.
"The restaurant bill alone is a big bill for us," Van Cleave said.
"We'll be celebrating come July 1st."
**************************************************
21. RTD anti-gun LTEs
**************************************************
http://tinyurl.com/yjhzqrn
http://www.timesdispatch.com
Letters: Retro House Actions Mean Losses for All
By STAFF REPORTS
Published: February 28, 2010
Retro House Actions Mean Losses for All
Editor, Times-Dispatch: The Virginia House of Delegates had a busy
week. Gun laws were overturned, environmental concerns dismissed, and
resolutions passed concerning the primacy of states' rights according
to a very selective interpretation of the 10th Amendment.
Del. Robert G. Marshall asserts that Virginia has a long history of
"expressing our discontent with actions of Congress going back to our
denunciation of the Alien and Sedition Acts in the late 1790s."
One doesn't have to go back that far to find the delegates in a state
of high dudgeon, however. In the 1950s, Harry Byrd and the Virginia
legislature championed a movement known as Massive Resistance. The
strategy then was to assert states' rights in the service of keeping
our schools segregated.
There is a kind of evolution in the delegates' actions recently.
Massive Resistance was specifically targeted at the African-American
community. The current legislation and resolutions designed to stop
environmental initiatives, common-sense gun laws, and a more equitable
access to health care are relatively color-blind -- everyone loses.
David Byrne.
Richmond.
-
Governor Picked Awfully Winding Path
Editor, Times-Dispatch: Reading Gov. Bob McDonnell's letter outlining
his budget proposals made me wonder in which direction are we being led.
McDonnell writes, "The safety of our citizens is the top
responsibility of government," while the legislature approves measures
for people to carry concealed weapons in bars.
The rest stops are reopened to promote tourism while the governor
proposes closing five state parks.
McDonnell recognizes the $700-million cut in education will "create
short-term hardship for our great teachers and school administrators,"
yet does not mention anything about the long-term impact of these cuts
on students and ultimately on the economy of Virginia.
The governor has indicated that this is a time that requires a strong
leader. It appears that we are being led down a winding path that
leads to security for McDonnell's personal political future at the
expense of the safety, education, and the long-term economic
prosperity of Virginians. I don't want to follow.
Daniel Rigsby.
Richmond.
***************************************************************************
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/]