VCDL's meeting schedule: http://www.vcdl.org/meetings.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Abbreviations used in VA-ALERT: http://www.vcdl.org/help/abbr.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
VCDL Update 3/31/10
1. Reminder: Lynchburg VCDL meeting on April 6
2. The VCDL Member Discounts page is now LIVE!
3. Is the American Automobile Association (AAA) anti-gun?
4. Does Anti-Gun Researcher David Hemenway Have Something To Hide?
5. Father of toddler opens fire on I-95, police say
6. Gun rights foes hope to stir opposition against three gun bills in Virginia
7. Richmond Police Chief OK with repeal; Board and EM members have cameo on news
8. VA-ALERT reader responds to article in Martinsville Bulletin
9. Fed, state rules blur issue of guns in national parks
10. Firearms regulations in the National Parks
11. NPS carry site
12. 22 minutes for a concealed weapon permit
13. The shocking truth about a fundamental right being denied to 55% of citizens
14. Small handgun calibers / slow stops
15. Kansas campuses move closer to concealed carrying
16. Open carry event in Wisconsin
17. Man "shot dead" at gun show RECOVERING in Denver hospital
18. Harry Reid to host gun party
19. Shooting Sports Shows: DirecTV and Dish Network
20. Free CHP Training in VA for .edu addresses
**************************************************
1. Reminder: Lynchburg VCDL meeting on April 6
**************************************************
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. The VCDL Member Discounts page is now LIVE!
**************************************************
Check it out on the vcdl.org web site
http://www.vcdl.org/static/discounts.html
**************************************************
3. Is the American Automobile Association (AAA) anti-gun?
**************************************************
http://tinyurl.com/yhcb22e
sailorcurt.blogspot.com
By Curtis Stone (VCDL EM)
March 26, 2010
There's been a lot of buzz about the incident in Northern Virginia on
I-95 involving a dump truck ramming a Jaguar and the driver of the Jag
responding with gunfire.
I haven't commented because the details are still a little murky and I
don't want to jump to any premature conclusions. It is unclear at
this time whether the shooter's actions were a result of anger, or
legitimate fear for his and his child's life in the face of a
vehicular assault.
AAA seems not so reticent about jumping to conclusions, however. In
this article about the incident, AAA Mid-Atlantic Manager of Public
and Government affairs John Townsend is eager to take a stand:
"More than 1,500 people are killed or injured in road rage incidents
each year in this country and when you add a gun to the mix the
situation is more likely to spiral out of control, said AAA John B.
Townsend II. Gun-toting drivers are more likely to become involved in
road rage incidents, study after study has confirmed.
Studies have shown that young men, and young adults overall, have
admitted to making obscene gestures, cursing or blatantly shouting at
other drivers while they were carrying a handgun, said Townsend. He
quoted a 2006 Harvard study of 2,400 drivers, which showed motorists
who carry guns inside their car are more likely to engage in road rage."
Of course, he claims the backing of "study after study" to rationalize
his bigotry against gun owners, yet cites only one in support...one
that happens to have been authored by perennial anti-gun hack
"researcher" David Hemenway. The cited "study" consisted of a
telephone poll which asked people if they had made obscene or rude
gestures at another motorist, or had aggressively followed another
vehicle too closely in the past year; after a series of other
inconsequential or demographic inquiries, the question "how many days
in the past 12 months have you ridden in a motor vehicle in which
there was a gun?" was asked.
No questions were asked as to whether a gun was present at the time
the gesture or tail-gating incident occurred, whether the person
answering the question was in possession, or even had access to, the
firearm, whether the person who had possession of the firearm was
licensed to carry a concealed handgun or any other effort to clarify.
In other words, the "study" doesn't even TRY to make the connection
that it implies and that Mr. John Townsend of AAA contends is settled
science.
In a prime example of the weakness of the methodology, John Lott, in
reviewing the "Study" a while back, noted that:
"The paper also has some funny results. For example, Liberals are
apparently much more likely to engage in road rage than conservatives
and the difference is larger than the difference between those who did
and did not have a gun at least one time in their car over the last
year. This variable is apparently never investigated, but presumably
they are also concerned about liberals being allowed to drive cars."
I wonder, would Mr. Townsend of AAA condemn Liberals as quickly as he
does gun owners based on this so obviously meaningless pseudo science?
I've got a call out to the National AAA Public Affairs office and am
awaiting a callback to find out if Mr. Townsend's statement is
representative of AAA National policy, or only his own personal
opinion. I would contend that if Mr. Townsend was speaking as a
private individual rather than a representative of AAA, he should have
made that very clear. If AAA does not endorse his sentiment, they
should issue a statement to that effect as soon as possible as I'm
sure it is information that the millions of law abiding gun owners in
this country would like to know when making decisions about joining,
or remaining a member of, their auto clubs.
I'll update as soon as I get more information.
[PVC: See item #4, below for more information]
----
John Townsend at AAA emailed me this:
--
here is the link to the study.
http://tinyurl.com/yclmast
The AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety reveals "In 37 percent of the
cases a firearm was used; in 35 percent the weapon was the vehicle
itself." [PVC: I know that some CHP holders have brandished a gun to
stop someone from hurting or killing them in a road rage incident - a
good and proper use of a firearm.]
John B. Townsend II
Manager, Public and Government Affairs
AAA Mid-Atlantic
**************************************************
4. Does Anti-Gun Researcher David Hemenway Have Something To Hide?
**************************************************
VCDL EM Hal Macklin emailed me this in reference to the research data
quoted in the AAA's article on road rage:
--
NRA-ILA has this to say:
"Does Anti-Gun Researcher David Hemenway Have Something To Hide?"
http://tinyurl.com/ygqodgr
http://www.nra-ila.org
March 24, 2010
[SNIP]
It is common practice among legitimate researchers to give their peers
access to data used in their studies, so that other researchers can
review both the data and the methodology used in their analysis.
Recently, prolific anti-gun researcher David Hemenway, of Harvard
University's Injury Control Research Center, released an article on a
survey he and colleagues conducted, hoping to undermine laws
respecting the right of people to carry firearms for protection. Their
theory was that there would be a correlation between "road rage"
incidents (including situations in which a rude hand gesture was made)
and the presence of a gun in an automobile.
Among the survey's obvious flaws, it did not ask people whether they
had ever used or observed a gun (as perpetrator, witness or victim) in
any such incident. Instead, it asked people whether they had ever been
involved in such an incident and, separately, whether they had at any
time ridden in a vehicle in which a gun was present. Thus, it did not
determine whether there were guns in any vehicles involved at the time
of such incidents, let alone whether guns were brandished or used.
John Lott, Research Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, and
Michael Brown, of Doctors for Sensible Gun Laws, took a quick look at
Hemenway's article and humorously observed that it showed that
"liberals are much more likely to engage in road rage (both making
obscene gestures and driving aggressively) than conservatives." To
thoroughly evaluate the survey, Lott has since asked Hemenway to share
his data, but, he says, ***"Hemenway is not responding."***
[See here] http://tinyurl.com/yf87ppa
Good luck in finding a FREE copy of Hemenway's propaganda.
**************************************************
5. Father of toddler opens fire on I-95, police say
**************************************************
http://tinyurl.com/yl4jkga
http://www.wtop.com
March 25, 2010
DALE CITY, Va. -- Both drivers involved in a road rage duel on
Interstate 95 during Tuesday afternoon's rush hour are being charged
with trying to kill each other.
Virginia State Police Wednesday evening took dump truck driver James
A. Bringham, 44, of Woodbridge, into custody. Police obtained a
warrant against Bringham for attempted second-degree murder. Police
previously charged Bringham with reckless driving.
Already charged with attempted second-degree murder is Gabriel
Poventud, 25, of Woodbridge. He's also charged with child
endangerment, use of a firearm in the commission of a felony, shooting
a missile into an occupied vehicle and reckless use of a firearm.
Police say Poventud -- who allegedly fired 13 rounds -- had his 2-year-
old daughter in his Jaguar during the road rage incident on southbound
I-95.
This happened after Bringham, the driver of a 2007 Ford F550 dump
truck, tried to merge into the southbound lanes of I-95 from Route
123, shortly after 4 p.m.
Police say the drivers then "began engaging with one another in an
aggressive manner."
The dump truck struck the Jaguar twice.
Both vehicles ended up on the left shoulder of the highway, pinned
against the Jersey wall. That's when Poventud got out of his car and
started firing at the truck, police say.
The dump truck pulled away into traffic, but was struck far more than
four times by the 13 rounds. No one was hurt by the gunfire.
"In that kind of traffic, to have somebody shoot upwards of 13 rounds
at a moving vehicle, the fact that nobody was struck, no houses, no
vehicles is somewhat miraculous," says Virginia State Police Lt. Danny
Glick.
As Poventud followed Bringham on the right shoulder, a trooper stopped
both drivers.
Police say they have no reports of other drivers or vehicles being
struck by the gunfire.
Police say drivers should avoid engaging with aggressive drivers.
The Smooth Operator Program offers these tips:
- Steer clear of aggressive drivers and get out of their way;
- Stay calm;
- Don't challenge aggressive drivers. Avoid eye contact. Don't make
rude gestures;
- Give drivers the benefit of the doubt. Not all aggressive driving
behavior is intentional;
- Move to the right, if you are driving slower than the rest of
traffic and don't block the passing lane;
- Dial #77 on a cell phone to report aggressive drivers.
----
Gun involved in 'road rage duel' legally owned
http://tinyurl.com/ycckf9m
http://www.wtop.com
By Adam Tuss
March 26, 2010
DALE CITY, Va. - The gun that police say was used to fire 13 shots
during a road rage duel on Interstate 95 was legally owned, WTOP has
learned.
Gabriel Poventud, 25, and James Bringham, 44, have been charged with
attempted murder in the altercation that began at the height of
Tuesday's afternoon rush hour. Police say Bringham, the driver of a
2007 Ford F550 dump truck, tried to merge into the southbound lanes of
I-95 near Route 123, shortly after 4 p.m.
Police say the drivers then "began engaging with one another in an
aggressive manner."
The dump truck struck the Jaguar Poventud was driving twice.
Both vehicles ended up on the left shoulder of the highway, pinned
against the Jersey wall. That's when Poventud got out of his car and
started firing at the truck. The dump truck pulled away into traffic,
but was struck more than four times by the 13 rounds, police say.
Police say Poventud had his 2-year-old daughter in the car during the
incident. No one was hurt by the gunfire.
Poventud did not have a prior history of mental illness or a criminal
background that would have prohibited him from having a gun.
The information that the gun was owned legally has supporters on both
sides of the debate weighing in.
"It shows that even people that legally have guns do stupid things and
make mistakes, and that's one of the risks that goes with having more
guns in more places," Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to
Prevent Gun Violence, tells WTOP.
"Too many people who have guns get angry, get drunk, do something
stupid and when that happens, all of us are endangered. It's why we
need to treat guns very seriously and make sure that it is not too
easy for dangerous people to get guns," Helmke says.
Phillip Van Cleave, president of the Virginia Citizens Defense League,
suggests the dump truck driver should have been armed himself.
"Why should he have been murdered helplessly? He should have been able
to protect himself. I don't care who it is -- if it was an off-duty
police officer that cracked and started doing that. You still need to
be able to save your life, if you are the innocent life," Van Cleave
says.
"Your life is precious. Things happen in this world. Crime can happen
at any time. Owning something legally doesn't mean you can't misuse
it. Basically our view is that you should be able to protect yourself
and should be prepared to do so at any time."
**************************************************
6. Gun rights foes hope to stir opposition against three gun bills in
Virginia
**************************************************
The antis are grouping together more and more as they become tinier
and tinier:
http://tinyurl.com/yd7yb3n
http://www.personalliberty.com
By Personal Liberty News Desk
March 23, 2010
Four gun violence prevention organizations have called on Virginia
Governor McDonnell to veto three gun bills currently on his desk that
they believe would put state residents at greater risk of gun violence.
The Virginia Center for Public Safety (VACPS), the Virginia Chapters
of the Million Mom March, Protest Easy Guns (PEG) and the Angel Fund
have issued a statement saying that signing SB 334, SB 408 and HB 1217
would violate the governor's earlier declaration that "the foremost
obligation of government is public safety."
SB 334 would allow concealed carry permit holders to bring loaded
handguns into establishments that have a liquor license in Virginia,
SB 408 would allow those without concealed carry permits to keep
loaded handguns in their vehicles or boats if stored in a locked
container, while HB 1217 requires the Virginia Board of Education to
establish a standardized program of gun safety education for students
in elementary school.
With respect to this last bill, the coalition referred to "numerous"
studies that demonstrate that familiarizing children with guns makes
them more likely to handle firearms when adults are not present.
"The governor talks about the importance of public safety, but in
practice he has cut millions of dollars in public safety funding from
the state budget and supported a number of dangerous changes to
Virginia's gun laws," said VACPS board member Lori Haas.
"Commonwealth families now have one last chance to hold him to his
word and insist he veto [these bills]."
McDonnell has until April 12 to make his decision.
**************************************************
7. Richmond Police Chief OK with repeal; Board and EM members have
cameo on news
**************************************************
Here is Richmond coverage of the restaurant ban repeal, which has an
interview with the Richmond City Police. Chief Norwood said he isn't
concerned about permit holders carrying concealed in restaurants.
EM Sandy Ferris and Board member Bruce Jackson appear in the video
briefly as they are going in the door of a restaurant (stock footage).
http://tinyurl.com/yeu7pvf
**************************************************
8. VA-ALERT reader responds to article in Martinsville Bulletin
**************************************************
Clark Welsh emailed me this:
--
From a recent article in the Martinsville Bulletin:
http://tinyurl.com/ycdczbo
"An armed law-abiding citizen might be able to stop a gunman from
taking innocent lives, Rogers said. For that reason, he said he
disagrees with the recommendation that McDonnell veto the ("guns in
bars")bill.
Perry wasn't swayed by that line of thinking.
"If a person thinks they need protection when they go in a bar,
they've got a choice not to go there," he said."
Sheriff Perry, by that line of reasoning, if I feel I need the ability
to effectively defend my life ANYwhere, say, at the grocery store, the
mall, the barber shop, on the street, in my front yard, etc., does
that mean I have the 'option' not to go such places, that I should
just stay locked in my home like a hermit, and hire people to do my
errands for me?
Tell me, Sheriff, where is there a place on this entire planet where I
am absolutely, 100% guaranteed to be safe? Violent attacks occur
sometimes in stores, in schools, in churches, in hospitals, at work,
in parks, in people's very homes; tell me where I can go in this world
where I am truly safe. You can't, can you, because there IS no such
place, a fact that you should be keenly aware of as a law enforcement
officer.
I have the right to defend my life, if need be, whereEVER I am,
wherever I go. And so do you. Period. Self defense is a basic human
and civil right, even in a restaurant that serves alcohol.
I'm sorry, but taken to its logical conclusion, your position just
doesn't hold water, and you need to re-think it.
Sincerely,
Clark Welsh
Falls Church, VA
**************************************************
9. Fed, state rules blur issue of guns in national parks
**************************************************
http://tinyurl.com/yk87pjr
http://www.fresnobee.com
By Mark Grossi
March 22, 2010
Federal law now allows visitors to carry guns in national parks, but
you can't just slip a loaded pistol into your backpack and take a hike.
Pay attention, because this is a little complicated.
You will need a concealed weapons permit to carry the loaded gun in
the backpack. But you don't need any kind of permit if you just want
to stash your loaded weapon in the tent.
At the same time, unless you feel your life is being threatened, don't
shoot the gun at all.
What's going on' Guns in national parks are now under both state and
federal restrictions, and the result can be confusing.
State law generally applies to the way guns are carried and how a
concealed weapons permit is enforced. California's odd exemptions to
the concealed weapons rule include sleeping in a tent, which is
considered your temporary home.
Federal restrictions aim at a bigger picture. They do not allow guns
in many federal buildings, such as park visitor centers. They also
forbid hunting, target shooting or even firing a gun.
'The fact is, you still can't use a weapon in the park,' said Steve
Shackelton, former chief ranger of Yosemite National Park. 'I don't
think we'll see much of a difference with this law in Yosemite.'
Still, officials across the country now must make sense of differing
state gun laws in each national park as the tourist season approaches,
said Shackelton, who is now associate director for visitor and
resource protection for the National Park Service in Washington, D.C.
Supporters of the new federal law said it makes national parks
consistent with policy over vast federal acreage in national forests
where carrying a gun is legal. They say carrying a gun is a right
protected by the Second Amendment.
But passage of the law disappointed rangers associations and the
National Parks and Conservation Association, a parks advocacy group
based in Washington, D.C. They tenaciously opposed the law for years,
fearing an increase in wildlife poaching and danger to visitors.
The opponents ask: Will someone get hurt if a nervous camper fires a
gun to scare away a bear'
'We don't know what will happen,' said Bryan Faehner of the Parks and
Conservation Association. 'That's why we fought this law tooth and
nail.'
Though Shackelton does not expect problems, he said there may be
incidents that will require rangers to take action. For example, he
warned hunters not to use the sighting scopes on their rifles to
admire deer or other animals in the distance.
'We don't know if the rifle is loaded or not,' Shackelton said. 'So we
will seize it. If you want to look at the wildlife, take the scope off
the rifle or bring binoculars.'
Rangers and other federal officials will focus on educating visitors
about rules and safety, Shackelton said. Many visitors won't carry
guns anyway, he said.
Officials at Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks say their
adjoining parks are surrounded by the Inyo, Sierra and Sequoia
national forests, all of which allow firearms within their boundaries.
They said people probably have safely passed through the parks for
years with firearms on the way to the surrounding forests.
'People who are carrying guns know how to properly handle them,' said
spokeswoman Adrienne Freeman.
But there will be challenges in observing some state laws, especially
in places such as Yellowstone, which includes parts of three states '
Wyoming, Montana and Idaho.
Montana recognizes concealed weapons permits from more than 40 states.
Wyoming recognizes fewer than 25 states. A visitor may own a permit
from a state that is legal in Montana, but the same permit may not be
legal in Wyoming.
California doesn't allow concealed weapons permits from any other state.
That's not the knock on California's law, though. The law is just
confusing, said Mike Stollenwerk, co-founder of OpenCarry.org, an
Internet-based group supporting the right to carry holstered handguns.
Without a concealed weapons permit, it is illegal to carry a loaded
firearm on the body in urban public places, according to the
California law.
But it is legal to carry the loaded weapon if you are in the act of
hunting or fishing. It is also legal to have the loaded firearm in a
person's residence, motel room, campsite, business or on private
property.
Another point of contention: A loaded firearm can be carried openly in
an unincorporated area without a concealed weapons permit, unless the
area forbids firing weapons. Yosemite officials say the park qualifies
as an unincorporated area with a gun-firing ban.
But Stollenwerk said he is not so sure Yosemite or any other national
park can qualify for the gun-firing ban under state laws. He said
California's law could be interpreted to apply only to local
jurisdictions, such as counties, not the federal government.
'It's not easy to understand California's laws,' Stollenwerk said. 'It
would be much simpler to just allow open carry of loaded firearms in
all of California.
**************************************************
10. Firearms regulations in the National Parks
**************************************************
The NRA-ILA web site has compiled a list of links to individual parks
dealing with firearms possession and carrying. You might want to
bookmark the link:
http://tinyurl.com/y987f6d
**************************************************
11. NPS carry site
**************************************************
Carla & Dave Hicks emailed me this:
--
check out:
http://tinyurl.com/ycv9lhw
BTW -- note the:
"If you feel threatened by someone with a fire-arm, please contact the
nearest park ranger or park office for help."
**************************************************
12. 22 minutes for a concealed weapon permit
**************************************************
http://tinyurl.com/yg9lbwy
http://www.msnbc.com
By Mike Stuckey
March 25, 2010
SEATTLE - On a cool morning in the epicenter of Left Coast liberalism,
I went looking for what it takes to pack a little heat.
Although the NRA held its annual meeting here in 1997, the Emerald
City's image is more often associated with Birkenstocks than Glocks.
In keeping with that image, then-Mayor Greg Nickels in 2008 banned
firearms on all city property in the wake of a shooting at a music
festival. But last month, the gun ban was thrown out by a judge who
said it violates a state law that forbids local governments from
regulating most gun-related matters.
Despite Seattle's leftward lean, Washington state actually has some of
the nation's least-restrictive gun laws. For instance, it's one of
only seven states in which there is no minimum hunting age. And when
it comes to concealed weapons, Washington wrote the book on "shall
issue" systems, which enable most adults to obtain licenses to carry
hidden guns on demand.
The state passed its measure in 1961, long before the "right-to-carry"
movement surged in the mid-1980s, boosting the number of "shall issue"
states and those where no permit is needed from nine to 39.
Never held a loaded handgun
As a native and 40-year resident of California, which has some of the
nation's most restrictive gun laws, including a "may issue" concealed-
weapons permit system, I was not raised in a hunting or shooting
family and, at 53, have never owned a firearm.
More than 20 years ago, I went trap-shooting with a friend and
actually proved pretty good at blowing little clay pigeons out of the
sky with a 12-gauge Mossberg. I also seem to remember squeezing off a
few rounds from a rifle or two, though I'm not certain.
But I know for a fact that when I applied for my Washington State
Concealed Pistol License, I had never fired a revolver or
semiautomatic handgun of any caliber. Not once. In fact, I had never
even held a loaded pistol in my hands. And I had never taken a minute
of formal firearms training.
The state of Washington cared nothing about this when it came to
issuing me a license to carry anything from a .22 revolver in my
jacket pocket to a .50-caliber Desert Eagle in my waistband. The state
also had no interest in whether or not I own a gun.
Indeed, the only requirements under the Washington law that grants me
the right to obtain a concealed-carry permit are that I am 21 or
older, have no history of mental illness and no criminal past. I meet
all three. And there's no requirement that I exhibit any knowledge of
firearms or experience with them to buy a gun.
That mental health question
Curious if it would really be that easy, I decided to go through the
process of obtaining a concealed-carry permit of my own.
The King County Sheriff's Office in downtown Seattle accommodated me
with brisk efficiency. I filled out a single-page application with my
vital stats, address, phone number and driver's license number.
I then answered eight questions, seven concerning whether or not I'd
been convicted of any crimes or had any other run-ins with the law and
one that asked if I had "ever been confined in a mental health
facility for more than fourteen days." The answers to all were "No."
Moments later, I presented my photo ID and $55.25 in cash for the
application and fingerprinting fees and was soon ushered into a back
office to be electronically fingerprinted.
Twenty-two minutes after parking my car, I was back behind the wheel.
Less than one month later, as required by the law, I received my
Washington State Concealed Pistol License. It is good for five years.
Thanks to reciprocal agreements, it is also good in 21 other states.
Despite my best journalistic efforts at impartiality, I was amazed at
how easy it was to obtain the license and nonplussed about the lack of
a training requirement.
Many gun-rights activists say that's as it should be, even though
other states require a variety of training and testing, including
basic marksmanship in some cases. While they are staunch advocates of
extensive training for every aspect of gun-handling, they just as
firmly believe the government should not mandate it.
"We encourage anyone who wants to learn more to go attend one of our
classes or any class out there," said Andrew Arulanandam, chief
spokesman for the National Rifle Association, adding that more than a
million people take NRA classes each year. But gun ownership is a
constitutional right, not a privilege, he said, and the government
should not require training.
Tom Gresham, the host of nationally syndicated television and radio
shows about firearms training, said anybody who carries a concealed
gun should take at least "a two- to three-day class," and that much of
the focus of the instruction should be on how to avoid using the
firearm.
"The good courses will tell you if you go the rest of your life and
never pull your gun out, you will have learned your lesson well," he
said. "When people are done with it, they stop flipping the bird when
they're driving, they stop doing anything that could possibly escalate
a situation. ... This is a parachute. This is a life-saving device.
The only reason you're going to use this is because everything else
has failed and you're going to die."
'A gun's a simple item'
While Gresham believes that all "responsible" adults should carry a
gun, he too does not believe the government should require training.
But doesn't the government's role in protecting the "greater good"
mean it should require training and testing, as states do for driver's
licenses?
No, said Alan Gottlieb, president of the Second Amendment Foundation,
which promotes and defends gun rights. "A gun's a simple item," he
said. Unlike driving a car, "There aren't rules of the road. It's
like, how does the gun operate and how do I operate it safely? How do
I load it, how do I take the safety on and off and how do I shoot it?
When you're buying a gun for self-defense, you're not planning on
shooting somebody down the block. You might have to shoot something
that's a threat that might be pretty close to you."
Gun-control groups couldn't disagree more.
The main problem with "shall issue" permit systems is that they do not
allow local police to decide who is qualified to carry a gun,
according to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.
"We should start handling guns more like automobiles, with
registration and licensing," said the group's president, Paul Helmke.
The Brady Campaign has called for federal legislation that would
mandate training for all handgun owners.
'Constant state of paranoia'
The concealed-carry training issue is a moot point to another gun-
control group, the Violence Policy Center, which seeks to ban handgun
ownership by civilians in the United States.
"Do you want to live in a constant state of paranoia, which is what a
lot of these people do?" asked the center's legislative director,
Kristen Rand. "To plan that you're going to be confronted by some time
and need to use deadly force, that's never going to happen to most
people.
"If you feel like you really need to have a gun, get a shotgun and
keep it in your house."
In my home state of Washington, that would be even easier than getting
a concealed-carry permit. I could pick one up on the way home from
work tonight, as could any law-abiding citizen 21 or older.
But for the record, and without going into whether or not it should be
a government requirement, I have no plans to own any gun without
extensive training in a classroom and on a firing range.
At this point, even though I had an introductory handgun lesson and
fired a number of pistols under close supervision in the course of
reporting this article, I still don't really know how to load one.
**************************************************
13. The shocking truth about a fundamental right being denied to 55%
of citizens
**************************************************
A VA-ALERT reader emailed me this:
--
Philip:
An article from the "American Thinker" Blog. Perhaps tongue in cheek:
http://tinyurl.com/ydwqu6v
http://www.americanthinker.com
By M Allen Fritsch
March 22, 2010
There is a fundamental right being denied 55% of all Americans. This
denial costs over 16,000 lives per year, meaning more than 44 of our
fellow Americans will die every day that we delay. What should be done
in light of these shocking figures?
Using the example set by President Obama and the Congressional
Democrats, there is only one answer: Universal Gun Care for every
American. Surely a right outlined in the Bill of Rights (2d Amendment)
is just as important as a right NOT found the Constitution (Health
Care).
Bonus, it should be easier to implement. After all, gun dealers and
manufacturers are ready and willing to help solve the problem. Unlike
the evil insurance companies, gun dealers don't want to take your
weapon away from you when you most need it. Nor will they deny selling
you a weapon simply because you haven't purchased one in the past
(i.e. a pre-existing condition).
- Conventional estimates state that 45% of all US households own a
firearm. This leaves at least 55% of all Americans "uncovered."
- In 2008 there were 16,272 murders in the USA. How many of those
could have been prevented if the victims had been able to protect
themselves?
My proposal is a modest one:
- Mandate for every American to purchase a gun or be provided one by
their employer (children under the age of 26 can share a weapon with
their parents)
- Tax credits to offset the cost of purchase (for those making less
than $250,000 per year and everyone in Nebraska)
- For those that can't afford it, a grant or subsidy to purchase a
weapon (union members can get two weapons subsidized before 2018)
- Funding for a series of community based gun dealers/clinics and
firing ranges (especially in under-served urban and rural areas)
- Monthly ammunition benefit so that no one has to choose between
feeding their kids, paying the rent, or buying a box of .38 special
cartridges
Contact your representative today. The time to act is now.
M Allen Fritsch is an entrepreneur and business owner. He is a
graduate of the United States Military Academy and a former Army
officer. His household is one of the 45%.
**************************************************
14. Small handgun calibers / slow stops
**************************************************
A recent self-defense shooting involved a .32 Auto and required 3
shots (2 to the torso and 1 to the neck) to stop the bad guy - he
staggered outside and died. Not exactly a quick stop.
Andrew Parramore emailed me this:
--
Dear Philip,
Thanks for the latest excellent VA-ALERT.
Re: Item #13, the Philly shooting videotape. The assailant is shot 5
times but when police arrive he's still alive, alert and talkative
( I'll bet he was)...
Caliber and handgun make are not specified, and how motivated or
capable the assailant was to actually do harm to the shooter is not
clear.
But it feels like a reminder that, when you absolutely have to put
your attacker down, having chosen too little gun/too little caliber is
almost as unwise as having no gun at all.
Quick anecdote: I have a longtime friend in Miami who is an emergency
room nurse & also a Florida CHP holder. She often sees gunshot cases
where perps are brought in after being shot multiple times with
smaller calibers, but were not stopped at the time by the shots. Some
have run surprising distances, returned accurate fire, fought, swam,
even bicycled away, almost everything short of an Iron Man Triathlon
before slowing down, and some have walked into her ER for treatment 24
hours or more after the shooting, fully functioning. Others arrive DOA
but despite sustaining fatal wounds continued doing serious damage
before finally winding down. Similar story with serious knife wounds.
Based on her ER observations and subsequent research, she has no
confidence now in anything less than a .40, especially on larger
subjects.
Thanks again as always,
Andrew Parramore
Centreville
----
Paul Kent emailed me this:
Might want to make reference to the 1986 FBI shootout in Miami:
http://tinyurl.com/ckvf29
that led to first the adoption of the 10mm and later the shortened
version .40 S&W.
Of course, velocity counts too, leading to the effectiveness of the .
223 as fired from an AR-15/M-16 or the same caliber at closer range as
from the FN Five-seveN.
Cheers,
Paul Kent
Chantilly, VA
**************************************************
15. Kansas campuses move closer to concealed carrying
**************************************************
Dr Cathy Roberts emailed me this:
--
Philip, I received a link to this article from a higher ed email
newsletter this morning. Looks like Kansas is more committed to safe
campuses than we are.
Dr. Cathy C. Roberts, P.E.
Smithfield, Virginia
http://tinyurl.com/y89zlt5
http://www.kctv5.com
March 24, 2010
LAWRENCE, Kan. -- With eight votes in the Kansas House, public college
campuses got one step closer on Wednesday to allowing people to carry
concealed weapons.
The bill passed on Wednesday would allow anyone with a concealed gun
license who is over 21-years-old to bring a weapons to any of the
state's public higher education institutions. The only exception would
be if the building was deemed to have adequate security measures, such
as metal detectors inside.
On the University of Kansas campus, there are signs posted that say no
weapons are allowed inside, but there are no metal detectors.
One KU student said Wednesday that he is not strongly opposed to the
idea of concealed weapons being allowed on campus.
"Obviously, if they are allowed to go through a process, I wouldn't be
opposed to it," said student Adam Buhler. "Potentially it could be
someone who could act in quicker time than to wait for authorities to
get here."
KCTV5 has obtained a letter written by the president of the Kansas
Board of Regents. In the letter he wrote, "It is our firm belief that
allowing weapons on campus would significantly increase the risk of
violence and harm to students, faculty and others rather than making
anyone safer."
The University of Kansas issued the following statement regarding the
bill:
"The concealed carry bill as passed would undermine campus safety and
security efforts now in place. In fact the number of reported crimes
on campus, overwhelmingly nonviolent, is down 34 percent in the last
decade, thanks largely to increased police patrol, camera surveillance
and educational efforts to encourage students and staff to take
precautions to avoid being a victim of crime.
"Allowing weapons on campus would significantly increase the risk of
violence and harm to students, faculty and others rather than making
anyone safer.
"To keep weapons off campus, the university would have to install
metal detectors at virtually every building entrance. Such security
methods would be cost prohibitive and would not absolutely guarantee
safety."
The bill now goes to the Kansas Senate for a vote.
**************************************************
16. Open carry event in Wisconsin
**************************************************
http://tinyurl.com/ylo6zx5
mystateline.com
By Joelle Parks
March 22, 2010
Just across the state border, residents cleaned up this Beloit park as
part of an open carry event. Participants wore their guns outside of
their clothes where they're visible, all while raising awareness about
conceal and carry.
"Illinois and Wisconsin are the only two states left in the country
that don't allow you to conceal and carry a pistol for your own
protection," says Icarry.org Executive Director Shaun Kranish.
Participants hope conceal and carry will be law in Illinois and
Wisconsin in the near future.
**************************************************
17. Man "shot dead" at gun show RECOVERING in Denver hospital
**************************************************
Dale Hawley emailed me this. I guess the editor was sound asleep when
this article was written:
--
Philip,
I know it's not Virginia, but talk about a newspaper going for all out
sensationalism.
Man shot dead at gun show (later the article says "The victim is
recovering at Denver Health Medical Center")
Dale
http://tinyurl.com/yhwdmrr
http://www.news.com.au
By Tammy Vigil
March 21, 2010
A man was accidentally shot in the chest at a gun show in Denver,
Colorado, Saturday (local time) according local media reports.
The shooting happened at the monthly Tanner Gun Show about 2pm
Saturday (7am Sunday AEDT) at the Denver Merchandise Mart, FOX 31
reported.
The victim is recovering at Denver Health Medical Center. A witness
told FOX 31 he was shot in the chest.
"I heard the gunshot. Nobody panicked or anything, so I didn't think
too much about it," said visitor Russ Huntley.
Signs outside the event clearly state, "Absolutely no loaded weapons
allowed."
"Apparently, somebody was looking at the gun. That gun did discharge
and one person was struck," said Sergeant Candi Baker of the Adams
County Sheriff's Office.
The Tanner Gun Show bills itself as the state's largest gun show with
700 tables displaying guns, knives, ammunition, reloading equipment,
military surplus and hunting and fishing gear.
The show, which drew fire in 1999 when three guns bought there were
used by Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris in the Columbine High School
shooting, has run in some form since 1964, The Denver Post reported.
It's not the first time there's been a shooting at or around the show
- a 64-year-old Littleton man accidentally shot himself in the stomach
with .38-caliber handgun in the parking lot in 2008
**************************************************
18. Harry Reid to host gun party
**************************************************
Election years always make for strange bedfellows. The NRA is giving
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid political cover on guns. Reid has
been trying to shore up his gun-rights credentials lately. Sonny Mays
emailed me this:
--
Philip,
Thought you might like to read this:
Sonny
http://tinyurl.com/yzyxtaw
http://www.lasvegassun.com
By Lisa Mascaro
March 24, 2010
WASHINGTON -- While the Tea Party folks bring their protest to Senate
Majority Leader Harry Reid's hometown of Searchlight on Saturday, Reid
will be throwing a little party of his own at the new shooting range
he helped build just north of Las Vegas.
Reid will be welcoming gun enthusiasts, including National Rifle
Association executives Wayne LaPierre and Chris Cox, to the Clark
County Shooting Park on Saturday for the official grand opening of the
facility -- believed to be among the nation's largest.
The majority leader was instrumental in developing the $61 million
park on 3,000 acres of federal lands that citizens had wanted for
decades. Funding came mainly from Southern Nevada public lands
management legislation Reid has championed while in Congress that
allows unused federal lands to be sold with money returned to help
Nevada communities.
The shooting range began operations in January. It is open Wednesday
through Sunday from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. and costs $7 a day to shoot
rifles, pistols and archery, or $6 for shotgun rounds.
**************************************************
19. Shooting Sports Shows: DirecTV and Dish Network
**************************************************
A VCDL member emailed me this in regards to VCDL Update 3/27/10, item
#10.
--
Philip,
I saw the post about firearms programs on DirecTV. In the interests of
full disclosure: I'm an employee of Dish Network as well as a member
of VCDL. I just wanted to mention that Dish also has the shows
Handguns, Personal Defense TV, Tactical Impact, Tactical Arms, and
Guns & Ammo Classics on channel 285 (The Sportsman Channel). Dish also
has a bunch more shooting-sports programs on channel 153 (The Outdoor
Channel) on Wednesday afternoon and evening: American Rifleman TV,
Cowboys (cowboy action shooting), Impossible Shots (exhibition type
shooting), SWAT Magazine TV, Best Defense, Shooting Gallery, American
Guardian TV, Shooting U.S.A., and Sighting in with Shooting U.S.A.
I've been recording and watching them for years and they're a great
bunch of shows.
**************************************************
20. Free CHP Training in VA for .edu addresses
**************************************************
Kurt Mueller emailed me this. While you can never have too much
training, this is a good opportunity for more of our college and
university students to get trained and involved in responsible firearm
ownership:
--
Hey Phil,
As part of my role with SCCC, I have secured an offer for free
training for the VA CHP from the online company
http://www.onlineconcealedcarry.com
This offer is good for anyone with a .edu email address for the week
of April 4-10.
I was wondering if there was any way to get the word out to more
students in VA. We can include the discount code and information in
that weeks VA ALERT for a start.
Cheers,
http://tinyurl.com/yehzy44
***************************************************************************
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/]