Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc. (VCDL)

Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc.
PO. Box 513, Newington, VA 22122 • 804-639-0600 • 703-372-3285 • 757-271-3705 • 540-446-5783

07/26/09 - VCDL Update 7/26/09 - Part 2

it's a political statement. I'm not important enough for my right to self-defense, so what we do is we just take it out in the open. This is what we have to do." Nate has been open carrying for about a year and heard about it on Calguns.net. "I just started doing it," he says. "Read[ing] up, whatever I could do." Sean, a 32-year-old senior systems engineer, chimes in. "I've always been somewhat of a gun-rights activist," he says. "I'm really in it more for the activism more than anything else. I've noticed that a lot of the guys are younger, and the police seem to react differently to folks who are in their 30s than to folks that are in their 20s. So I feel it's a good idea to keep the reactions moderated a little bit." Sean has been open carrying for about a year, he says, and is also an active member of Calguns.net. Most of the response the trio has gotten while open carrying has been positive. "On the 28th, I'd say about two-thirds of the contact we had was 'Hey, that's legal to do?' " Sean says, referencing an open-carry event held in San Diego in February. "Not accusatory or anti -- either positive or just requesting information." He pauses. "The people who were blue-collar guys or office workers or whatever, they're more curious about stuff like this than people who are just out there on the beach all day because they don't have an obligation to go be somewhere else. I think that's probably the reason that there's sort of a skew in the types of contact we've had today." As we walk and talk, a man in a red shirt passes us, his eyes obstructed by wraparound shades. He turns around to face us. "You walking around with live ammo in those?" he asks, walking backward. "Not with live ammo in them," Sean replies amicably. "Do you have a permit for that?" the man asks. "You don't need one," says Sean. "I'll find out down here for you, 'kay?" the man asks, somewhat rhetorically, as he hightails it down the boardwalk. "It's not Mexico, guys, you can't pull that shit off," he shouts, over his shoulder. "Do you really think that guy is going to go to the cops?" I ask, once I'm sure he's out of earshot. "Probably," says Sam. "And the cops will say, 'It's legal. You don't have to like it, but it's legal.' " Turning back, walking into the sun, we decide it's time for food and continue -- undisturbed -- to Mission Boulevard, where there's a small Mexican restaurant with outdoor seating. San Diego open carriers, I discover, have had a few open-carry events here in town, coordinated mostly via sites such as Calguns.net, OpenCarry.org, and CaliforniaOpenCarry.org, where there are local forums in which members discuss issues of gun ownership, gun rights, gun laws, and more. The last meet, at the time of this writing, was in February and took place on the very boardwalk Nate, Sean, Sam, and I just traversed. The police were well informed, and things went smoothly as an estimated 40 to 50 people, open carriers and supporters alike, congregated beachside. At the Mexican restaurant, lunch proceeds normally, save for a few stares, until I notice a large white-and-black SUV pull up in front of us. "Uh-oh," I think. "Here we go." A male cop emerges, a tall man with a salt-and-pepper crew cut. He smiles at us. "Howdy, folks. How're you all doing today?" he asks. "Fine," everybody responds. "I'm going to have to do a 12031(e) inspection on you and get out of your hair," the cop says. "Are you requesting or demanding?" Nate asks. "I'm sorry?" asks the cop. "Are you requesting or demanding?" Nate repeats. The cop looks at him. "Well, I'll start with a request, but then I'll demand," he replies. "As long as you're demanding," says Nate. The cop starts with Sean. He has him face the opposite direction and goes around behind him, removing Sean's gun. He checks for ammunition and, finding none, places the gun back in its holster. The cop makes his way around the table. Each of the trio stands and, when asked to be checked, pipes up with "Requesting or demanding?" When the cop gets to me, I gulp, even though I know my line. "You, ma'am, are carrying as well?" he asks. I nod, then jump right in. "Requesting or demanding?" I ask. "Requesting and then I'll be demanding," comes the reply. I stand, watching as he removes the gun from my hip. I can hear the revolver's wheel turning as he checks the chamber for bullets. Then he hands it back to me -- the first time I've handled a real handgun -- and I slide it, if somewhat amateurishly, into the holster. "Okay," the cop says. "I appreciate your cooperation." Before he leaves, Sean asks if someone sent him over. "Actually, we had a radio call. I guess you were out on the boardwalk," the cop replies. "I think I know the guy..." Sean says wryly. "I talked to one person that had called. He said you were headed south," the cop says. "So we were looking for you. We appreciate your cooperation. Have a good day." I glance around me and notice several cruisers are parked along the edge of the Mexican restaurant's lot, plus the SUV. Nate turns to me. "You have just experienced the hassle of the open-carry movement," he says. "That guy was actually very good, very straightforward," Sean comments, as the SUV and its entourage drive away. "He was not out to abuse rights, he was not out to try and make anything up. He was just doing his job." This makes one cop stop for Sean, two for Sam, and three for Nate. And, of course, one for me. "It's all very complicated," I tell them, speaking of the various gun laws, regulations, and restrictions, from state to federal, as we collect our trash from lunch. Sam nods. "And if we just followed the Second Amendment the way it was written, none of this would be necessary," he says. Shortly after our encounter with the cops, we part ways, agreeing to meet up at a later time that night. Nate, Sean, and Sam are taking me to a local firing range, and come evening, I will have fired my first gun. The range is located in a squat brown building with an American flag in the window and a big neon sign bearing the word "GUNS" in all capitals. Inside is a small series of booths separated by dividers. It's busy, and people in groups wait their turns, snapping pictures, flashes going off in time to the sound of the guns. The ground is littered with glittering brass shell casings, and I can feel them through the soles of my shoes as I walk to my appointed booth. Sean is my teacher for the evening, and he patiently goes over how to handle the first guns I will shoot, a .22-caliber CZ Kadet and his .40- caliber Sig Sauer P229. I try to remember, listening to his instructions over the loud pops and bangs from neighboring rangegoers. I take a deep breath. Eject the magazine. Click the slide back to make sure it's not loaded. The CZ is heavy in my hands and heavier still as I slide a full magazine inside and give it a firm tap with my hand. I position my hands, making sure my grip is not too weak and my thumbs are not too low. My finger slides over the trigger, pulls back. Pow! An explosion erupts, and the gun jerks back in my hands, shell ejecting onto the floor; it drops and I don't see it. I'm transfixed. I try again, trying not to close my eyes. The smell of gunpowder tickles my nose. I finish the clip, watching the holes that have appeared in the paper target I was aiming at. They're nowhere near where they should be, but it's not bad. Sean reels the target in and points to a cluster of holes around the bottom of one of the bull's-eyes. It's a clover pattern, he says; it's good. "You should be proud of that," he says, over the din. I smile. At the end of the night, I have shot eight guns -- three handguns, one carbine, and four rifles. The list is a litter of letters and numbers to me. There are the CZ Kadet, Sig Sauer, and CZ 97B for handguns. The carbine is an FN PS90. For rifles, I handle the Ruger Mini-14, the Kel- Tec SU-16CA .223, the not-so-fearsome AR-15 .223 -- a gun that might be soon made illegal -- that weighs so much I can barely hold it to my shoulder, and the Ruger 10/22, a lightweight rifle without much recoil (kickback) that turns out to be my favorite. (Though the range generally does not allow certain types of rifles to be used, for the purpose of this article, we were permitted to shoot the Kel-Tec SU-16CA and the AR-15.) The evening after my shooting adventure, I'm due to meet another open carrier, Tom, at a coffee shop in Mission Valley. Tom is a neatly bearded gentleman with wire-rimmed glasses. Fresh from work, it appears, he wears a dress shirt and black slacks along with his Springfield Armory 1911 .45 that is barely visible on his belt. His wife sits across from him, reading. Tom smiles as he introduces himself, assures me that I'm not too terribly late, and offers me a coffee before we settle down to talk. While not new to gun ownership -- in fact, he's an avid collector -- Tom has only been open carrying for a few months. He is a member of several of the online forums previously mentioned, where he reads and responds to various topics and discussions. Unlike Nate, Sam, and Sean, with whom he is acquainted, Tom has not been stopped by many people, curious or otherwise. He speculates that, because of his dress, most may take him for a plainclothes police officer. "They must think you've got a badge somewhere," I joke. "Could be," he agrees. "That's the first thought. But people need to be aware that a citizen living in a free country is allowed to have liberty and to do these things. And most people assume it's against the law." Tom began carrying mostly out of political reasons. "I got alarmed at how radically guns and gun owners are being vilified across California and across the country," he says. "The laws are being passed willy-nilly, some that don't even make sense, and it's time to start pushing back against unfair, unjust laws." He, like the others, agrees that the Second Amendment needs to apply to the states as well as at a federal level. He elaborates on a California case recently heard by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court that tackles this issue, Nordyke v. King, in which Alameda County attempted (and succeeded) in banning guns from its fairground in order to stop a gun show. "They started a legal action against the city. Another lawyer picked [it] up and has been pursuing it for almost ten years on his own dime, [with] no financial support. And what we're hoping it will do [is] incorporate the Second Amendment to California." Tom, 56, also open carries for other reasons than political activism, recognizing that it could be useful in an unsafe situation. "I look at it like we've never had a fire in our house, but we have two fire extinguishers," he says, and cites something he read in the news as one example. In February of this year, in Los Angeles, he says, two men walked into a cafe and shot seven people, then walked out. "Now, if they'd come up to that cafe and looked in the window and seen two or three guys with a gun on their hip, wouldn't they have turned around and gone someplace else?" Tom wonders aloud. "Or would they have gone in anyway? The first responding officers heard the shots, but they weren't able to get there in time to catch the guys. So the only one who's in a position to do anything about it would be the people who are right there getting shot at. And I'd like to ask those people sitting in the cafe if they wished they'd had a gun when they saw those guys walk in the door." He makes the point that, in areas with stricter gun-control laws, crime is higher. "[In] places where the laws allow the citizens to take their security into their own hands, violent crime goes down significantly," he says. "Look at Chicago and Washington, D.C., where the citizens are essentially forbidden to own handguns, and the incidents of violent crimes are enormous." (In June 2008, the Supreme Court struck down Washington D.C.'s ban on handguns.) Later, he sends me a link to the FBI crime statistics from 2007 (the latest information available). They report some grim facts. In Vermont, which allows the concealed carrying of weapons without a permit, the violent crimes per 100,000 inhabitants is 124.3, while in the District of Columbia, it's 1413.3. Alaska, like Vermont, allows concealed carrying without a permit, and their number is 661.2. In California, it's 522.6. Though he knows the laws regarding guns aren't always in the favor of gun owners, Tom speculates that they can only get so rigid. "To completely eliminate all access to guns is going to be kind of tough because we live in a country where the founders have determined that it's a good thing for the citizens to be armed," he says. "And we agree." Tom doesn't open carry everywhere. He can't at work, where he is a technical writer, and doesn't feel comfortable doing so at church. "I consider it inappropriate to wear it exposed because it's a big distraction," he says. "And we're there to worship, not there to be distracted by someone's outlandish clothes or political activism." He will also take it off, if on private property, when asked, such as when he was stopped -- and the only time he's been approached negatively -- in a supermarket. "The whole point is to try and make people aware and comfortable that law-abiding citizens can carry guns without the world coming to an end," he says simply, "without having to provoke a SWAT incident. We're very meticulous in obeying the law. We're very careful about what the law says, what we're allowed to do [and] what we're not allowed to do. And the police have endorsed that, verified that." Though Tom may be in a minority, there is a growing open-carry movement in San Diego. Tom estimates that there are between 75 and 100 active open carriers locally. "We had between 75 and 100 people who said they were going to come [to the February 28 event]," he says. "So there are at least 75 to 100. There have been other meets where we've all gotten together for lunch down at El Indio, and there were 20 to 25 people at each one of those. And there's some overlap, and some people came to the first and not the second, so I'd be surprised if there were less than 100 active people in the San Diego area." He attended the El Indio lunch and reports that everyone in the restaurant was respectful and supportive. "A couple of girls came in and had lunch and asked about it," he says. "They said, 'Why are you guys all wearing guns?' " He pauses, laughing at the story. "And we explained the program to them, and they said, 'You know, I bet this is the safest place in San Diego right now!' " ************************************************** 9. Clarification on carrying in National Parks ************************************************** Looks like the date that we can start carrying in National Parks is February 22, 2010. http://tinyurl.com/ns4c24 ifallsdailyjournal.com VNP clarifies gun carrying law By Journal Staff Created 07/17/2009 - 6:15am On May 22, Pres. Obama signed into law the Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act of 2009, an act which regulates credit card companies and protects consumers. A provision of that act allows the carrying of loaded firearms in units of the national park and national wildlife refuge systems when authorized by state law and not otherwise prohibited. Section 3 of the act states that the carrying of loaded firearms will not take effect until Feb. 22. Until that time, the current prohibition against the possession of firearms in national parks will remain in place. Voyageurs National Park rangers will continue to enforce the provisions of 36 CFR 2.4, adopted in 1983 and 1984, which generally prohibit possession of a firearm within a park. The safety of all visitors, staff, and wildlife is extremely important. Park staff will work to ensure that there are no misunderstandings that could cause unnecessary concerns to visitors or threaten park resources. For additional information contact Chief of Operations Jim Hummel at park headquarters, 283-6650. ************************************************** 10. BBC looks at TN repeal of restaurant ban ************************************************** Thanks to Matt Gottshalk for the link: bbc.co.uk Tennessee gun law divides opinion By James Coomarasamy BBC News, Nashville, Tennessee Following a recent series of high-profile shooting incidents in the United States, the southern state of Tennessee is changing its gun laws this week. It is relaxing them. If a last-minute legal challenge fails, from Tuesday, gun owners in the state will be allowed to carry their weapons in a lot more public places - including bars and restaurants. I went to Nashville to find out what local residents thought about the proposed law change. 'Seconds count' Nikki Goeser takes her Second Amendment right to bear arms very seriously. One of Tennessee's 250,000 registered gun owners, she saw her husband, Ben, shot dead in front of her in April. She believes her right was denied when she needed it most. Soon, Tennessee's bars and restaurants will no longer be off-limits for registered weapons. State legislators - a quarter of whom own firearms - have passed a law allowing guns into bars and restaurants, but preventing their owners from buying alcohol. For the bill's Democratic sponsor - State Senator Doug Jackson - it is a case of preserving the rights of individuals and those of individual states. "People are fearful about tomorrow. They feel insecure. And the Second Amendment right is something that they cherish and it's a means of protecting themselves and their family and defending what they have. It provides security in troubled times." But on the streets of Nashville, even some staunch defenders of Second Amendment rights fear that the Music City is about to become Dodge City. And that mixing guns and alcohol is a recipe for disaster. 'Scared' Nashville restaurateur Randy Rayburn is anything but cool about the idea of his customers having guns. He is leading a last-minute legal challenge to the law - to protect his barmen. "Yes they're scared, I'm scared, my wife is scared for our personal safety." He has done what restaurant owners are permitted to do - placed a sign in his window, saying "no guns allowed". But he is worried that the sign will not be enough to prevent people taking the new law into their own hands. " I don't care so much about a bad guy's life... If they choose that, and I am armed I know what I'm doing, I will try to stop them. " "We don't need vigilantism inside my business," he says. "I'm a gun owner, I have a gun at my home, but I keep it there, not at a public place where many people's lives can be threatened. And he has support from the city's police chief, Ronal Serpas, who does not believe that people who walk into bars with guns will steer clear of the shot glasses. "If you think about how alchohol influences the choices people make... I don't believe people are not going to drink and have guns, because I know they drink and drive," he says. "What process is going through their mind as it's clouded by alcohol? [They're] trying to do a good thing, but they have NO training, NO experience, NO time for reflective thought, and their minds are consumed by alcohol - it doesn't make sense." But for Nikki - and other law-abiding gun owners - what does not make sense is being allowed to have a gun, but being prevented from using it when it counts "I hear people say all the time, guns are made specifically to kill," she tells me. "My answer to that is: 'yes a gun can kill, but in the correct hands, it can be used to save innocent lives'. I don't care so much about a bad guy's life. I'm sorry, I don't. They make the choice to be evil, that's their choice. If they choose that, and I am armed I know what I'm doing, I will try to stop them." And soon she will be allowed to - in a lot more places. ************************************************** 11. ATF rejects TN Firearms Freedom Act ************************************************** The BATFE is spitting at the States, saying that the 10th Amendment isn't worth the paper it is written on. The issue is states like TN and MT who have passed laws saying that BATFE has no authority over guns manufactured in their state that are sold only in that same state. These new laws make sense as the feds only have jurisdiction over *inter-state* commerce according to the Constitution. But since when has the Constitution ever stopped the feds from doing something they really wanted to do? I expect this battle to intensify as VCDL will be backing any similar measures introduced in Virginia next year: http://tinyurl.com/lfmxbk tenthamendmentcenter.com The Battle Begins: ATF vs the Constitution Posted on 18 July 2009 by Bryce Shonka A line was drawn in the sand last week - a response by the Federal Government to the State of Tennessee and their assertion of sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution. (Editor's note: A similar response was sent to Montana Firearms licenses on 07-16-09 as well) Part of a series of moves by states seeking to utilize the Tenth Amendment as a limit on Federal Power, the Tennessee State Senate approved Senate Bill 1610 (SB1610), the Tennesse Firearms Freedom Act, by a vote of 22-7. The House companion bill, HB1796 previously passed the House by a vote of 87-1. Governor Breseden allowed the bill to become law without signing. The law states that "federal laws and regulations do not apply to personal firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition that is manufactured in Tennessee and remains in Tennessee. The limitation on federal law and regulation stated in this bill applies to a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured using basic materials and that can be manufactured without the inclusion of any significant parts imported into this state." At the time of passage through the TN House and Senate, Judiciary Chairman Mae Beavers had this to say- "Be it the federal government mandating changes in order for states to receive federal funds or the federal government telling us how to regulate commerce contained completely within this state - enough is enough. Our founders fought too hard to ensure states' sovereignty and I am sick and tired of activist federal officials and judges sticking their noses where they don't belong." The Federal Government, by way of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms expressed its own view of the Tenth Amendment this week when it issued an open letter to 'all Tennessee Federal Firearms Licensees' in which it denounced the opinion of Beavers and the Tennessee legislature. ATF assistant director Carson W. Carroll wrote that 'Federal law supersedes the Act', and thus the ATF considers it meaningless. Constitutional historian Kevin R.C. Gutzman sees this as something far removed from the founders' vision of constitutional government: "The letter says, in part, 'because the Act conflicts with Federal firearms laws and regulations, Federal law supersedes the Act, and all provisions of the Gun Control Act and the National Firearms Act, and their corresponding regulations, continue to apply.' That is precisely what I predicted the Federal Government's response to the Tennessee act would be. As I told Judge Andrew Napolitano on Fox News's Glenn Beck Program on June 5, 2009, federal officials don't care about a good historical argument concerning the meaning of the Constitution." "Their view is that the states exist for the administrative convenience of the Federal Government, and so of course any conflict between state and federal policy must be resolved in favor of the latter." "This is another way of saying that the Tenth Amendment is not binding on the Federal Government. Of course, that amounts to saying that federal officials have decided to ignore the Constitution when it doesn't suit them." The Federal Government has regularly claimed that the commerce clause of the constitution, which gives DC authority to regulate commerce between the states, gives them authority to regulate or add prohibitions on items that never cross state lines. One notable use of the commerce clause in this manner can be found in the 2005 decision by the Supreme Court in 'Gonzales vs. Raich', where the court contended that consuming one's locally grown marijuana for medical purposes affects the interstate market of marijuana, and hence that the federal government may regulate--and prohibit--such consumption. They used this claim, even though at the same time they made it clear that no legal market for marijuana exists. One key aspect of the ATF's letter is that it was only sent out to existing Federal Firearms Licensees, those generally already in compliance with federal regulations - and who likely would not have participated in the TN Firearms Freedom act anyway, according to sources close to Tenth Amendment Center. Ultimately what the letter represents is another move in the chess match being played out between the states and the Federal Government, the resolution of which may not be seen for quite some time. Below is the full text of the letter sent last week by the ATF: "U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Assistant Director OPEN LETTER TO ALL TENNESSEE FEDERAL FIREARMS LICENSEES The purpose of this letter is to provide guidance on your obligations as a Federal firearms licensee ("FFL"). The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives ("ATF") is dedicated to your success in meeting your requirements as a Federal firearms licensee. The following guidance is intended to assist you in accomplishing this goal. The passage of the Tennessee Firearms Freedom Act, H.B. 1796, 106th Leg. (Tenn. 2009) 1796 ("Act"), effective June 19, 2009, has generated questions from industry members as to how this State law may affect them while engaged in a firearms business activity. The Act purports to exempt personal firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition manufactured in the State, and which remain in the State, from most Federal firearms laws and regulations. However, because the Act conflicts with Federal firearms laws and regulations, Federal law supersedes the Act, and all provisions of the Gun Control Act and the National Firearms Act, and their corresponding regulations, continue to apply. As you may know, Federal law requires a license to engage in the business of manufacturing firearms or ammunition, or to deal in firearms, even if the firearms or ammunition remain within the same state. All firearms manufactured by a licensee must be properly marked. Additionally, each licensee must record the type, model, caliber or gauge, and serial number of each firearm manufactured or otherwise acquired, and the date such manufacture or other acquisition was made. The information required must be recorded in the licensee's records not later than the seventh day following the date such manufacture or other acquisition was made. Firearms transaction records and NICS background checks must be conducted prior to disposition of firearms to unlicensed persons. These, as well as other Federal requirements and prohibitions, apply whether or not the firearms or ammunition have crossed state lines. If you have any questions regarding the Federal firearms laws and regulations, please contact your local ATF office. ATF works closely with the firearms industry and appreciates the important role the industry plays in combating violent crime. A listing of ATF office phone numbers can be found at http://www.atf.gov/contact/field.htm. Carson W. Carroll, Assistant Director (Enforcement Programs and Services)" ************************************************** 12. Fireworks (and ammo) amnesty business booms ************************************************** "'The storage of these things (is) unsafe,' said Omaha police Lt. Mark Desler. 'If you have a quantity of ... older ammunition, it poses a hazard. They're flammable, obviously, and it can cause problems inside of your residence.'" WHAT is the Lt. talking about? I guess when a reporter calls, he just starts making up things as he goes along, hoping that as an "official" he can get away with it. http://tinyurl.com/kn3gqp KETV.com Fireworks Amnesty Business Booms People Also Turn In Ammunition, Tear Gas POSTED: 11:01 am CDT July 11, 2009 UPDATED: 4:06 pm CDT July 11, 2009 OMAHA, Neb. -- People brought old fireworks, bullets and even tear gas to drop-off sites in the Omaha area for the sixth annual Fireworks Amnesty Day. More than a dozen metro police departments worked together to allow people to turn in illegal items and ammunition, no questions asked. "I brought three old boxes of shotgun shells because I haven't hunted since 1983, when my dog died," said Paul Wilson, of Ralston. "I just kind of forgot about them until this thing." "The storage of these things (is) unsafe," said Omaha police Lt. Mark Desler. "If you have a quantity of fireworks in your home or a quantity of older ammunition, it poses a hazard. They're flammable, obviously, and it can cause problems inside of your residence." Officers set up three drop-off sites, including one at Seymour Smith