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

10/15/09 - VCDL Update 10/15/09 - Part 4

legally carried by law-abiding citizens. He has been reminded by Washington State Attorney General Rob McKenna that he does not have the authority under the state's long-standing preemption law. It is an = arguable point that such a ban would be unconstitutional under the state constitution. If Nickels goes through with his threat and has these park areas posted off limits to guns, he is setting the stage for a court showdown that will ultimately fall into the lap of his successor. Thanks to Rasmussen, it is now public knowledge that the majority of citizens do not support such bans, and that fanatics like Nickels who promote and defend such nonsense are like Pacific Northwest salmon swimming up the wrong stream against a strong current. ************************************************** 33. Incredible ballistic slow-motion videos ************************************************** Slow motion images of bullet impacts on stationary and moving targets: http://tinyurl.com/y9cyuqy www.youtube.com ************************************************** 34. Anti-gun N.C. state senator shoots intruder ************************************************** EM Ron Hyson emailed me this: -- Typical anti gunner -- they require all guns to be safe - except theirs?? Oh right, we can use a club, knife, our hands and/or wait 15 = minutes for the police to arrive!! Stay safe, Ron http://tinyurl.com/ydjmfuc www.usacarry.com 74-year-old N.C. state senator shoots, wounds intruder at his home | Richmond Times-Dispatch Posted by Glockster20 Long time Anti-Gun Advocate State Senator R.C. Soles, 74, shot one of two intruders at his home just outsideTabor City, N.C. about 5 p.m. Sunday, the prosecutor for the politician's home county said. The victim, Kyle Blackburn, was taken to a South Carolina hospital, but the injuries were not reported to be life-threatening, according to Rex Gore, district attorney for Columbus, Bladen and Brunswick counties. The State Bureau of Investigation and Columbus County Sheriff's Department are investigating the shooting, Gore said. Soles, who was not arrested, declined to discuss the incident Sunday evening. "I am not in a position to talk to you," Soles said by telephone. "I'm = right in the middle of an investigation." Soles, a top-ranking Democrat and the longest-serving member of the legislature, already was the subject of an SBI investigation over sexual misconduct allegations with former male clients. (FHW - Now, that sounds more like a liberal to me). The Senator, who has made a career of being against gun ownership for the general public, didn't hesitate to defend himself with his own gun = when he believed he was in immediate danger and he was the victim. In typical hypocritical liberal fashion, the "Do As I Say And Not As I = Do" Anti-Gun Activist Lawmaker picked up his gun and took action in what apparently was a self-defense shooting. Why hypocritical you may ask? It is because his long legislative record shows that the actions that he took to protect his family, his own response to a dangerous life threatening situation, are actions that he feels ordinary citizens should not have if they were faced with an identical situation. It has prompted some to ask if the Senator believes his life and personal safety is more valuable than yours or mine. But, this is to be expected from those who believe they can run our lives, raise our kids, and protect our families better than we can. ************************************************** 35. Feds sued to keep out of state's gun affairs ************************************************** Montana law would keep feds out of some local gun and ammo purchases: http://tinyurl.com/ydcybmk www.wnd.com Feds sued to keep out of state's gun affairs Complaint filed seeking affirmation of Montana Firearms Freedom Act Posted: October 03, 2009 11:25 pm Eastern By Bob Unruh (c) 2009 WorldNetDaily In the second major front in the war over gun rights that has developed in just days, a lawsuit has been filed against U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder seeking a court order that the federal government stay out of the way of Montana's management of its own firearms. Montana statehouse The action was filed by the Second Amendment Foundation and the Montana Shooting Sports Association in U.S. District Court in Missoula, Mont., to validate the principles and terms of the Montana Firearms Freedom Act, which took effect today. WND previously reported on the precedent-setting move taken over the course of recent months when the 2009 Montana Legislature approved the bill and the plan was signed into law by Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer. The law provides guns and ammo made, sold and used in Montana would not require any federal forms; silencers made and sold in Montana would be fully legal and not registered; and there would be no firearm registration, serial numbers, criminal records check, waiting periods or paperwork required. The idea is spreading quickly. Tennessee already has a similar law, and similar plans have been introduced in many other states. An organization called the Firearms Freedom Act has created a map of such activity nationwide: Map of gun law activity assembled by FirearmsFreedomAct.org The move comes at a time the nation has a president who has placed anti-gun activists in several influential positions, including an attorney general who supported a complete handgun ban in the District of Columbia before the U.S. Supreme Court threw it out. Get "Shooting Back: The Right and Duty of Self-Defense" and learn why you have a responsibility to be armed. Montana's plan is called "An Act exempting from federal regulation under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution of the United States a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition manufactured and retained in Montana." The law cites the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that guarantees to the states and their people all powers not granted to the federal government elsewhere in the Constitution and reserves to the state and people of Montana certain powers as they were understood at the time it was admitted to statehood in 1889. "The guaranty of those powers is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889," the law states. The lead attorney for the plaintiffs' litigation team is Quentin Rhodes of the Missoula firm of Sullivan, Tabaracci & Rhoades, PC. The team includes other attorneys working in Montana, New York, Florida, Arizona and Washington. "We're happy to join this lawsuit," said Alan Gottlieb, founder of the SAF, "because we believe this issue should be decided by the courts. "We feel very strongly that the federal government has gone way too far in attempting to regulate a lot of activity that occurs only in-state," added MSSA President Gary Marbut. "The Montana Legislature and governor agreed with us by enacting the MFFA. We welcome the support of many other states that are stepping up to the plate with their own firearms freedom acts." David Codrea, a Gun Rights Examiner writer, noted the federal government already has started attacking the move. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, he wrote, previously had written to Federal Firearms Licensees, warning that they could be prosecuted for following the state laws in Montana and Tennessee "What if an FFL was not acting in his capacity as a federal licensee to manufacture for personal use, or to transfer firearms strictly within a state? Or what if a person so engaged was not a federal licensee at all?" Codrea asked. Then he answered: "ATF's determined intent to hold all accountable under federal law has not wavered. In a letter to MSSA president Gary Marbut, Richard Chase, Special Agent in Charge, Denver Field Division, states: 'The manufacture of firearms or ammunition for sale to others within Montana requires licensure by ATF.'" In a statement the SAF said, "The primary purpose of the MFFA is to set up a legal challenge to federal power under the commerce clause." The lawsuit seeks a "declaratory judgment" and is "brought for the purpose of determining a question of actual controversy between the parties." "Passage of the MFFA was an express exercise by the State of Montana of powers reserved to the states and to the people under the 10th Amendment of the United States Constitution," the lawsuit said. "The MFFA is also authorized under the conditions of the compact with the United States that Montana entered upon admission to the union. The United States Congress therefore has no authority, under the limited powers granted to it by the United States Constitution, to preempt the MFFA." The arguments continued, "Under the 10th Amendment, all regulatory authority of all such activities within Montana's political borders is left in the sole discretion of Montana. Federal law therefore does not preempt the MFFA and cannot be invoked to regulate or prosecute Montana citizens acting in compliance with the MFFA, so long as they do so solely within the political borders of Montana." WND also reported this week on a second front in the battle over guns when the Supreme Court agreed to hear a landmark Second Amendment case challenging Chicago's ban on handguns and onerous registration procedures on other firearms. The Illinois State Rifle Association and the Second Amendment Foundation filed a lawsuit against the city of Chicago claiming the city enforces a handgun ban identical to the one struck down by the Supreme Court in the case District of Columbia v. Heller and that the ban violates residents' Second Amendment rights. In Heller, the court rejected a lower court position that claimed the Second Amendment applied only to state "militia," such as the National Guard. However, the 5-4 ruling referenced the federal jurisdiction of Washington, D.C., and not states and localities. This case, McDonald v. Chicago, challenges a 7th Circuit court ruling that said the Second Amendment applies only to federal regulation of an individual's right to guns and not in cases of restrictions by states and municipalities like Chicago and Oak Park, Ill. The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states: "A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Furthermore, Section 1 of the 14th Amendment, or the Privileges or Immunities Clause, states: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. The plaintiffs argue that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" in the Second Amendment is "incorporated" into the 14th Amendment and applies to both states and localities. ************************************************** 36. VCDL EM fixes Leesburg's invalid ordinances ************************************************** EM Dave Vann sent me this email detailing his long odyssey getting Leesburg into compliance with state law: What started almost a year and a half ago as a simple request to remove a "no weapons" sign at Leesburg Skate Board Park turned into a major undertaking. We were originally notified by Bob Jenson of the sign. I contacted City Attorney Irby and thought the entire matter was being taken care of. You would think I would have learned a long time ago not to expect an easy win. Nothing was heard for the longest time and then Bob contacted us to let us know that the sign and code had been changed to read no weapons allowed unless you have a CHP. Now the fun begins. I placed a phone call to City Attorney Irby. Three weeks pass and no return phone call. Ramping up, I try and call = the Mayor's office. Note the emphasis on TRY. The Mayor does not have an office. WHAT? That's right, the Mayor does not have an office. Further, the phone number I was given for the Mayor doesn't have voice mail! I think it would be easier to get in touch with Bin Laden. Next step, the Town Manager. I do get through to him after playing voice mail tag a couple of times. He informs me the Council has just passed revised code and he will email it to me the following morning. = The morn dawns and the sun sets and no revised code. The next day I call him again. He promises that they are going over every word to ensure it complies with Preemption and I'll have it the next day. Again, I wait, and wait and wait. No presents in my in box. This time I wait until the following week, call and leave a somewhat terse message for him. His secretary calls back (delegation of course) and informs me that the elusive Mayor is going to sign the revised code and as soon as she does I'll be emailed a copy. Below is = a copy of the fruits of our labor. Of course they could have said "....Shall be allowed...." instead of "....may be allowed...." but I suppose they just had to have the last tweak. No matter, I believe this covers it. Now, if they've taken down the onerous portion of the sign and any others that may be hanging around it'll be one more victory we can chalk up. -- PRESENTED: September 22, 2009 ORDINANCE NO, 2009-0-05 ADOPTED: September 22. 2009 AN ORDINANCE: AMENDING ARTICLE II (PARK RULES) OF CHAPTER 26 OF THE LEESBURG TOWN CODE (PARKS AND RECREATION) TO AMEND SECTION REGARDING THE UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF WEAPONS IN TOWN PARKS The Town Council of Leesburg, Virginia, ordains: SECTION I. That the following section of Article II (Park Rules) of Chapter 26 (Parks and Recreation) of the Town Code of the Town of Leesburg, Virginia, 2009, as amended, be and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 26-26. Behavior. (k) Weapons. Weapons may be a allowed in accordance with Virginia Code = Sections 18.2.287.4, 18.2-308 and 18.2=B7280. SECTION II. Including the changes referenced ahove, Article II of Chapter 26, of the Leesburg Town Code is reordained and amended. SECTION III. All prior ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed. SECTION IV. Severability. If a court of competent jurisdiction declares any provision of this ordinance invalid, the decision shall not affect the validity of the ordinance as a whole or any remaining provisions of the Leesburg Town Code. SECTION V. This ordinance shall be in effect upon its passage. PASSED this 22nd day of September, 2009 ------------------------------------------- ***************************************************************************