Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

Anti-gun Activists Blast Virginia Legislature For ‘back-room Dealing’

February 19, 2010 by  

Anti-gun activists blast Virginia legislature for 'back-room dealing' A coalition of gun violence prevention groups in Virginia has criticized the House Militia, Police and Public Safety Committee of the Virginia General Assembly for holding a surprise subcommittee meeting to pass HB 49, a bill that would repeal Virginia’s one-handgun-per-month law.

The bill was pre-filed in early January by Republican State Delegate Scott Lingamfelter, who is a retired U.S. Army colonel and sits on the Militia, Police, and Public Safety Committee. HB 49 would repeal the state’s law that limits Virginia residents to one handgun purchase every 30 days.

According to the Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence, the subcommittee had originally announced that it would conduct no further meetings, leaving HB 49 unreported. However, on Feb. 10, it reconvened late in the day giving only a few hours’ notice to the public to approve the piece of legislation.

"This is back-room politics at its very worst," said Andy Goddard, president of the Richmond Chapter of the Million Mom March, adding that the current law was designed to curb illegal gun trafficking in the Commonwealth.

"Attempting to repeal this law under the cover of a blizzard, in a surprise meeting, is reprehensible," he added.

Vagunforum.net says that only three other states ration handgun purchases—California, Maryland and New Jersey.
ADNFCR-1961-ID-19617094-ADNFCR

Special To Personal Liberty

You Sound Off! is written by our readers and appears the last Wednesday of each month. If you would like to submit an article or letter to the editor for consideration for You Sound Off!, send it to yousoundoff@personalliberty.com by the Friday before the last Wednesday of the month. To be considered, a submission should be 750 words or less and must include the writer's name, address and a telephone number. Only the writer's name will be published. Anonymous submissions will not be considered.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Anti-gun Activists Blast Virginia Legislature For ‘back-room Dealing’”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • http://google mathilda musgrove

    Good for Virginia, they finally get the idea to do like the other side is doing.
    Pitty we have to stoop to that level, but seems as long as it’s legal we can do what they can do.
    But we get blasted for it, and they don’t. What is wrong with this country?
    We the People need to stand up and just start getting things back in order the way the constitution is and quit talking. Start planning and just do it.
    Seems Virginia is on that route.
    Way to go Virginia!

  • William Nealey

    those anti gun idiots are just that. they are making a lot of money doing what they do. I wish some one would make a list of all who donate money to them and publish the list so we could all boycot any company giving them one dime,

  • William Nealey

    Mathilda the way to get the country back to normal is do what you folks in Va. did. the main thing is dont vote for an incumbant unless you are very sure he is for we the people and not just another yes man-woman for the party.

  • Barb

    I only hope more states start re-enforcing their gun laws to protect our right to bear arms and protect our own. I think it’s great that they did it in the same manner that Obama and his damndemocrats have been passing legislation against us for quite some time. I agree with Mathilda the Damndemocrats can do it and not a word is uttered but let a good bunch of savvy Republicans do the same type of thing and all Hell breaks out! I hate the idea of going down to their level too but it was a cool move non the less. Kudos to Virginia!

  • Tim

    I personally can’t see how someone would need to purchase more than one handgun every thirty days. That law seems like it was really useless. However, passing it does open up the door to an excessive number of handguns in the public domain, with which to commit a crime. Obviously, you don’t use handguns for hunting. They are primarily for self defense or committing crimes.

    I am for the right to bear arms, but I think there needs to be sensible gun control. We regulate the use of a vehicle. Handguns likewise, need to be regulated. I am against assault rifles. They have been linked to too many mass killings by crazies. Also, I am against teflon bullets, which can penetrate body armour. Law enforcement has come up against some formidable opposition, because of the flow of teflon bullets and assault weapons being used by criminals.

    • TIME

      Tim, The idea is Criminals are not allowed to have guns.
      What differance will it make if you buy two hand gun’s per month, if your a collector thats not out of line, most will sit in a display case and never will be used.

      Who are you to tell them they can’t own two, ten or even 100 hand guns. After all they have paid for them and 99.99% will never even be used.

      I think every person in the United States should be trained to not only use a Gun as in all forms of guns, it should be a Law that everyone should own at least 2.
      Then 99% of crime would come to a grinding halt.

      • DaveH

        And we can only shoot at the most two at a time, and not very effectively at that, so what’s the big deal if a guy buys 10 or 20?

        And I wonder if Tim even knows what an assault rifle is?

        When I was young, I had a single shot shotgun that I could shoot and reload in less than 5 seconds. I imagine that, if I was a criminal, I could have gotten off several shots before somebody smart enough to be armed could have stopped me.

    • blackhat

      Tim…You are such a fraud…You just posted that you were for “the right to bear arms”…just stop being such a poser.

    • Tagley

      Tim, obviously you do not know much about handguns because they ARE used for hunting and have been used to take some of the largest game animals in the world and also to protect oneself against some of the largest predators in the world. I have friends that have used handguns exclusively for hunting big game animals for most of their lives. As for the comment about needing to purchase more than one handgun a month, its our God given right to legally purchase what we want. Ted Kennedy’s car killed more people than my guns. Since vehicles kill lots more people every year than guns how about a limit on vehicle purchases. Watch the automotive industry tank on that law.

      • Joe H.

        tagley,
        My brother used to hunt wild boar with a 44 mag!!! He shot one one year and it didn’t stop it it just came right at him. He climbed a small sapling and when it was at the tree shot 3 more shots at the thing.The shots caused him to lose his grip and his foot came down on the boars head as it died!! Talk about a grown man about pissing his pants!!! He never enjoyed boar hunting quite as much after that!!!

      • bbstacker

        Tagley that excellent! the “Ted Kennedy” car reference. In the United States the average deaths from auto accidents per year is exceeding 40,000, but we don’t have lobby groups out trying to ban driving or auto ownership. They are registered, insured and we have to be licensed, but it doesn’t stop the death rate from using them, so there goes that whole argument. You cannot put a price on common sense, but stupid is free.

    • Hello?

      Tim, with all due respect, I really don’t know how it would affect you if everyone went out and bought 1000 hand guns and I know that if they do it will be legal. No one can buy a hand gun without proper background check and it should be that way.
      I don’t know why you are against assualt weapons, I will assure you that criminals and illegals have them and they found them on the black market which cannot be controlled. Do you feel safe with all this weaponry around in the wrong hands and you are armed with only a pocket knife. Now how is weapon regulations going to make anyone safer against thugs.
      I carry a weapon on my person at all times and I have a legal permit and I am no threat to anyone except to anyone that would do harm to me or my family.
      Tim, wouldn’t it be wonderful if someone on the 911 aircraft had had a weapon, there would be 3000 people still with their families. Do we want to be as helpless as they were because of liberal ideas?

      • DaveH

        Good Point Hello (about 911).

      • Joe H.

        hello?,
        I’m not so sure that I agree with the statement about background checks! All it leads to is registration and that gives the government a list of all who have legal arms!!! Put a tatoo on convicts that are not to have access to weapons and if they remove it, make it a five or ten year streach for removal!! Why should I be treated like a criminal if I have not even had a parking ticket? That’s crap!!!

    • Art C

      Tim,
      Could you please give us your definition of what an “Assault Weapon” is? I’m betting you don’t have a clue. And please define “Sensible Gun-Control’. Vermont has only one gun law, Basically it’s that you can’t carry a firearm if you intend to commit a crime. Covers everything, and they had about four murders last year, while your gun-control meccas are drowning in blood.
      The Second Amendment isn’t about hunting, so stop using the tired excuse that handguns aren’t for hunting, and besides they are also used for hunting.

      • J C

        Some definitions of an assault weapon:
        Knives et al.
        Automobiles.
        Bus
        Heavy Flower Vase.
        Baseball Bat
        Hockey Stick
        Axe
        Forks
        Pencils
        Air Nailer
        Pipe
        2 x 4
        Sling Shot
        Bow and Arrow
        Shard of Glass
        Bull Whip
        Attack Dog
        The ACLU ;)
        A Rock
        OH! and Firearms in the hands of criminals who don’t adhere to stupid gun laws anyway.

        • bbstacker

          To JC and Art…excellent points and danged funny, too. For anyone here, and especially any of the “control freaks”: go attend an Apple Seed (www.appleseedinfo.org) It’s our HERITAGE. Plain and simple we as Americans have this God given right to protect ourselves and our country from all enemies, foreign and domestic. Criminals don’t observe laws, and all the “control” does is make the law-abiding Citizen jump through gov’t hoops to comply with nonsense that criminals just laugh at.

    • Regular American

      Tim, What is dangerous about an assault rifles? The way it looks? that’s the only difference between them and the run of the mill semi automatic rifle. Assault weapon ban was a stupid attempt by anti gun nuts to protect society from something that didn’t exist.
      Fully automatic rifles are already illegal, unless you have a special license to posses them.
      The mass killings are not usually done with legal guns anyway. Criminals will always get the gun they need to carry out their dirty deeds, no matter what the laws are.

      Even though we may not need more than one hand gun a month, why should the government be able to tell us we can’t buy all the hand guns we want?

    • John

      I live in California and I also like to collect guns. I like to buy guns when I want to, not when the government tells me that I can!

      I like most gun owners am a law abiding citizen that subscribes to gun safety and the laws that govern the state that I live in. I’ve owned guns for over 40 years and to this day I still take a variety of gun classes to enhance my gun handling skills.

      The classes are taught by military, police officers, FBI and alike.
      Everyone in the classes has a high degree of respect for gun safety and the law. It is the idiots that do not respect guns that give law abiding gun enthusiast a bad name. But irregardless there will always be idiots in any sport, hobby or recreation that give that pastime a bad reputation.

      Should all pilots and aircraft enthusiasts be banned from flying airplanes because one idiot fly’s his plane into a Federal Building?

    • http://victorbarney@embarqmail.com Victor L Barney

      Tim, after reading your response and also reading all the responses given you, I’d read them all if I were you because they seem to have put more thought into this topic than you!

    • Joe Gunowner

      You’re a fool if you think the governement has ANY right to regulate arms. The constitution is clear “the right to keep and bear arms.” Live by the constitution or die a slow tryannical death by an out of control government.

      • John

        The states such as CA are regulating gun purchases and ammo is next.

    • DaveH

      Tim,
      Where do you get your phony facts?
      “They [assault weapons] have been linked to too many mass killings by crazies”
      Do you just make these things up on the fly? Of course you do, you’re a Liberal!

      http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcassaul.html

    • http://www.NRA.com Stephaan

      Tim;
      assault weapons: a term coined by prez Clinton (tied for first place as the worst prez as far as his assault on the Constitution and the 2nd amendment)
      Clinton used this a.w. term to try and scare the “uninformed” public into thinking semi-auto rifles, shotguns, and handguns are evil, when in fact it is the criminals who use weapons that are “evil” and should be CONTROLLED!
      If our judicial system WOULD CONTROL CRIMINALS we wouldn’t have any need for any gun control would we Tim? At least that wouldn’t be a bonafide EXCUSE anymore. Judging from how well our government has done with criminal control, wouldn’t you have to assume that they would do just as well with gun control? (a rhetorical question Tim, no need to answer) There is no “sensible” gun control Tim. There IS sensible “criminal control”, but it is not what we have now.
      Your analogy of regulating/registering cars so we must regulate guns too? That sounds EXACTLY like Al Gores speech to congress! ha ha ha.. Al Gore: another lying liberal socialist politician who made his money off the backs of innocent unaware citizens with his lies and corruption.
      WAKE UP TIM! It’s not about gun control, it’s about controlling us, the free law abiding citizens, so they can ram their socialist one world order down our throats. Every single law controlling guns, no matter how insignificant it may seem to you, is just another foot in the door!

    • http://www.ccrkba.org. Dartanian

      Tim;
      These are all such good posts that there is nothing left for me to say. I only hope that you read them all and learn something here.
      ……………………………………………………………………………………………

      Tagley says: Ted Kennedy’s car killed more people than my guns.

      So True Tagley! The only case I know of where a drunk driver ever got off scot free after killing someone. No criminal charges for the elitist Mr. Kennedy for killing Mary Jo Kopechne. I think Kennedy paid off her parents since they didn’t pursue him in court for wrongful death. If he had accidentally shot her with a gun do you think he would have been charged? I think not.

      • John

        Come on, lay off Ted Kennedy, he’s been sober for months now.

        • http://wwwNRA.com Stephaan

          Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha… Yeah John, BUT ONLY because he has to be!

        • libertytrain

          as far as we know….

          • jim

            The song goes In Heaven there is no beer, That’s why we drink it here. The part of that song that may not apply is the location.

          • Joe H.

            Jim,
            Yeah, I’ll bet his drinks are a lot warmer now!!!! No ice cold beer for him now!!!!

    • John

      There is no such thing as “sensible gun control”. Those are the exact same words used by anti-gun zealots. What is sensible and who is going to define it?

      • George E

        Here’s another way of looking at it that may help Tim see what you’re saying. I’m for “sensible” abortion control, but I’ll bet my definition of sensible is a lot tighter than his is. Most liberals want absolutely no control on abortion rights because they think that restricts a woman’s right to choose (death for her child). To me, “sensible” abortion control is almost no abortions allowed.

        Sorry if I took us off subject, but I thought this example might help liberals see gun control from a conservatives point of view.

    • JeffH

      Tiny Tim, you are against everything that relates to anothers freedom. I enjoy my guns, they’re like Big Boys Toys. If I could afford to buy more than the one “new” handgun a month here in California I would, but I would rather purchase 10 used handguns in one month than be limited to just one new handgun.
      It’s really funny to read your smack. In over 45 years of gun ownership, I’ve never pointed a gun at another person nor have I ever been close to thinking about commiting a crime let alone kill somene.
      Can’t recall any of my huntin’ or shootin’ buddies doing any of that either. Because I choose to be safe and own guns, I get treated by my state and federal government as a possible criminal.
      Well there is a new sheriff in town, known as the American citizens, or patriots that believe in the Bill of Rights and the Constitution.
      Tiny Tim, your welcome to join this new and growing elite group of Americans.

      • JeffH

        I’m not a marine, but ohh rah! Virginia.

    • independant thinker

      You know, I don’t see why anyone would need to purchase more than one handgun a month either but you know what, I do not care how many you purchase in a month. You want one a day more power to you. Hunting handguns, I have two that I hunt with one for small game and one for deer. Bullets penetrating a law enforcement vest? Most if not all centerfire rifle bullets will penetrate a law enforcement vest. Sensible gun control, hit what you aim at is the best and only logical answer to that.

      • Joe H.

        What about the collector? If he is limited to just one purchase a month, he may have to forgo the one purchase that would make his collection complete. And let’s face it, most collectors would never fire their collections unless they were most assuredly forced to!!!

    • JeffH

      Tiny Tim, why would the anti-gun government allow the assault weapons ban to expire and not renew it? I’ll tell you why! The assault weapons ban had zero effect on gun related crimes. That is a big “0″.

      Assault weapons are not the weapons of choice among drug dealers, gang members or criminals in general. Assault weapons are used in about one-fifth of one percent (.20%) of all violent crimes and about one percent in gun crimes.
      http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcassaul.html

    • J C

      There is no such thing as “sensible” gun control. You don’t get it Tim, the only people being controlled are law abiding citizens…and they don’t need to be controlled. Maybe what you mean is you’d like to see fewer criminals with guns. No problem, we can help with this by giving law abiding citizensthe right to shoot these criminals when they break into a home. I’d give it about 6 months before criminals are either too fearful to carry on with their career or just choose a new career. But that doesn’t allow the government to have all the control that it wants so our gun rights are an eternal battle of the Government vs. We The People.

    • Christopher51

      So you ARE for gun control. You can’t have it both ways. You can’t have a little of this and a little of that. There are copious amounts of laws that are already on the books. The criminals who ignore the law are not behind bars, where they should be. The government is more intent on going after you and me. Why? We pose a much greater threat to them then all of the criminals put together.

      We don’t need any more laws. What difference does it make whether you’re allowed 1 gun a month or 101 guns a month? The GOVERNMENT worries about those people, you shouldn’t. That’s what all of this is all about. That’s what organizations like Gun Control Inc. is all about.

      As Thomas Jefferson once said, “When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.”

      And you can’t get rid of all of the crime by getting rid of all the guns. Have we learned nothing from Prohibition? Look at Great Britain. Since they banned private firearm ownership, knifings have risen almost 800 percent. How about Australia? Crime, in general, has risen over 700 percent. FBI statistics report that less than 1/10 of 1 percent of Concealed Weapons Permit holders is responsible for gun related crimes. Do you want to compare that to automobile related fatalities? Think about that next time you hand junior the key to your 3000 pound, 350 HP automobile.

      Incidentally, the difference between an automobile and a firearm is simple. Ownership and usage of an automobile is a PRIVILAGE whereas self protection, by ANY means, is a GOD given right!

      As Thomas Jefferson once said, “The God who gave us life, gave us liberty… at the same time.”

      Why is it an “Assault” weapon? Let’s get it right once and for all. It’s a Military style/type weapon. Why do people like them? It’s simple. If my Remington 700 or 300 Weatherby takes a dip in the stream, it’s game over! The day is done. If my AR-15 or M-16 goes for the same dip in the stream, you shake it out, clear the chamber and keep on going. Military type weapons are tough, reliable, fast and accurate.

      Why don’t the GOVERNMENT and/or police want the “WE THE PEOPLE” to own military type firearms? It’s simple. It levels the playing field. They don’t like that.

      As George Washington once said, “”A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.”
      Incidentally, people DO hunt with handguns. It’s actually a greater challenge. Unlike a rifle, you’ve got to get up close and personal with a handgun. That takes skill.

      In closing, just remember what all of this gun control issue is really about. As Thomas Pain once said, “It is the duty of every patriot to protect his country, from its government.”

      Laus Deo.

    • NA

      The point is that the government does not need to be telling any citizen how many guns they can buy. Goes to the premise of “tight to bear arms.” Is refreshing to see legislators actually doing what they are supposed to do, defend the constitution, state of federal. Wish this sentiment could spread to Washington, unfortunately, the only way that will happen is through elections, vote them out, Democrat or Republican.

  • Robin from Indiana

    Democrats hate it when their tactics are used for Republican legislation. Way to go VA!

  • Hello?

    We, the American people should wake up, our founding fathers gave us the right to bear arms and mainly to that we may protect ourselves against tyranny and from future idiots such as we have in our government. I just can’t understand why a lot of people in this country want to shove their fears and opinions down someone else’s throat, they don’t have that right in the first place. No one in this country can purchase any type of weapon without proper I.D. and permits issued by the local authorities.
    Search history and you will find that all dictators have removed weapons from their citizens and the citizens have been at their mercy with no means of protecting themselves from a government that intend on making them slaves.
    Gun laws protect the criminal and not the law abiding citizen. What good is a law if you don’t have any respect for laws to begin with, therefore the intention of the gun laws are to take control of citizens and that otherwise would obey and respect the law.
    I will assure you that this administration at some point will and it has already been tried , to disarm all citizens in this country because they can’t force their agenda against an armed America. Better buy up some firearms as you are going to need them to protect your freedom as Americans and not to break laws or hurt anyone that is not a threat to you.YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO PROTECT YOURSELF AND FAMILY.

    • George E

      I’m only theorizing here, but I’d guess that since many liberals live in cities, they generally don’t hunt and about the only time they see or hear any thing related to guns is in relation to crimes committed. Conservatives, on the other hand, often live in more rural areas where hunting is an acceptable practice. Also, I’m pretty sure that many more conservatives serve in the military than liberals so this is another place they get exposed to the use of weapons. I believe these are some of the reasons conservatives have a better understanding how weapons properly used can actually bring good things to life instead of just violent crime.

      • J C

        Good theory George. Most city dwellers only hear about guns in a tragic context. But for every tragic shooting there are ten more stories of self defense and lives saved because of lawful use of a gun. But the MSM doesn’t report these since it doesn’t help the agenda of disarming Americans. I know this to be true because I recieve publications that print stories of self defense and lawful use. And I wonder why they don’t make the news…
        The other thing is, what will these city dwellers do if the trains stop running for three days? There won’t be a single thing on the shelves at the grocery store. That’s when I’ll want my guns handy and loaded.

  • Guy

    Tim there are a lot of hunts and hunter that use hand guns for hunting also in shooting competitions you need more than one handgun also a lot of SASS members like to have matched pairs of guns also a lot of times you can get a better price if you buy more than one.

  • charles craig

    you go Virginia. This is the USA. “Whiskey for my men and beer for my horses” Let the bad guys beware of are armed citizens. “Don’t tread on me. My home is safe because I own and am extremely well trained, at the SWAT and police officer level.

    • Grampy

      Amen

  • Mikerr

    You go Virginia, the founding fathers saw to it that we could bear arms and the government has tried to control our weapons long enough. Let them try to take away our weapons and see the uproar. The time has come to take our country back from the left crazzies!

    • Norm

      Aren’t you usually on your knees praying?

  • Barb

    Tim and all you who think like him. We are not backwoods, shoot ‘em up types as you libs would love to paint us. We are educated, smart, and never drank the koolaid wide awake types, who will be and actually are ready for the unlawful raids on any or all of us by the tyrant that is now in charge. Should that day come they will find out just how few sheep are really out here and how many will fight for a free America. And that means fight to the death hopefully theirs if we have to. Unfortunately it’s sheep like you who will see the truth way to late.

    • JeffH

      Barb, God forbid should it come to that, but it is better to be prepared than not for any disaster, man made or natural.

      • George E

        It’s less likely to come to that when you’ve got a well-armed populace. Also, don’t forget, and I’ll bet this doesn’t go completely unnoticed by those in power, the vast majority of people in our military are conservatives or independent. They are very loyal to our commanders, but at some point they will wake up to the tyranny and turn against the government they are supposed to support if things get bad enough. Anyway, that’s my theory.

        • Joe H.

          George E.,
          It doesn’t have to be against our own government, with the condition of our southern border it could come in the form of an invading force!!! Let food get too scarce in Mexico or all of central and south America and it could very well happen! We will be the ones defending our liberal pansies against the big, bad, wolves from the south!!!! I fought for this country once and would gladly do it again, so Norm maybe you should not wish too much bad luck on us “gun nuts” as I would still protect your life and liberty today and I’m still a damn good shot!!!

          • JeffH

            That is what patriots do…

  • http://myronjpoltroonian.blogspot.com Myron J. Poltroonian

    Dear Everyone Except Tim, “The beauty of the second amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.” Thomas Jefferson (However, I’m beginning to believe he may’ve had more than just the use of the second amendment in it’s own defense in mind.)

  • atsoc

    great for the backroom deal the antis got there own medicine. may the oathkeepers.org get stronger in your state

    • J C

      Thanks for mentioning the OATHKEEPERS.ORG. They are one of the few organizations in our country that can still be relied on to actually defend the Constitution. God Bless them and their integrity.

  • uniteas1

    The people against guns ought to rethink their position. Look at Austrailia and Great Britain. They banned guns from the public and now they have HIGHER crime rates. Up to 40% more thanks to a banning of guns. making more laws and more policies on guns is a waste of money and legislation time. We have laws in effect for any use of a firearm against another individual or for committing a crime.

    • Pat R

      I salute Switzerland!!!
      They have a law in Switzerland that requires all citizens to own a handgun Or weapon. Crime rate almost non-existent!

    • J C

      And they also have greater government control…you get the picture?
      It isn’t about public safety….at all!

  • Eric

    Resides here in VA! Yes! Just why an unconstitutional law shouldn’t be repealed in the first place is beyond me. There is no question about it. If you don’t like guns then don’t own one. Since when do guns kill? It is people who kill. How about in recent news of the one woman who drove clear from North Carolina to California to stab to death by knife a psychic woman whom she received advice from to her misfortune? No guns used! This is a criminal act of an unstable person. What if this woman, who was slain, had a hand gun and was able to protect herself? Disarmament of the people only leads to their loss of right to live free and peaceably both from the GOVERNMENT and a viable means of self protection and preservation. This said government should be by the people and for the people and not the other way around; the anti-gunners are for the government to dictate to you while you lead your life as dumb domesticated sheep. The sad news for those who wish to live in a utopia world is that it is unrealistic; get yourself a grip with reality and wake up to the reality you are in now. This is like saying the world stinks after you walked up to a skunk and kicked it on the part of those who want government to usurp your rights to bear arms because they do not have the common sense of self responsibility and reliance. Perhaps it is a ripe time for these anti-gun people to stop listening to all the mush put in your head and follow your heart in the true expressions of freedom. This is why the US founding fathers saw the necessity of your second amendment rights. The bottom line is with each step the government takes to disarm the people it already has taken other rights from you and plans to do so with each other step it takes until you are disarmed and no longer free. Freedom takes responsibility and is not with out cost to ensure your freedom. Our past as a nation proves you can’t trust our government when it comes to the matter of Indian affairs. Bye the way you won’t find the truth on this issue in Hollywood or our history books. The only truth they spoke to the Native American nations is that we are going to take your lands. Broken treaties and broken promises were their practice. The legacy of genocide via germ warfare and firearms verses bow and arrows. The legacy of colonization versus people who lived in respect to all life the Creator placed about them. What if the first nations had fire arms and were immune to the diseases brought from Europe here? What if the people of the US are disarmed likewise? A battle has to be won one step at a time and there are they who are battling against the freedoms you do enjoy.

  • http://victorbarney@embarqmail.com Victor L Barney

    Go Virginia! Do not fall to the Progressive Movement in America as so many Americans, especially the educated women, have been led! Also, don’t fall victim to a Kenyan Islam-trained black man, who the Progressives’ made President of the USA to finish off America economically, which his Islam Terrorist brotherhood couldn’t have done without him! America, wake-up, and act like Virginia to stop these terrorist groups from destroying us! Remember: Islam also is being used as a tool of the Progressives, and the women that they have lied to like a sociopath does to them so effectively in our society!

  • Millard Shirley

    Thank you, Colonel, and your committee for a common-sense approach to a basic 2nd Amendment right, one that the O-damocrats would deny the good residents of this nation. Further, it is ironic that your committee beat the socialists by using their preferred tactics – shadowy, back-room dealing.

    Signed: Another retired colonel

  • Arthur

    It’s no different than all the backroom dealing in Washington by Obama, Pelosi and Reid about all issues ! Turnabout is fair play especially when people try to mess with the Amendments to our Constitution and our Rights to live life without being interfered with !

  • Arthur

    If you look at the crime rates in Chicago, new York City, Washington, D.C. with their city provisions which are against the law and being challenged especially since the Supreme Court of this land has already said that the “Right to Keep and Bear Arms” is an individual right; the cities and states can’t change that. Federal Law trumps local law every time !

    • J C

      And of course you’ve noticed that the highest crime rates are in “gun ban” cities. Which makes sense right away as criminals are able to select victims with impunity.

  • jerry zopp

    Hey! i liked the one gun a month rule. it should have been “mandatory” that you buy a gun a month! i mean, hell, how many people get to buy 12 guns a year?

    • jim

      Hi Jerry, I’m with you. It’s not in my budget. The the ammo cost. Maybe if I stuck with 22′s.

    • Hello?

      Now , that is a common sense remark, that would take a lot of money. I have been having a problem finding ammo and or reloading components. These bunch of marksists in Washington will make the ammo imposabile to get and render the gun inoperable. They will let you buy a car and remove the steering wheel. I hope we can get rid of this bunch before they make us prisoners. Thanks Jerry.

      • DaveH

        I’m sure regulations are responsible for a lot of the ammo shortage, but the main factor is that people have become energized by the election of Obama, and the shootings at Fort Hood. So ammunition is flying off the shelves.

        • J C

          Dave, in the last 3 months of 2008, Americans bought 7 million guns and over a billion rounds of ammunition.

          • http://www.NRA.com Stephaan

            Yep, the only part of the economy that Osama has helped is the firearms manufacturers, retailers, and all associated equipment etc.
            It was the same under Clinton. The November/December/January sales after the Clinton election were way up. One small retailer that I bought from back then said Clinton was the best thing that happened to him since he had opened for business in 1971. He was up a little over 300%, and that was before Brady bill or assau. weapons ban.

      • JeffH

        There is plenty of ammo available online. One good site is
        http://gun-deals.com/index.php

      • Norm

        Hello?
        Supply and demand. Page 1 of economics 101. There will be as much ammo as the market can handle.

        • DaveH

          Norm,
          Supply and Demand is greatly affected by regulations.

        • J C

          Usually yes….but the Annointed One has started a war on ammunition factories. He’s doing his best to shut them down. Naturally you wouldn’t know this because the MSM isn’t talking about it.

          • independant thinker

            I have no doubt he would do that but you need to show some references so we can have the ammunition to refute the nay sayers with.

          • JC

            Independent, Good thought.
            http://skinnymoose.com/help4hunters/index.php/2009/03/16/402/
            http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=102851807

            Google “Obama / Ammunition”
            There’s a ton of info there.

          • http://www.NRA.com Stephaan

            Independent thinker;
            The info is all over the place about osamas 500% tax on ammo, and about them not releasing the brass to the reloaders. I received it in a news letter from NRA, or CCRKBA, or Second Amendment Foundation, about 6 months ago. If I can find it I will post it, or you can google it..

          • http://www.NRA.com Stephaan

            Independent thinker;
            I copied and pasted this from World Net Daily. There are multiple links in it, so this site might delete everything after the first link if their filter sees the links as spam. I have had this problem before and sometimes I get a message that my post is being considered for posting but it is in “moderation” whatever that means.

            WND posted this AFTER the Fed. released the brass, BUT the shortage had already been caused because of the Fed. holding the brass and not releasing it.

            Just a side bar for some of you that think there aren’t good conservative “Democrats” senators and reps in congress, PLEASE NOTE THAT THESE 2 SENATORS that got the ammo brass released ARE DEMOCRATS! CONSERVATIVE DEMOCRATS, THAT BELIEVE IN THE SECOND AMENDMENT! Why would we want to vote these INCUMBENTS OUT? Why would we want to put TERM LIMITS on these two, or any other conservatives, no matter what party they belong to? We can’t be lumping all the Dems into the socialist category, and all repubs into the conservatives. Watch what each of your reps/senators do, and how they vote on the issues, (especially the 2nd amendment because it protects everything) and THEN DECIDE if you really want to vote them out
            ………………………………………………………………………………………………..

            Feds undercut ammo supply
            World Net Daily
            By Drew Zahn
            © 2009

            World Net Daily
            Responding to two Democratic senators representing outraged private gun owners, the Department of Defense announced last night it has scrapped a new policy that would deplete the supply of ammunition by requiring destruction of fired military brass.
            The policy already had taken a bite out of the nation’s stressed ammunition supply, leaving arms dealers scrambling to find ammo for private gun owners.Mark Cunningham, a legislative affairs representative with

          • DaveH

            I ran across this article which may help answer the question:
            http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/nationwide-ammunition-shortage-hits-us/?singlepage=true

  • http://gmail High Plains Pat

    I guess the gang bangers and the mex gangs all get their permits and follllow the law. If the enforcement was swift and a quick round up of the hoods and justice was despensed when caught with the illegal fire arms, we’d have less crime and settle the bastards down, as 90% are of that linage. We hung horse theives and cattle rustlers on the spot and it slowed the down the range thugs. Of course our country is run be a muslim educated President and a group of like minded thugs, our AG is another Kenyan cross bred that defended a group of terrorists and would love to take away our right to keep and bear arms. How can he proscute skm when he loves the muslim idelogocial view, should recuse himself.

    • JeffH

      Good ole California Assembly Member DeLeon just pushed through a handgun amm registration bill AB962 which forces sellers to fingerprint and keep records of every handgun ammunition deal they make. They also have to store their ammo away from public access and the law will not allow Californians to purchase ammo online.

      • J C

        So they get their ammo in Oregon, Nevada or Arizona. And now we have a greater level of government control as law abiding citizens became criminals over night.

  • Ron (Bear)

    Good words TIME. Since we have learned that vehicles can kill and so can sex, perhaps we should limit them too. Sounds a bit stupid? Maybe we should limit the amount of food people can buy so we can get rid of all the obesity in our country. The fact that we allow politicians and these radical “know nothing about firearms” groups to declare certain places off limits to handguns, I.E. school, churches, government buildings, banks, liquor stores, etc., shows our lack of a basic ability to show these people that all they are doing is creating places for these crazies to commit their murderous terrorist attacks on our innocent citizenry without any opposition to their efforts. I call these places “targets of opportunity” because the coward murderer knows he or she will not encounter anyone with a firearm to stop him or her. I site the incident where a woman shot and killed three administrators and wounded three more because they didn’t want to grant her tenure. If one of those administrators had been carrying concealled, that woman wouldn’t have been able to kill and wound all of those innocent people. I site the murder with a hatchet in Las Vegas who killed a four month old baby. If someone on the street had been carrying concealled, he or she might have been able to respond and kill that murderer before that innicent four month old baby was chopped to death. According to the antis, we will probably be looking at outlawing hatchets and axes next. When will they ever understand that the outlaws don’t give a damn about any of our laws much less our pitiful emotions. They will ALWAYS have hand guns and they will always look for the easiest way to harm us. That’s why they are criminals in the first place. They are lazy, evil and bent on harming others to get what they want. WE DO NOT MATTER TO THEM! The only way to defeat them is to be preparred for their vist and shock the hell out of them when they show up.

    I am one of this country’s military veterans. I own firearms and have a concealled carry permit. In fact I own many firearms and the fact is that none of my firearms have ever hurt a single person. In fact, they are totally incapable of hurting anyone since they’re inannimate objects. Blameing firearms for killing anyone is like blameing a pencil for misspelling words. I find, however, people are always afraid of things they don’t understand. That’s why so many people are afraid of horses and even dogs. More people have died on our nations highways and streets every year than will ever be killed by all guns combined yet we have no such banning actions against the motor vehicle industry.

  • Robert

    Wait a minute! The Lone Ranger had two guns. So did Hopalong Cassidy and Roy Rogers. John Wayne only needed one, he was that good as was Sgt. York (only one squirrel rifle). What are these anti-gun bozo’s saying, these guys were Un-American? Me, I prefer Bradley Tanks. Your aim doesn’t matter, you just have to know where to point the barrel.

  • J.D.

    I see some people in this reply post are saying that there should be some laws on gun control due to crime. In a perfect world, that might work, but gun laws are like locks in this country. They are only keeping the honest people out! Instead of putting laws on guns, lets put stiffer penalties on THE PEOPLE WHO MISUSE THE GUNS!!! Lets face it, people are the problem, not guns. The government is going for trying to remove your guns because it is easier to control a society who is unarmed. These guns laws aren’t for our safety, it is for theirs. If they can remove the guns from our society, our other rights can be tampered with, without retaliation. Its common sense, which dog would you try to put a collar on? One that licks your hand or the one that has its teeth bared and is growling angrily? Also, during Hurricane Katrina, how many looters had their guns taken? Not near all of them, but they sure cleaned out all the honest people of theirs! That’s what I mean when I say laws only work on honest people. Criminals have guns, because,mostly, they get theirs illegally. Therefore, why make a law they don’t follow anyway. Can I get an Amen?

    • DaveH

      “These guns laws aren’t for our safety, it is for theirs”.
      So true J.D.
      and Amen.

    • http://www.NRA.com Stephaan

      A BIG FRICKIN AMEN J.D.
      Very well put. All conservatives see it as you do, and the liberal socialists do also. The libs know the truth, they just won’t ever admit it. The libs just don’t know “that we know” what their true plan is, so they try and pretend it’s about crime control, in the hopes that they can sway the “uninformed” who have never thought about the issue “clearly” and with the “big picture” in mind. You/we will never sway the lib socialists from their agenda. The libs already know the score. We can only hope to inform, and convince the uninformed people who have no idea what is going on. Some of the uninformed actually think that gun control might work, or even does work, because they have never done any research, don’t know that the liberals are lying to them, or have ever been close enough to the issue to even care. They also don’t understand the difference between sovereignty, and a one world order. They have never read the Constitution, and they don’t know why the second amendment is there.

  • Mikerr

    Amen,J.D

  • Mark

    Anti-gunners should crawl under a pile of cat crap and hide. It might at least hide their own smell of filthy politics against firearms. These people making a living on being anti-this and anti-that need a bolt in their head from temple to temple. And yes, a list of the idiots and fools that sponsor them should be published. I do not watch Hallmark tv or purchase their cards because they donated money to anti-gun legislation in Missouri. I hate the Chiefs, Rams, Cardinals and Royals because they too donated money to anti-gun. Silver Dollar City in Missouri also contributed to anti-guns, so I do not waste my dollars on fools and cities ran by fools. If they want to donate money let them be known, of course they are all to chicken _hit to make themselves known. I don’t need a gun to kill ya anyway, I could beat ya to death with a bat, and then how many lobbyists would be attempting to outlaw bats in spite of baseball.

    • Pat R

      I think my black iron skillet that I use to bake cornbread would make an excellent weapon! (But I don’t want to ruin it. Very old and irreplaceable!)

    • http://www.NRA.com Stephaan

      20 years ago I found out “Budwiser” was donating $$ to gun control. It was .25 cents for every beer they sold. I agree with boycotting ALL companies who donate $$ to gun control. I just wish there was a complete list of companies who do.

      • George E

        I’ll bet they were sucking up to the politicians for some favor….

  • http://www.NRA.com Stephaan

    Back room dealing? Behind closed doors? Reprehensible?
    I guess it’s ok when the liberal socialists do it, but not ok when anybody else does. SUCK UP YOUR TEARS Andy Goddard. This is the way of your socialist party Andy, and we have adopted it since we have seen that it works quite well for you and your party.

    Nice going Scott! You are a true American representing the American people and the Constitution.

    I wish my state had a few like Republican State Delegate Scott Lingamfelter.

    The Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence? Obviously a federally funded, anti-Constitutional organization comprised of liberals, socialists, hypocrites, ignobles, & nitwits.

  • http://msn.com woodrow

    The activists just don’t get it…. It’s not the guns doing the killing! It’s purpose is to kill. Let us deal with the folks that are using them to rob, steal,carjack, or otherwise.

    No, they won’t do that..they get up and protest another execution, when a killer is sentenced to death for murder,with a firearm.

    The law abiding citizen needs to be armed to protect his family, self, and property should be included too, in my opinion.

    • J C

      Right, if guns kill people, why don’t guns go to jail?
      I guess we can blame spoons for Oprah being fat too right? ;)

      • John

        I didn’t think Oprah used a spoon. More like a shovel.

    • Joe H.

      woodrow,
      Are you kidding??? Ohio has a law that says that if you commit a crime using a firearm of any type or convey the thought that you have one then you automatically get an additional seven years. Due to overcrowding in the prisons they don’t enforce it or they deal it away!!! Then they bemoan the idea that guns kill and try to take the guns away from our honest residents!!!! I’ll bet ten dollars to a hole in a donut that if a home owner killed someone intent on doing them harm and were somehow convicted of murder, the courts would enforce it then!!!

  • Rolla

    Some people you just can’t reach! You can take a horse to water, but you just can’t make them drink. ” WE THE PEOPLE can vote with our feet by moving away from states that try to control our rights .( NY,CA, NJ just to name a few)

    The only other option WE THE PEOPLE (that just pisses lefties off ) have is to vote the bums out of office. It’s really sad to think that the school system (government union employees and lefties controlled SEIU) do not teach real US history and the Constitution and The Declaration of Independence anymore.
    That combined 38 page pocket size document has a lot of guidance for us in these trying times.

    George Washington wrote in 1787 (for those that have suffered the lefties view of history through the pubic school system he was the first President and one of the founding fathers) ” The power under the Constitution will always be in the people. It is entrusted for certain defined purposes, and for a certain LIMITED period, to representatives of their own choosing; and whenever it is executed contrary to their interest,(that would be the interests of WE THE PEOPLE) or not agreeable to their wishes, their servants( elected officials ) can, and undoubtedly will, be recalled.” (voted out)

    B.O. ( yes that does stand for body odor!!) has stated may a time that he “IS GOING TO FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGE THE UNITED STATES” The Declaration of Independence in paragraph 2 states
    “But when a long train of abuses and usurpation’s,(not listening to WE THE PEOPLE) pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards (representatives) for their future security.” Then it list for a verity of reasons, one of them being. ” For taking away our Charters, (a written constitution) abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering FUNDAMENTALLY (I added caps for effect) the Forms of our Governments:” (that is about paragraph # 23)

    If WE THE PEOPLE do not start realizing that our Government is suppose to be OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE , FOR THE PEOPLE!!!! not of the government, by the government, for the government (like it is becoming today)
    we will wake up one day and realize we have become a member of the
    EU

    So put down the koolaid, clear you mind and read the truth (that little 38 page pocket sized book, the Const. & the Dec of Indep.) It will never lie to
    you!! (unlike a politician)

    Anyone can get a poll to swing any way they what it to turn out!! (bias in reporting) Once again i will revert back to one of my favorite founding fathers George W. in 1796 wrote

    “In proportion as the structure of a government gives force to public opinion,( polls slanted to someone’s opinion) it is essential that public opinion should be enlightened.” ( yeah that does mean educate said public opinion) so with that thought in mind.

    I once again revert back to the founding father George W. ( by now I shouldn’t have to say which W.) In 1796 George wrote

    “A primary object….should be the education of our youth in the science of government. In a REPUBLIC, ( I added for effect) what species of knowledge can be equally important? and what duty more pressing……than…..communicating(that would mean teach) it to those who are to be the future guardians of the liberties of the country?” AH yes that does mean you and me and WE THE PEOPLE A lot of people seem to thing that we are a democracy, when in reality we are a Representative Republic and not a democracy

    And in my final thought on this ( cause some people just refuse to educate themselves of the truth ( our Constitution and Dec of Independence ) In mans history on this planet, no Republic has ever lasted more than 300 years because as George said so long ago, they refused to

    communicating(that would mean teach) it to those who are to be the future guardians of the liberties of the country?” If WE THE PEOPLE don’t wake up, we will be doomed to repeat history
    And the final word from George W. (that would be Washington for you knee jerk lefties) to WE THE PEOPLE about the constitution.

    ” its only keepers, the people” (not the government!!!!!!!)

  • Rolla

    Oh I forgot, I open carry everyday in Las Vegas because

    OPEN CARRY IS OUR 2 AMENDMENT IN ACTION, concealed carry is a regulated privilege that can be taken away!!!

    • jerry zopp

      Great post Rolla!!! maybe we can “jump-start” america and make her last for 600 years++

  • L, USA

    Embrace the Constitution and exercise your freely given, by God, rights therin.

    P.S. Keep a .45 handgun for back up when hunting wild boar, bear and bison.

  • http://yahoo.com bargal

    As a Former Marine who Qualified as an expert 12 out of 14 years I can’t for the life of me understand when I got my discharge it made me un-qualified to own a weapon as a civilian. will some of you (as it will take more then one) convince me why I was good enough to protect you in uniform but not in civilian attire.

    • http://www.ccrkba.org. Dartanian

      bargal;
      There is no way that your military discharge could have anything to do with your right to own a gun. My discharge or anybodies for that matter have NOTHING to do with your 2nd amendment right. It’s got to be something else. Have you ever been convicted of a felony? Most states deny gun ownership to felons, and some states also deny gun ownership to people with drug convictions, and some states deny ownership to anyone who has ever been involved in a family domestic disturbance. Do you live in the U.S.? If so what state? I have never heard of any U.S. military branches discharge keeping former military from owning a gun. You need to give us more information on this one. It has to be something to do with your civilian life (past or present) It has nothing to do with your discharge, unless you given a dishonorable discharge for shooting your commanding officer?
      …………………………………………………………………………………………………
      GOOD POST ROLLA!! :-)

    • J C

      bargal,
      That would be because you went from the status of expendable government tool to dangerous red neck with a gun the moment you were discharged. Don’t get me wrong, I respect your service and your patriotism very much…I’m speaking from the point of view of Pelosi, the fake President and Napolitano et al;…they liked you when you were far away (defending the Constitution?) but here at home they are afraid you’ll…defend the Constitution. They’re putting people like you and me on watchlists. In fact I’m quite sure they watch sites like this and have out home addresses nailed down. Kepp your powder dry.

  • J C

    From a newsletter I get:

    Since its inception as the National Council to Control Handguns over 30 years ago, the Brady Campaign has premised its entire agenda on the notion that having more gun control laws and, therefore, fewer guns, means that crime must necessarily decrease.

    History has not been kind to the group’s delusion, however. In recent decades, the severity of gun control laws has been diminished at the federal, state and local levels, the number of guns has increased by over four million a year on average, and today, the nation’s murder and total violent crime rates are at 45-year and 35-year lows, respectively.

    If you’re a gun control group, this isn’t the kind of thing you want to put in your press releases to the Washington Post, of course. So, every year the Brady Campaign instead runs a little gimmick where it assigns arbitrary school-grade values to whatever gun control laws the group happens to be pushing at the moment. And since most states don’t have the laws Brady advocates, Brady gives most states very low grades. Naturally, gun control supporters plaster Brady’s school-grade nonsense on the pages of newspapers around the country, hoping people will take it seriously.

    Brady came out with its 2010 “grades” this week, and once again we’ll take them as seriously as they deserve.

    With the nation’s murder rate having been cut in half since 1991, as Brady’s agenda has been dismantled or rejected by Congress and one state legislature after another, and the numbers of guns, gun owners, Right-to-Carry states, and carry permit holders have risen to all-time highs with no end in sight, here are the “highlights” of Brady’s annual exercise in school-grade silliness:
    http://www.nraila.org/Legislat…..px?id=5448

    • DaveH

      Gun control is not about guns. It is about Control.

  • jim

    Gun control is hitting the target.

  • http://yahoo.com bargal

    JC–I didn’t say I can’t own a gun I say those that are trying to take away our right to own a gun have no sense when it comes to painting everyone with the same brush. Certainly you have read the article that stated they want to take away all gun ownership and I am merely stating the fact that a person that was once carrying to protect while in uniform should not be restricted from gun ownership out of uniform. Don’t assume and insinuate that I must be a felon and or have some dark secret that is prohibiting me from gun ownership. You have to be a democrat to jump to such a conclusion so quickly.

    • http://www.ccrkba.org. Dartanian

      Bar gal;
      What do you mean you didn’t say you couldn’t own a gun? That is exactly what you said and that is what we were trying to answer.
      Here are your exact words:
      bargal says:
      February 19, 2010 at 10:57 pm
      As a Former Marine who Qualified as an expert 12 out of 14 years I can’t for the life of me understand when I got my discharge it made me un-qualified to own a weapon as a civilian.

      Those are your exact words bargal, so that is what we tried to answer for you. YOU SAID YOU WERE UNQUALIFIED TO OWN A WEAPON/GUN because of your military discharge.

      Excuuuuuuuuuse me for trying to answer THE QUESTION THAT YOU ASKED!

      If “WHAT YOU SAID” IS “NOT WHAT YOU MEANT” then maybe you should learn how to articulate a little better, as WE ARE NOT MIND READERS.

      As far as you accusing me of “being a democrat to jump to conclusions so quickly”…….me? a democrat?? you must be NEW HERE! LMAO

      • Judy

        Dartanian;
        Regarding “Bar” gal
        Don’t you know that women NEVER SAY WHAT THEY MEAN OR MEAN WHAT THEY SAY?? NEVER… EVER… :-) You may have thought bar stood for “Browning Automatic Rifle” but in “bar” gals case I think it is a “place” where they go and swill alcoholic beverages like a “pub” or “tavern” That could have had a little to do with her question that she asked, that she didn’t think that she asked….ha ha
        My compliments to you for your patience & tongue in cheek reply, as opposed to BLASTING HER WITH BOTH BARRELS! HA HA HA HA ;-)

    • J C

      bargal, I made no such assumption. Read it again.

  • JeffH

    Just another FYI, the long gun ban in Canada is being repealed. The Soros backed group in Canada that pushed the ban through in the mid 90′s has been exposed as the liars they are. Promises of only 2mil cost to the taxpayers grew to over 2 billion. Great news for Canadiens and for gunrights

    • Sheila

      Jeff H
      The long gun ban? “Long”, as in the duration of time the ban has been in effect, or “long guns” as in rifles and shotguns? I am not at all familiar with the Canucks firearms laws. I only know that they have gun control but do not know what guns are involved. If this repeal is for ALL guns, including handguns, then this is VERY GOOD NEWS for the U.S too, because of “neighboring state”, basic statistics, and the domino effect. ;-)

      • JeffH

        …as in rifles and shotguns…won’t affect US laws at all.

      • J C

        Canada requires registration and special licencing of hand guns.
        They are for target shooting only and pretty much have to be kept in a safe.

    • J C

      Canada didn’t “ban” long guns. What is being repealed is the “registration” of long guns. They were always allowed to have them, but they had to be registered.

  • http://vagunforum.net www.VaGunForum.net

    Good things are happening in Virginia, and we have many people to thank – Our elected representatives.

    Please don’t ever forget that you can have an impact on the laws and regulations in your state. When people seek election, ask them the hard questions and hold their feet to the fire. If they give the answers that you want to hear, give them your vote. If they reverse their vote when they get into office (i.e. they LIED to win the election), then vote them out at the earliest opportunity. Don’t vote just based on party affiliation – vote for people who will represent YOU and your ideals.

    Keep in mind that it’s not over yet in Virginia, and there’s still a lot of work to do. Contact your representatives and tell them how you want them to vote on upcoming bills.

    • denniso

      Virtually ALL gun people miss the point entirely…There is absolutely NOTHING in society that is not regulated or controlled to varrying degrees…the size of vehicles on the road,building codes for house construction,libel and slander laws for speech,alcohol laws, food regulations and on and on…and most gun lovers want no restrictions or controls on the right to own a gun, even though there are already prohibitions on types of weapons allowed. You can’t have bombs,live grenades,nuclear tipped weapons,rockets,etc. People have already decided on some controls and it apparently isn’t carved in stone,is it?

      • J C

        So what’s your point? Everything should be regulated? How about we start with the number of children you’re allowed to have? I mean…if we’re going to regulate “everything”.
        The gun issue is different from everything else in that it is the only thing that gaurantees our freedom. Quite unlike the weight of a rtuck being regulated.

        • http://www.NRA.com Stephaan

          J C How about we start with the number of children you’re allowed to have?

          Ha Ha, I gotta second that J C! If we could regulate the number of children, we might be able to end the perpetuation of ignorance!

          • http://www.NRA.com Stephaan

            They deleted words from my post above. It was suppose to say “if we could regulate the number of children ” has”…. and then the rest of the sentence

          • http://wwwNRA.com Stephaan

            LOL, one more time J.C.
            “denniso has”

        • denniso

          J C…where in the constitution does it say that the 2nd ammendment is different or more important than the other rights?? And if you really believe that handguns and rifles will ever stop a determined totalitarian gov’t from oppressing the people, well then you guys are more foolish than I thought.
          The interpretation of the 2nd ammendment is wrong anyway…it is not in the constitution to enable the people to fight their own gov’t,it’s because we didn’t have a standing army and the purpose was a ‘well regulated militia’.

          • http://www.NRA.com Stephaan

            Denniso; If you really believe those points you made in your post then I would suggest you are too far gone and too ignorant for anyone to try and help. However if you would read the Constitution, and the 2nd amendment, and read the “Federalist Papers” you might get a clue, and then you could come back here and have an intelligent conversation with us. Until you do, you will not be politically educated enough to discuss the 2nd amendment, since you do not appear to EVEN KNOW WHY IT WAS PUT IN THERE BY THE FOUNDING FATHERS!

          • J C

            Denniso, that’s where you are dead wrong. An armed population will stop government tyranny in it’s tracks everytime. How many (American)soldiers do you think are going to be kicking in (American) doors when the chance they’ll be shot in the face is 1 in 3? The armed population of America is very likely over 100 million. That’s a lot of guns isn’t it? In fact if you combine the military forces of the entire planet, they wouldn’t come to half of that.
            So, it is the ONLY thing that keeps us free…which was exactly the intent of the 2nd Amendment.

          • denniso

            OK, so we have more guns than any other country in the world and all I read here is how we’re not free in this country…so, what’s the problem? We have more guns than ever in our history and you whine that we have to return our country to earlier days when we had more freedom…what gives? Do you understand logic and simple equations? Your equation isn’t balanced,as is true of most of you gun nuts…

          • denniso

            Step…thanks for the heads up. Maybe you want to reread the federalist papers…I had forgotten that Hamilton specifically opposed the addition of the bill of rights in the constitution. Of course your beloved 2nd ammendment is in that very bill of rights.

            And you might want to reread the 2nd itself and listen to what it actually says,not what some ‘interpretation’,old or new says. You people want to be literalists w/ the constitution until it doesn’t quite fit your political agenda.

            ” 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”.

            Now, it says ‘the security of a free state’…not freedom from gov’t tyranny. It also says ‘a well regulated militia’…not ‘a bunch of ragtag hotheads who hate the gov’t’. Well regulated militia is a clear reference to a military force, not individuals.

            I don’t have a problem w/ the 2nd as written and w/ reasonable controls and restrictions that reflect our modern societies needs. How about sticking w/ what an ‘arm’ was 200+ yrs ago? automatic/semiautomatic weapons? armor piercing bullets?? rocket launchers? 50 caliber machine guns?? Ammunition clips? Don’t think those things are mentioned or imagined in the 2nd, are they? You want no controls over weaponry and point to the 2nd,when the only guidance it gives is what an ‘arm’ was back then. You want ‘arm’ to refer to any weapon you want it to mean… Hypocrital stance…

          • http://wwwNRA.com Stephaan

            You’re really not worth my time to respond denniso,(words removed for offensive content toward a poster), however try reading the interpretation the supreme court came down with. “Individual right”

          • http://wwwNRA.com Stephaan

            well alrighty then. I guess we can’t use words like “politically uneducated” “ignorant liberal socialists” “poor pathetic moronic liberals” etc.to refer to the liberal socialist posters on here anymore. Thanks for clearing that up for me!

            FYI, on the Tancredo vs. CAIR page, your editorial calls him “Tom” and “Ted” in the same article. Ya might want to DELETE that too.

          • jim

            Hi Denniso, When the 2nd ammendment was written out new goverment was forming after overthrowing there previus government by force. Not knowing what was going to happen with the new government the founding fathers wanted to make sure WE THE PEOPLE would have the resources to correct the problem if the new boss was same as the old boss( Won’t be fooled again) it was put in place so we could protect ourselve from a corrupt government. As far as the Founding Fathers not being to aticipate the newer weapon tech, the only media back then were newspapers books and word of mouth. They could never have concieved radio, t.v. the internet and these blog pages you and I are useing right now, but the principle of FREEDOM OF THE PRESS is still the same even with the tech we have today.

          • denniso

            Stephann…apparently you’re not worth anyone’s time,since all you can respond w/ are censored words. Brilliant commentary…

          • denniso

            Jim…I think you’re wrong. The 2nd says ‘well regulated militia’ and ‘security of a free state’. That can’t be interpreted as individuals armed for the purpose of fighting the gov’t. I’m not denying that there is a right to own guns in the constitution,just what the context is and what purpose was intended by the 2nd. Also,how restrictions and controls can be read into it. Well regulated militia is a pretty strong clue, I think…

          • denniso

            Stephaan…certainly you know that court rulings come and go w/ the politics of the various courts makeup. Because a conservative court rules one way doesn’t mean anything more than a liberal court reversing the decision later. Big deal, it’s politics of course.

          • Dylan

            I agree. SOME liberal socialists are just too far gone to reason with, AND ARE NOT WORTH OUR TIME RESPONDING TO THEM! (denniso, coal miner, nathan, tim, norm, etc.. I pretty much just IGNORE THEM anymore anyway. They’re staring truth right in the face, but they can’t see it. They TRY and rationalize the TRUTH away to suit their own agenda. The Constitution scares the holy crap out of them, and they go stupidly blind trying to tell us WHAT IT REALLY MEANS LMAO
            BTW, since were not allowed to call the lying liberals and socialists: liars, politically uneducated, moronic liberals, idiots, and all the other names that fit them so well, couldn’t we just call them “dennisos” “Coal miners” “phils aka filldirt” “Nathans” “Timmys” and the like? Since they exude all the same qualities… I’m just sayin…

            about denniso: It funny he remarks about our posts getting censored, but he defended the racist and hate mongering posts of his buddies coal miner, and “gentleman jim” whos’ entire posts were deleted due to swear words and hateful rants. I guess denniso was ok with that huh? Isn’t that what they call hypocrisy? Gee, go figure…. What a politically uneducated pathetic bunch of whiners and liars the liberal socialists are……

          • jim

            Hi Denniso, Before a standing Army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword, because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense raised in the United States.- Noah Webster.At that time a malitia was a citizen army. Maitia’s were the first to fight the British army. Loyalists in the colonies formed malitias to fight for the British. To read Noah Websters quote seems to me to say The 2nd ammendment is the to defend the Constitution from either enemies from another country or a corrupt government. The 2nd Ammendment the other Checks& Balances. Don’t trust a government that doesn’t trust you being armed.

          • denniso

            Hey Jim…Europe has guns,people hunt,they just don’t have a society saturated w/ handguns and automatic weapons…also, I don’t see dictatorships ruling Europe and enslaving everyone. I’ve talked to many people who think they will fight the gov’t for their future freedom and I tell them all the same thing…if a gov’t armed w/ a million man army,cruise missiles,tanks,artillery,f-16′s, satellite survielance and, state police forces,county sherrifs,marshalls,cia,nsa and more, wants to take your freedom by force they can do it. The solution to fighting for freedom is at the ballot box. Bush pushed through the patriot act and all it’s invasion of privacy aspects w/o a shot fired. We have to fight that sort of thing w/in our political system.

          • J C

            There is nothing to “interpret” about the Second Amendment. We were meant to be able to defend our persons and our property from criminals and tyranny…period.
            Sadly I think, for you, you’re laboring under the misconception that people are bad and government is good…when it is exactly the other way around as far as I’m concerned.
            As for real freedom? We are allowed to wander around aslong as we comply to all the rules imposed on us by a government who’s policy is tighter control of our movements, thoughts, money….it gets worse everyday but you have to be paying attention to see it.
            Or I suppose one can wander around saying “yes we can yes we can…”

          • jim

            Hi Denniso, In an earlier post we were discussing if the founding fathers were talking about protecting our gov. or protecting ourselves from government when writing the 2nd ammendment. I quoted Noah Webster, one of the men who was there. HE mentioned late 1700′s Europe, not me. I was just trying to show the mind set of the people who wrote the ammendment. I agree the ballot box is the way to go, we’ve been at it for 230 years. I just like to know the other options are left open. I really don’t know how quoting a founding father can lead you to your normal blame it on Bush rant, you need to let some of your hate for one man go. I never saw Bush as a threat to the 2nd ammendment the way I know this current adminisration is. I still say it was because thet didn’t know what to expect with the new government they had just formed, because they only had the experience of the one they just overthrew. They didn’t even know about Bush back then.

          • jim

            Europeans do hunt & sport shoot, but the 2nd ammendment states the RIGHT TO KEEP AND BARE ARMS, not the right to hunt and target shoot. A big difference, Denniso.

          • JC

            It also says “The Right of The People to Keep and bear Arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED” Not yelling, just didn’t want you to miss it. And yes the intent was that We The People could and should defend ourselves from aggressors….period!

  • Firebird

    So whats the pea-brains at STOP GUN VIOLENCE have against virginia resdents ecersising their 2nd amendment rights What do these sawdust for brains liberals have against the RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS as is written in the U.S. CONSTITUTION?

    • J C

      If they wanted to stop violence…they would declare open season on criminals. Crime would drop to nothing very quickly. I’m not suggesting vigilantism either, just lawfully blowing off the head of a criminal in the act. Bye Bye recitivist maggot! ;)

  • MEG

    There are no SENSIBLE gun control laws! LAWS ARE FOR THE LAW ABIDING … CRIMINALS ARE NOT LAW ABIDERS. Why can’t libs wrap their tiny dysfunctional brains around that one simple fact? Some of these half wits say “I’m for right to bear arms but don’t think assault weapons should be legal! WHAT?!?! The 2nd amdt is a protection of the PEOPLE against abuses of power by an over-reaching govt. The “people” have to have access to the same types of weapons as the military to protect our freedoms from enemies … FOREIGN OR DOMESTIC!

  • MEG

    Denniso … I’ll say it again so even YOU can understand it. “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state” does not mean the Army … and free state is not Kansas, Florida, Virginia or any other govt within our borders. It means, the right of all citizens to live in a state of freedom. And yes the 2nd was for protection of or borders against foreign enemies as WELL as domestic enemies (govt that oppresses and usurps powers not given it)!!

  • http://wwwNRA.com Stephaan

    Check out how many of Osamas czars are anti-2nd amendment, and anti Constitutional!
    The Commander & Cheats appointed czars. Read who they are and what they want to do.

    Czar Position: Summary

    Richard Holbrooke: Afghanistan Czar
    Ultra liberal ANTI GUN former Gov. of New Mexico. Pro Abortion and legal drug use. PRIMARY OBJECTIVE, IS TO DISSOLVE THE 2ND AMENDMENT.

    Ed Montgomery: Auto recovery Czar
    Black radical anti business activist. Affirmative Action and Job Preference for blacks. Univ of Maryland Business School Dean teaches US business has caused world poverty. ACORN board member. Communist DuBois Club member.

    Jeffrey Crowley: AIDS Czar
    Radical Homosexual.. A Gay Rights activist.. Believes in Gay Marriage and especially, a Special Status for homosexuals only, including complete free health care for gays.

    Alan Bersin: Border Czar
    The former failed superintendent of San Diego . Ultra Liberal friend of Hilary Clinton. Served as Border Czar under Janet Reno to keep borders open to illegals without interference from US

    David J. Hayes: California Water Czar
    Sr. Fellow of radical environmentalist group, Progress Policy. No training or experience in water management whatsoever.

    Ron Bloom: Car Czar
    Auto Union worker. Anti business & anti nuclear. Has worked hard to force US auto makers out of business. Sits on the Board of Chrysler which is now Auto Union owned. How did this happen?

    Dennis Ross: Central Region Czar
    Believes US policy has caused Mid East wars. Obama apologist to the world. ANTI GUN and completely pro abortion.

    Lynn Rosenthal: Domestic Violence Czar
    Director of the National Network to End Domestic Violence. Vicious anti male feminist. Supported male castration. Imagine?

    Gil Kerlikowske: Drug Czar
    devoted lobbyist for every RESTRICTIVE GUN LAW proposal, Former Chief of Police in Liberal Seattle. Believes no American should own a firearm. Supports legalization of all drugs

    Paul Volcker: Economic Czar
    Head of Fed Reserve under Jimmy Carter when US economy nearly failed. Obama appointed head of the Economic Recovery Advisory Board which engineered the Obama economic disaster to USeconomy.. Member of anti business Progressive Policy organization

    Carol Brower: Energy and Environment Czar
    Political Radical Former head of EPA – known for anti-business activism. Strong ANTI-GUN OWNERSHIP.

    Joshua DuBois: Faith Based Czar
    Political Black activist-Degree in Black Nationalism.
    ANTI GUN OWNERSHIP lobbyist.

    Cameron Davis: Great LakesCzar
    Chicago radical anti business environmentalist. Blames George Bush for Poisoning the water that minorities have to drink. No experience or training in water management. Former ACORN Board member (what does that tell us?)

    Van Jones: Green Jobs Czar
    (since resigned).. Black activist Member of American communist Party and San Francisco Communist Party who said Geo Bush caused the 911 attack and wanted Bush investigated by theWorld Court for war crimes. Black activist with strong anti-white views.

    Daniel Fried: Guantanamo Closure Czar
    Human Rights activist for Foreign Terrorists. Believes America has caused the war on terrorism. Believes terrorists have rights above and beyond Americans.

    Nancy-Ann DeParle: Health Czar
    Former head of Medicare / Medicaid. Strong Health Care Rationing proponent. She is married to a reporter for The New York Times.

    Vivek Kundra: Information Czar
    Born in New Delhi, India. Controls all public information, including labels and news releases. Monitors all private Internet emails.

    Todd Stern: International Climate Czar
    Anti business former White House chief of Staff- Strong supporter of the Kyoto Accord. Pushing hard for Cap and Trade. Blames US business for Global warming. Anti- US business prosperity.

    Dennis Blair: Intelligence Czar
    Ret Navy. Stopped US guided missile program as provocative. Chair of ultra liberal Council on Foreign Relations which blames American organizations for regional wars.

    George Mitchell: MideastPeace Czar
    Fmr. Sen from Maine Left wing radical. Has said Israel should be split up into 2 or 3 smaller more manageable plots. (God forbid) A true Anti-nuclear ANTI-GUN & pro homosexual “special rights” advocate

    Kenneth Feinberg: Pay Czar
    Chief of Staff to TED KENNEDY. Lawyer who got rich off the 911 victims payoffs. (horribly true)

    Cass Sunstein: Regulatory Czar
    Liberal activist judge believes free speech needs to be limited for the common good. Essentially against 1st amendment. Rules against personal freedoms many times like private GUN OWNERSHIP and right to free speech.

    John Holdren: Science Czar
    Fierce ideological environmentalist, Sierra Club, Anti business activist. Claims US business has caused world poverty. No Science training.

    Earl Devaney: Stimulus Accountability Czar
    Spent career TRYING TO TAKE GUNS AWAY FROM AMERICAN CITIZENS! Believes in Open Borders to Mexico . Author of statement BLAMING US GUN STORES for drug war in Mexico .

    J. Scott Gration: Sudan Czar
    Native of Democratic Republic of Congo. Believes US does little to help Third World countries. Council of foreign relations, asking for higher US taxes to support United Nations

    Herb Allison: TARP Czar
    Fannie May CEO responsible for the US recession by using real estate mortgages to back up the US stock market. Caused millions of people to lose their life savings.

    John Brennan: Terrorism Czar
    Anti CIA activist. No training in diplomatic or gov. affairs. Believes Open Borders to Mexico and a dialog with terrorists and has suggested Obama disband US military

    Aneesh Chopra: Technology Czar
    No Technology training. Worked for the Advisory Board Company, a health care think tank for hospitals. Anti doctor activist. Supports Obama Health care Rationing and salaried doctors working exclusively for the Gov. health care plan

    Adolfo Carrion Jr: Urban Affairs Czar
    Puerto Rican born Anti American activist and leftist group member in Latin America . Millionaire slum lord of the Bronx , NY. Owns many lavish homes and condos which he got from sweetheart deals with labor unions. Wants higher taxes on middle class to pay for minority housing and health care

    Ashton Carter: Weapons Czar
    Leftist. WANTS ALL PRIVATE WEAPONS IN US DESTROYED. Supports U.N. BAN ON ALL PRIVATE FIREARMS OWNERSHIP IN AMERICA. Has no other policy

    Gary Samore: WMD Policy Czar
    Former US Communist. Wants US to destroy all WMD unilaterally as a show of good faith. Has no other policy.

    How lucky are we that these are the people who are helping Obama in the RUINING of our 2nd amendment, our Constitution and our country.

  • Mark

    I have a question Goodard, when criminals know people are more prone to own a firearm, why is gun violence down except between gang to gang. Seems as if John Q Public is pretty much left alone. But as in Chicago gun violence is rampant, citizens were not supposed to own guns so the bad guy could do whatever he pleased.
    Tell you what Goodard, lets you and I both move to Chicago, hmm say the south side, across the street from each other. I will make it know by placing NRA stickers on my windows and you make it know that you opposed gun ownership. Let see who gets robbed…..

Bottom
close[X]

Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.