Anyone going to the Charles City Council meeting tomorrow night?

imported post

http://tinyurl.com/4t5rdz


I'm going tomorrow night and I will be open carrying. This is just another example of the anti's demanding a solution for a non-existent problem. They are trying to ban rifle hunting.

Charles City is just East of Henrico County.

From VCDL's website.


"The Charles City County is considering banning or severely restricting =

the use of rifles for hunting.

You can download the proposed ordinances by clicking here:

http://tinyurl.com/4t5rdz

If you wish to speak against this matter, the meeting will be held at
the Charles City Government and School Board Administration Building,
10900 Courthouse Road, Charles City, VA 23030 on April 22nd at 7:45 PM.

If you can't attend, you can email the following Board members a
message. As always, be polite:

Timothy W. Cotman, Sr.
Email: tcotman*co.charles-city.va.us
Sherri M. Bowman
Email: sbowman*co.charles-city.va.us

Gilbert A. Smith
Email: gsmith*co.charles-city.va.us"

imported post

Is the School Board Administration Building considered a school? Can you legally carry there?

imported post

asforme wrote:

Is the School Board Administration Building considered a school? Can you legally carry there?

Click to expand...

You may have a point. I would say no, but It wouldn't suprise me. The anti's are sneaky like that.

imported post

T Dubya wrote:

asforme wrote:

Is the School Board Administration Building considered a school? Can you legally carry there?

Click to expand...

You may have a point. I would say no, but It wouldn't suprise me. The anti's are sneaky like that.

Click to expand...

I would say yes if it's only an admin building and not part of a school. Are there children there during the day?

imported post

I'm going to sit that one out.
I lease hunting land in Charles City and know a lot of the serious hunter there. Charles City has always been a rifle only deer county (Muzzleloader excepted)

They have allowed rifles under certain circumstances in the last couple of years for deer, and you can use .22 and under for hunting.

The hunters there are well organized and damn vocal. They also haven't asked for help as far as I know.

It isn't an open carry issue and I hate it when uninvited outsiders try to move the politics in my home county. If they had put out a call for help, that would be one thing, since they haven't I'm inclined to let the locals tend their own bar.

imported post

peter nap wrote:

I'm going to sit that one out.
I lease hunting land in Charles City and know a lot of the serious hunter there. Charles City has always been a rifle only deer county (Muzzleloader excepted)

They have allowed rifles under certain circumstances in the last couple of years for deer, and you can use .22 and under for hunting.

The hunters there are well organized and damn vocal. They also haven't asked for help as far as I know.

It isn't an open carry issue and I hate it when uninvited outsiders try to move the politics in my home county. If they had put out a call for help, that would be one thing, since they haven't I'm inclined to let the locals tend their own bar.

Click to expand...

Peter,

If you lease hunting land there then you above the rest of us should attend. Even if the rest of us attend we should not try and make it an open carry issue but simply voice support for the right to continue hunting with rifles. Because we are not simply individual hunters,target shooters,CC's,OC's. We are collectively gun owners. Regardless of our other views this is an issue that we all feel strongly about and it is apathy or hunters not caring about CC's issues or CC's not giving a rip about hunting rights that allows the anti's or the misinformed to infringe on our rights.

In my experience the crap i hear in regards to why to ban rifle hunting is on par with the propaganda we here about CC OC and "assault weapons". I.E. the majority of the stuff said is pure BS.

I hunt and personally prefer rifles,muzzle loaders, and slugs over buckshot. Give me something that I know allows me to put the animal down and down fast with one shot.

Banning rifles for hunting is just the first step to banning rifles period. If you can't hunt with one then you can't claim it has a sporting purpose. (we shouldn't have to but that is beside the point right now).Its one of the reasons when we were at the VA assembly on Jan 21st that i went back around to see my reps after we finished lunch and lobbied to kill the stupid bill Goochland County put in to ban turkey hunting with rifles.

I don't see much hope in this fight as one member of the BOS ran on banning rifle hunting as part of her campaign and another member of the board voted against it in prior years and has abstained in the past, though he did say he was willing to work a compromise in the news article i read.

so peter grab your press pass and head on down to the meeting and voice your support of rifle hunting especially since you have a dog in this hunt so to speak.

joe

imported post

67GT390FB wrote:

peter nap wrote:

I'm going to sit that one out.
I lease hunting land in Charles City and know a lot of the serious hunter there. Charles City has always been a rifle only deer county (Muzzleloader excepted)

They have allowed rifles under certain circumstances in the last couple of years for deer, and you can use .22 and under for hunting.

The hunters there are well organized and damn vocal. They also haven't asked for help as far as I know.

It isn't an open carry issue and I hate it when uninvited outsiders try to move the politics in my home county. If they had put out a call for help, that would be one thing, since they haven't I'm inclined to let the locals tend their own bar.

Click to expand...

Peter,

If you lease hunting land there then you above the rest of us should attend. Even if the rest of us attend we should not try and make it an open carry issue but simply voice support for the right to continue hunting with rifles. Because we are not simply individual hunters,target shooters,CC's,OC's. We are collectively gun owners. Regardless of our other views this is an issue that we all feel strongly about and it is apathy or hunters not caring about CC's issues or CC's not giving a rip about hunting rights that allows the anti's or the misinformed to infringe on our rights.

In my experience the crap i hear in regards to why to ban rifle hunting is on par with the propaganda we here about CC OC and "assault weapons". I.E. the majority of the stuff said is pure BS.

I hunt and personally prefer rifles,muzzle loaders, and slugs over buckshot. Give me something that I know allows me to put the animal down and down fast with one shot.

Banning rifles for hunting is just the first step to banning rifles period. If you can't hunt with one then you can't claim it has a sporting purpose. (we shouldn't have to but that is beside the point right now).Its one of the reasons when we were at the VA assembly on Jan 21st that i went back around to see my reps after we finished lunch and lobbied to kill the stupid bill Goochland County put in to ban turkey hunting with rifles.

I don't see much hope in this fight as one member of the BOS ran on banning rifle hunting as part of her campaign and another member of the board voted against it in prior years and has abstained in the past, though he did say he was willing to work a compromise in the news article i read.

so peter grab your press pass and head on down to the meeting and voice your support of rifle hunting especially since you have a dog in this hunt so to speak.

joe

Click to expand...

I agree with you Joe..and I was right behind you on the phone on the Turkey law. There are some differences though. The biggest is that this is a local matter. Sure I lease land but that isn't owning. I own land all over the state and make my feelings well known.

The reasons given are pure BS, your right. There are other reasons underneath though. One is the never ending fight between stand hunters and dog hunters and landowners. Unfortunately, many dog hunters have no respect for private property. They ride around and shoot deer on posted property, from the roads and then use the "wer're just looking for our dogs" excuse to get the deer.

This makes landowners mad and anything to cut their range is a good thing to them. Many are wealthy and new owners and unlike me, they don't want to fight with the dog hunters.
So, they do what wealthy and timid people do. They have the law changed.

The dog hunters are digging their own grave, the county is changing itself to the burbs and the Gentleman farmers are ruining it for all but the quail hunters.

I can't say I care for any of the positions.

imported post

Then again, you may be right. I'll be there.:banghead:

imported post

Told ya! It wasn't a pretty sight, but at least I got to see some old friends.

http://news.oldva.org/?p=112

imported post

peter nap wrote:

It isn't an open carry issue and I hate it when uninvited outsiders try to move the politics in my home county. If they had put out a call for help, that would be one thing, since they haven't I'm inclined to let the locals tend their own bar.

Click to expand...

It doesn't matter to me if it's an open carry issue or not. It is an anti-gun issue and we should have been all over it. The anti'ssay they want safety, but my suspician is their reasons are sinister.

It doesn't matter to me that they didn't ask for help. The VCDL put it out there and that is all the reason I need.

The anti's spat upon the working class last night. They snuck one by us and no one is talking about it on this forum today. They are using the same buzzword rhetoric they always use to demonize us, 'high-powered rifles". Nevermind .44s, 30/30,45/70, slugs or whatever cartridge could be used that is not "high-powered" when comparing to 30-06,.270,.308 etc.

They banned the use of rifles under the guise of safety! Nevermind the fact there has not been an incident! Nevermind the fact that rifle hunters had to be in a tree stand! From the Richmond Times Dispatch "One suggested that some hunters would be unable to resist shooting a deer even if they were on the ground and not in a tree stand."

Couldn't resist! This is the exact same reasoning the anti's used when they lobbied against the restaraunt carry bill.

imported post

http://www.inrich.com/cva/ric/news.apx.-content-articles-RTD-2008-04-23-0161.html



By REED WILLIAMS
TIMES-DISPATCH STAFF WRITER

• Change in hunting rules sought

CHARLES CITY -- The county Board of Supervisors voted 2-1 last night to prohibit deer hunting with high-powered rifles, drawing anger and raised voices from some in the audience.

"We're going to get you out next term," said Bill Johnson, addressing the board members.

Also last night, the three-member board unanimously adopted a $22.4 million county budget for fiscal 2009, which begins July 1. That is a nearly 4 percent decrease from the spending plan for the current fiscal year.

The county's real estate tax rate is being raised by 7 cents to 82 cents per $100 of assessed value.

More than 100 people packed the auditorium at the Government and School Board Administration Building during last night's public hearing on the rifle issue.

About 15 people spoke, with some in favor of hunting deer with high-powered rifles and others expressing safety concerns.

Several of those in favor suggested it was their right to hunt deer with rifles, or that the current practice of shooting from tree stands was relatively safe. A National Rifle Association representative said deer hunting was essential to controlling the deer population.

Vince Brackett said hunting with rifles is a tradition and it claims far fewer lives than boating in Virginia. "Boating's far more dangerous," he said.

Opponents of rifle hunting expressed concerns about stray bullets. One suggested that some hunters would be unable to resist shooting a deer even if they were on the ground and not in a tree stand.

Elbert Parker held a piece of inch-thick wood above his head to demonstrate the ease with which a bullet could go through someone's wall.

"Your children can be shot dead looking at TV in your house," he said, prompting an argument among him and members of the crowd until board chairman Gilbert A. Smith tapped on a table to quiet them.

Supervisors had three possible voting options.

The first two would have allowed people to continue hunting deer with high-powered rifles during general firearms season as long as they fired from at least 10 feet off the ground. Both added additional restrictions.

Supervisors Sherri M. Bowman and Timothy W. Cotman voted for the third option, the amendment that prohibits all deer hunting with high-powered rifles. Smith voted against it.

Last night's vote reversed a decision made less than three years ago to allow deer hunting with rifles.

For that vote in 2005, Smith and then-supervisor Michael L. Holmes voted in favor, and Cotman against.

But Bowman unseated Holmes in this past November's election, running on a platform that, in part, sought to rescind the use of rifles for deer hunting.

Bowman said after the board meeting that most of the residents who had talked to her about the issue had expressed safety concerns.

"It's been trying," she said. "You try to do what's best and what's fair."
Contact Reed Williams at (804) 649-6332 or rwilliams@timesdispatch.com.

imported post

There's a LOT more to it...and I expect you saw some of it last night. The last time this came up, it was held in the High School to accomidate the numbers. Why do you think they decided on the building with limited seating.

Did you know that Bowman had several off the record meetings with other Board members?

Why do you think it is that all the opposition was black? Please no raciest comments. I taped the whole thing...and support was white.

Why was real estate and taxes brought up.

There's SO much more to last nights vote that is under the radar. And yes, hunting is endangered and yes, it is a slap in the face, ands yes it is a local matter.

If the locals kick them out (at least one comes up for re election this year) they can revive it ....if they haven't changed the zoning too much by then.

This has NOTHING TO DO WITH SAFETY! It is purely money. Charles City is a poor, rural county, sitting next door to Colonial Downs and the sprawl from New Kents boom.

I'm not new to this, I'm very close to people in CC. I've been watching the tug of war for years....I'm also saying that if the locals don;t take care of it, it won;t get taken care of. Outsiders can't help!

Did you see the idiot from Hanover. I have no idea whose side he was on or what the hell he was trying to say. He also wasn;t long in Hanover..another damn yankee transplant. They cause as much trouble as anything.,

This thing was bought and paid for weeks ago!
New people, new money, new tax base. I've seen it too many times.

Just to give you an idea how complicated this is lets look at the "Ban the rifles" speakers last night. It's all sour grapes with them and they are just the excuse the Supervisors used. If you noticed, they all hunted (except the women). Once upon a time, the blacks had 50 acres and a mule. They sold off or lost to taxes, 49 of them. The black hunt clubs have to lease small tracts. Hunting leases are hard to find there and the large tracts and farms where rifles are useful, are expensive and taken already by the white hunt clubs.

There is a lot of racial hate in the area. It didn't take much to start them on the safety issue.

Now...aside from the farms that the white clubs have, there are moderate to large tracts owned by newcomers. They're the ones that want the rifles and ultimately hunting OUT!

Charles City had traditionally refused to allow subdivisions with lot sizes less than 10 acres. This board has changed that. Everyone is looking at big money for the future development of the county and hunting just doesn't fit in the picture.


Remember this fellow?




His name is Dave Adams. He owns Adams Sports Mart. He and his family go back so far that Providence Forge was named after the forge his family owned. They own a LOT of land and have no intention of selling any because they hunt. They also don't really farm much so taxes are low. They want to keep it that way.

This fellow (the opening speaker)



Gave a full power point presentation the last time this came up. He didn't this time because he had been assured that the law would not change.

IN SHORT....They were sold out!