Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: Can we get this done in Virginia?

  1. #1
    Regular Member ProShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    www.ProactiveShooters.com, Richmond, Va., , USA
    Posts
    4,671

    Post imported post

    http://www.examiner.com/x-2323-LA-Gu...oncealed-carry






    The genius of concealed carry of handguns is that would-be murders remain uncertain as to who is armed and who isn’t. This is true for everyone interested in being as safe as they can be from future violence, because it comes to the realization of specific unalterable realities: you’re on your own.

    This week some Southern California Church Leaders came to that very same conclusion, and took up a position advocating not only a very discreet security presence of professionals, but also took the advice of their consultants and adopted the policy of advocating concealed carry of handguns among the congregation.

    Realities are the core of solving the problem of church violence, and having the stomach to face those realities and to meet them. For too long, employers, churches, schools and others have said many different ways that they are sad to see things have to come to this, but this is a trap which serves not the people, but the killers. Fifteen Southern California church leaders refused to fall into that trap, and they sought out expert advice. It involves concealed carry of handguns in church, and they took it. Yes, concealed carry of handguns by the members who come to worship.

    This is huge. Especially in California.

    The Southern California churches’ consultant is Interfaith Intruder Response, a security firm for churches to respect their worship and sanctuary deeply while elaborating specific realities the church needs to accept in these times where threat assessment is a new function. Some of those realities involve not only understanding how families fall apart or how political sentiment can act out, but how to meet it with action at the most critical moments, and some of that action may involve lethal force of their own.

    Other churches around the nation have their own story to tell on the subject of not only how they have become pro-active and prepared, as in Bring-Your-Gun-To-Church Day, but also real experience in stopping murderous assailants the moment the assault begins. It works. So does announcing it publicly. Very shrewd.

    Some of the most helpful components of the one-day course from Interfaith Intruder Response is how the church is urged to accept facts the entire nation must come to accept, such as the moments between a violent attack and the arrival of police not as incapacitating, but as opportunity to stop them. Cases of mass murder of congregants taught to offer no resistance didn’t cut it, and instructions on how to hide or even to urge children to toss books at an active shooter do about as much and are so very counterintuitive. Yes, some have taught the kids to throw books.

    The answer is not to arm faculty who maybe present or not at the critical moment, or to have uniformed guards who are so easily recognized, but to do as these churches are now announcing: discreetly invite the armed citizen to join you.

    Killers can kill in moments before a request for aid can even be processed, much less dispatched and on-scene. Not all killers use guns. many have a knife, and a knife does not run out of ammunition. The law in nearly all states is on the side of the target when it comes to life-threatening danger and the use of lethal force in reasonable response. Individuals may use lethal force when in reasonable apprehension of grave danger. Individuals may come to the aid of another. For these churches, perhaps the authority and law were the easy part. The hard part was more likely understanding where their religious authority would lie in even consulting on the subject of violence. Actually, many liberty purists have commented on Christian authority in the righteous use of force. Some of that will be heard in the Gun Rights Policy Conference this September. [Please go to KeepAndbearArms.com for further details on this very important subject.]

    But violence is a political football more than a foe. This is because violence can be aggressive or it can resist. I differentiate that abuse and aggression are one side and a righteous response of resistance with force is the other side, and that it is simply not true that all violence is bad. I see that more and more are coming to that same conclusion.

    Let me emphasize my support and praise for any church, or school, or workplace who elects to go concealed carry on its premises: It took a lot of courage and faith to make it policy that armed members with concealed carry permits may attend church armed.

    It protects the innocent.

    James Reynolds

    NRA Certified Firearms Instructor - Pistol, Shotgun, Home Firearms Safety, Refuse To Be A Victim
    Concealed Firearms Instructor for Virginia, Florida & Utah permits.
    NRA Certified Chief Range Safety Officer
    Sabre Red Pepper Spray Instructor
    Glock Certified Armorer
    Instructor Bio - http://proactiveshooters.com/about-us/

  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Virginia, , USA
    Posts
    311

    Post imported post

    IANAL but........

    It is legal to carry in churches in Virginia.

    The law says for "good and sufficient reason".

    Self defense is a good and sufficient reason.

    If it isn't then the law does not states that.... In fact the law does not even define what "good and sufficient reason" is and therefore the law is unconstitutionally broad, in addition to violating civil rights. If the law does not state what the violation is then it has no teeth.

    Just be sure that the church isn't also a school.

  3. #3
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator ed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Loudoun County - Dulles Airport, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,848

    Post imported post

    Dispatcher wrote:
    The law says for "good and sufficient reason".
    Self defense is a good and sufficient reason.
    for ME you just answered your own (and my own) question... just sayin...
    Carry On.

    Ed

    VirginiaOpenCarry.Org (Coins, Shirts and Patches)
    - - - -
    For VA Open Carry Cards send a S.A.2S.E. to: Ed's OC cards, Box 16143, Wash DC 20041-6143 (they are free but some folks enclose a couple bucks too)

  4. #4
    Regular Member ProShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    www.ProactiveShooters.com, Richmond, Va., , USA
    Posts
    4,671

    Post imported post

    I'm not talking about the law. I'm talking about getting the support of churches to promote concealed carry for the protection of all.
    James Reynolds

    NRA Certified Firearms Instructor - Pistol, Shotgun, Home Firearms Safety, Refuse To Be A Victim
    Concealed Firearms Instructor for Virginia, Florida & Utah permits.
    NRA Certified Chief Range Safety Officer
    Sabre Red Pepper Spray Instructor
    Glock Certified Armorer
    Instructor Bio - http://proactiveshooters.com/about-us/

  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Virginia, , USA
    Posts
    311

    Post imported post

    Hopefully it'll help turn California around.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Neplusultra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Christiansburg, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,228

    Post imported post

    ed wrote:
    Dispatcher wrote:
    The law says for "good and sufficient reason".
    Self defense is a good and sufficient reason.
    for ME you just answered your own (and my own) question... just sayin...
    Unfortunately that would be up to a judge or jury to decide what the phrase means. But I have a hard time believing if you were to make a list of all the church attacks, and school attacks. Then divide them into two groups of outcomes, one with guns present and the other without. It would make a pretty compelling story.

    Jeanne Assam comes to mind :^).

  7. #7
    Regular Member Neplusultra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Christiansburg, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,228

    Post imported post

    ProShooter wrote:
    I'm not talking about the law. I'm talking about getting the support of churches to promote concealed carry for the protection of all.
    That would be a good point to advocate/agitate for is order to get that section of the law repealed... I unfortunately am not currently involved in a church....

  8. #8
    Regular Member ProShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    www.ProactiveShooters.com, Richmond, Va., , USA
    Posts
    4,671

    Post imported post

    Neplusultra wrote:
    ProShooter wrote:
    I'm not talking about the law. I'm talking about getting the support of churches to promote concealed carry for the protection of all.
    That would be a good point to advocate/agitate for is order to get that section of the law repealed... I unfortunately am not currently involved in a church....
    I'm a member ofthe church of Glock.
    James Reynolds

    NRA Certified Firearms Instructor - Pistol, Shotgun, Home Firearms Safety, Refuse To Be A Victim
    Concealed Firearms Instructor for Virginia, Florida & Utah permits.
    NRA Certified Chief Range Safety Officer
    Sabre Red Pepper Spray Instructor
    Glock Certified Armorer
    Instructor Bio - http://proactiveshooters.com/about-us/

  9. #9
    Regular Member sccrref's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Virginia Beach, VA, , USA
    Posts
    741

    Post imported post

    ProShooter wrote:
    I'm not talking about the law. I'm talking about getting the support of churches to promote concealed carry for the protection of all.
    Why just concealed carry. Why not pose it as carry in general and then leave it up to the church to decide if they want to limit it to one or the other or not limit it t all?

  10. #10
    Regular Member ProShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    www.ProactiveShooters.com, Richmond, Va., , USA
    Posts
    4,671

    Post imported post

    sccrref wrote:
    ProShooter wrote:
    I'm not talking about the law. I'm talking about getting the support of churches to promote concealed carry for the protection of all.
    Why just concealed carry. Why not pose it as carry in general and then leave it up to the church to decide if they want to limit it to one or the other or not limit it t all?
    Either is fine. Just getting the support to carry at all was my point.
    James Reynolds

    NRA Certified Firearms Instructor - Pistol, Shotgun, Home Firearms Safety, Refuse To Be A Victim
    Concealed Firearms Instructor for Virginia, Florida & Utah permits.
    NRA Certified Chief Range Safety Officer
    Sabre Red Pepper Spray Instructor
    Glock Certified Armorer
    Instructor Bio - http://proactiveshooters.com/about-us/

  11. #11
    Regular Member Neplusultra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Christiansburg, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,228

    Post imported post

    ProShooter wrote:
    Neplusultra wrote:
    ProShooter wrote:
    I'm not talking about the law. I'm talking about getting the support of churches to promote concealed carry for the protection of all.
    That would be a good point to advocate/agitate for is order to get that section of the law repealed... I unfortunately am not currently involved in a church....
    I'm a member ofthe church of Glock.
    That church is so fake. Real churches are made of metal :^)!

  12. #12
    Regular Member ProShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    www.ProactiveShooters.com, Richmond, Va., , USA
    Posts
    4,671

    Post imported post

    Neplusultra wrote:
    ProShooter wrote:
    Neplusultra wrote:
    ProShooter wrote:
    I'm not talking about the law. I'm talking about getting the support of churches to promote concealed carry for the protection of all.
    That would be a good point to advocate/agitate for is order to get that section of the law repealed... I unfortunately am not currently involved in a church....
    I'm a member ofthe church of Glock.
    That church is so fake. Real churches are made of metal :^)!
    Stand at the door of my church and say that!
    James Reynolds

    NRA Certified Firearms Instructor - Pistol, Shotgun, Home Firearms Safety, Refuse To Be A Victim
    Concealed Firearms Instructor for Virginia, Florida & Utah permits.
    NRA Certified Chief Range Safety Officer
    Sabre Red Pepper Spray Instructor
    Glock Certified Armorer
    Instructor Bio - http://proactiveshooters.com/about-us/

  13. #13
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator longwatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Northern Fauquier Co, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,297

    Post imported post

    ProShooter wrote:
    I'm not talking about the law. I'm talking about getting the support of churches to promote concealed carry for the protection of all.
    My church already is a carrying church as the grounds manager told me one day and the pastor has asked more that a few folks to carry.

  14. #14
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    ProShooter wrote:
    Neplusultra wrote:
    ProShooter wrote:
    I'm a member ofthe church of Glock.
    That church is so fake. Real churches are made of metal :^)!
    Stand at the door of my church and say that!
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Arlington, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    252

    Post imported post

    longwatch wrote:
    ProShooter wrote:
    I'm not talking about the law. I'm talking about getting the support of churches to promote concealed carry for the protection of all.
    My church already is a carrying church as the grounds manager told me one day and the pastor has asked more that a few folks to carry.
    Being asked by the pastor sounds like good and sufficient reason to me, but around here I bet hell would freeze over before a judge decided anything was good and sufficient reason.

  16. #16
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator longwatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Northern Fauquier Co, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,297

    Post imported post

    Then I guess one would have to pay the $250 fine if one were to be found in violation.

  17. #17
    Regular Member Neplusultra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Christiansburg, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,228

    Post imported post

    GWRedDragon wrote:
    longwatch wrote:
    ProShooter wrote:
    I'm not talking about the law. I'm talking about getting the support of churches to promote concealed carry for the protection of all.
    My church already is a carrying church as the grounds manager told me one day and the pastor has asked more that a few folks to carry.
    Being asked by the pastor sounds like good and sufficient reason to me, but around here I bet hell would freeze over before a judge decided anything was good and sufficient reason.
    That's when you ask for a jury trial. I would never put all my eggs in one basket even though the judge may be a real good guy.... Again, I'd lay out the case in terms of what's happened before. That and it is, and should be, a private property rights issue.... This is the only private property that is restricted by statute. It's unequal protection and unconstitutional at best....

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Arlington, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    252

    Post imported post

    Neplusultra wrote:
    That's when you ask for a jury trial.
    In the PRA good luck

  19. #19
    Accomplished Advocate user's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Northern Piedmont of Virginia
    Posts
    2,373

    Post imported post

    The thing that really drives me nuts is the federal prohibition against possession of firearms within 1000 feet of the outer boundary of the real estate on which a school happens to be located. * Any violation is a felony punishable by up to five years in a federal penitentiary. *There are a few exceptions, but not many. *And it's not up to the schools to decide whether they want to allow guns or not. *The person who wrote about carrying in church in Va. was limited by whether the church operates a school is exactly right. *(By the way, it's only carrying in religious services that's prohibited "without good and sufficient reason". *Not all carrying in church.)

    The statute claims to be based on Congress' power to regulate interstate commerce, on the theory that guns and ammunition that have passed in interstate commerce are the only ones that are so regulated. *Like, how exactly, does that "regulate interstate commerce"? *It has absolutely no bearing on how many guns cross state lines, whether anyone's paid taxes on them, or anything else having to do with interstate commerce.*

    The statute also says it's purpose is to help out the states that appear to be powerless against criminals with guns. *So it criminalizes otherwise law abiding citizens whose only purpose is self defense and defense of other innocent people. *

    The statute exceeds the power of Congress because it has no bearing on, or rational relation to, interstate commerce; it purports to regulate the possession of firearms which is exclusively a state interest (public health, welfare, and the police power, are reserved exclusively to the states - the United States has absolutely no jurisdiction with respect to any of those powers). *Thus, state law should actually pre-empt inconsistent federal law with respect to any such issue. *(Though there's never been a federal case in which the court held that federal law was pre-empted by state law.)

    So, in theory, a person who lives next door to a school can't drive out of his driveway with a rifle in the car; a person openly carrying a handgun can't walk to the 7-11 to get his morning coffee if he passes across the street from a school; and a hunter can't drive down certain streets in a city, in order to get to the game.

    And the children in the schools are defenseless. * I wonder how many lives would have been saved at Columbine or Va. Tech., had one teacher been armed and carrying pursuant to a permit?
    Daniel L. Hawes - 540 347 2430 - HTTP://www.VirginiaLegalDefense.com

    By the way, nothing I say on this website as "user" should be taken as either advertising for attorney services or legal advice, merely personal opinion. Everyone having a question regarding the application of law to the facts of their situation should seek the advice of an attorney competent in the subject matter of the issues presented and licensed to practice in the relevant state.

  20. #20
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator longwatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Northern Fauquier Co, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,297

    Post imported post

    user wrote:
    The thing that really drives me nuts is the federal prohibition against possession of firearms within 1000 feet of the outer boundary of the real estate on which a school happens to be located. Any violation is a felony punishable by up to five years in a federal penitentiary. There are a few exceptions, but not many. And it's not up to the schools to decide whether they want to allow guns or not. The person who wrote about carrying in church in Va. was limited by whether the church operates a school is exactly right. (By the way, it's only carrying in religious services that's prohibited "without good and sufficient reason". Not all carrying in church.)

    The statute claims to be based on Congress' power to regulate interstate commerce, on the theory that guns and ammunition that have passed in interstate commerce are the only ones that are so regulated. Like, how exactly, does that "regulate interstate commerce"? It has absolutely no bearing on how many guns cross state lines, whether anyone's paid taxes on them, or anything else having to do with interstate commerce.

    The statute also says it's purpose is to help out the states that appear to be powerless against criminals with guns. So it criminalizes otherwise law abiding citizens whose only purpose is self defense and defense of other innocent people.

    The statute exceeds the power of Congress because it has no bearing on, or rational relation to, interstate commerce; it purports to regulate the possession of firearms which is exclusively a state interest (public health, welfare, and the police power, are reserved exclusively to the states - the United States has absolutely no jurisdiction with respect to any of those powers). Thus, state law should actually pre-empt inconsistent federal law with respect to any such issue. (Though there's never been a federal case in which the court held that federal law was pre-empted by state law.)

    So, in theory, a person who lives next door to a school can't drive out of his driveway with a rifle in the car; a person openly carrying a handgun can't walk to the 7-11 to get his morning coffee if he passes across the street from a school; and a hunter can't drive down certain streets in a city, in order to get to the game.

    And the children in the schools are defenseless. I wonder how many lives would have been saved at Columbine or Va. Tech., had one teacher been armed and carrying pursuant to a permit?
    Well the current wording of the GFSZ act does set a high bar for prosecution, it has to be proven that the act affected interstate commerce. Seems in practice that deters a lot prosecutions, I mean think of how few you hear about.

    Also your hunter going hunting being prohibited isnt quite true, if the gun is in a locked container the hunter is not in violation.
    See
    http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18...2----000-.html
    (2) (A) It shall be unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm that has moved in or that otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone. (B) Subparagraph (A) does not apply to the possession of a firearm— (i) on private property not part of school grounds; (ii) if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do so by the State in which the school zone is located or a political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the State or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license; (iii) that is— (I) not loaded; and (II) in a locked container, or a locked firearms rack that is on a motor vehicle;

  21. #21
    Accomplished Advocate user's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Northern Piedmont of Virginia
    Posts
    2,373

    Post imported post

    Intersting perspective. *I've read that statute to require that the license be specifically a license to be in possession of a firearm, not a license to hunt (i.e., engaging in an activity that uses a handgun). *The problem with any other interpretation is the requirement that the license issued by the state be issued pursuant to a background check *("...the law enforcement authorities of the State or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license...").
    So a Virginia concealed handgun permit would qualify, a hunting license would not. *And, under Virginia law, the only exception for such people is that they can be in possession of a handgun (and no other proscribed weapon) while in a vehicle while on a driveway, parking lot, or traffic circle.

    Daniel L. Hawes - 540 347 2430 - HTTP://www.VirginiaLegalDefense.com

    By the way, nothing I say on this website as "user" should be taken as either advertising for attorney services or legal advice, merely personal opinion. Everyone having a question regarding the application of law to the facts of their situation should seek the advice of an attorney competent in the subject matter of the issues presented and licensed to practice in the relevant state.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •