buster81
Regular Member
imported post
http://www.wtvr.com/news/dp-va--xgr-guns0215feb15,0,2815543.story
Vote looms in Va. on bills widening gun liberties
By BOB LEWIS AP Political Writer
February 15, 2010
RICHMOND, Va. - The gun-friendly Virginia House set up votes on bills that would repeal the state's limit of one handgun purchase a month and allow Virginians to construct superguns at home.
On voice votes or a show of hands, the House also advanced measures to keep concealed handgun permit records from the public and shield people who shoot intruders in their homes from lawsuits.
One of the most ambitious pro-gun legislative bundles in years faces a final House showdown Tuesday, a constitutional deadline for the House to complete passage of its own bills and for the Senate to do likewise with its legislation.
The monthly handgun purchase limit was the 1993 legislative triumph of then-Gov. L. Douglas Wilder, a Democrat. It was enacted as gun homicide rates soared in Virginia's capital city and as the state gained a reputation as an East Coast armory for violent criminals.
"Right now you can buy up to 12 guns a year--an unlimited number of firearms, a huge arsenal. And we all know that gunrunning is real," said Del. Joseph Morrissey, D-Henrico and a former Richmond prosecutor. "We have been successful in the city of Richmond by reducing homicides by guns and right now we are unraveling almost two decades of progress."
It's not the first time gun-rights legislators have taken aim at the legislative legacy of the nation's first elected black governor.
Republicans and even some Democrats--including Sen. R. Creigh Deeds, last year's failed gubernatorial nominee--have argued that the monthly gun limit is outdated because technology has made instant background checks of gun buyers easy.
The bill's sponsor, Del. L. Scott Lingamfelter, argued that current law benefits only scofflaws.
"Making it harder on a law-abiding citizen to acquire a handgun legally will not stop felons from acquiring a handgun illegally," said Lingamfelter, R-Prince William.
The argument was equally vehement over Del. Charles W. "Bill" Carrico's bill that would allow Virginians to build firearms of extraordinary power as long as they are never used or taken outside the state, something that would violate federal law.
"This law would protect Virginians from giving up their 2nd Amendment rights," Carrico, R-Grayson, argued. Later, he said the bill would "prevent the federal government from interfering with Virginia's right to bear arms."
Opponents argued that the bill would empower terrorists, gangs or criminals to engineer weapons with daunting firepower. A high-caliber weapon such as a souped-up .50-caliber rifle, they argued, could devastate airliners landing or taking off from Virginia soil, including Reagan National Airport just across the Potomac River from Washington, D.C., and near the Pentagon.
Del. David Albo, R-Fairfax, warned that the bill carries dire unintended consequences.
"This is just one of those things that sounds good in a brochure, but this is very, very dangerous territory," Albo said.
A bill by 26-year-old freshman Del. James W. "Will" Morefield that would allow deadly force against intruders from whom "bodily injury" is reasonably feared left Morrissey incredulous. And Morrissey grilled him, invoking scenario after scenario in which people not reasonably likely to inflict serious injury or death could enter another's home and be shot dead without legal recourse against the shooter.
In one hypothetical scenario, Morrissey described "Jessica," a spurned girlfriend, showing up at the home of ex-boyfriend, "Tony," to find him with a new girlfriend. "She goes to slap Tony in the face, and Tony pulls out his Glock and shoots her in the head," Morrissey said. "Under your statute, can Tony be prosecuted?"
"Jessica should not have been dating Tony," Morefield replied as the House chamber dissolved in laughter.
Morrissey pressed again, only to have a Morefield respond, "You don't deal with hypotheticals."
Then he asked Morefield whether deadly force could be used regardless of the seriousness of the threat of harm. Morefield stammered his agreement.
http://www.wtvr.com/news/dp-va--xgr-guns0215feb15,0,2815543.story
Vote looms in Va. on bills widening gun liberties
By BOB LEWIS AP Political Writer
February 15, 2010
RICHMOND, Va. - The gun-friendly Virginia House set up votes on bills that would repeal the state's limit of one handgun purchase a month and allow Virginians to construct superguns at home.
On voice votes or a show of hands, the House also advanced measures to keep concealed handgun permit records from the public and shield people who shoot intruders in their homes from lawsuits.
One of the most ambitious pro-gun legislative bundles in years faces a final House showdown Tuesday, a constitutional deadline for the House to complete passage of its own bills and for the Senate to do likewise with its legislation.
The monthly handgun purchase limit was the 1993 legislative triumph of then-Gov. L. Douglas Wilder, a Democrat. It was enacted as gun homicide rates soared in Virginia's capital city and as the state gained a reputation as an East Coast armory for violent criminals.
"Right now you can buy up to 12 guns a year--an unlimited number of firearms, a huge arsenal. And we all know that gunrunning is real," said Del. Joseph Morrissey, D-Henrico and a former Richmond prosecutor. "We have been successful in the city of Richmond by reducing homicides by guns and right now we are unraveling almost two decades of progress."
It's not the first time gun-rights legislators have taken aim at the legislative legacy of the nation's first elected black governor.
Republicans and even some Democrats--including Sen. R. Creigh Deeds, last year's failed gubernatorial nominee--have argued that the monthly gun limit is outdated because technology has made instant background checks of gun buyers easy.
The bill's sponsor, Del. L. Scott Lingamfelter, argued that current law benefits only scofflaws.
"Making it harder on a law-abiding citizen to acquire a handgun legally will not stop felons from acquiring a handgun illegally," said Lingamfelter, R-Prince William.
The argument was equally vehement over Del. Charles W. "Bill" Carrico's bill that would allow Virginians to build firearms of extraordinary power as long as they are never used or taken outside the state, something that would violate federal law.
"This law would protect Virginians from giving up their 2nd Amendment rights," Carrico, R-Grayson, argued. Later, he said the bill would "prevent the federal government from interfering with Virginia's right to bear arms."
Opponents argued that the bill would empower terrorists, gangs or criminals to engineer weapons with daunting firepower. A high-caliber weapon such as a souped-up .50-caliber rifle, they argued, could devastate airliners landing or taking off from Virginia soil, including Reagan National Airport just across the Potomac River from Washington, D.C., and near the Pentagon.
Del. David Albo, R-Fairfax, warned that the bill carries dire unintended consequences.
"This is just one of those things that sounds good in a brochure, but this is very, very dangerous territory," Albo said.
A bill by 26-year-old freshman Del. James W. "Will" Morefield that would allow deadly force against intruders from whom "bodily injury" is reasonably feared left Morrissey incredulous. And Morrissey grilled him, invoking scenario after scenario in which people not reasonably likely to inflict serious injury or death could enter another's home and be shot dead without legal recourse against the shooter.
In one hypothetical scenario, Morrissey described "Jessica," a spurned girlfriend, showing up at the home of ex-boyfriend, "Tony," to find him with a new girlfriend. "She goes to slap Tony in the face, and Tony pulls out his Glock and shoots her in the head," Morrissey said. "Under your statute, can Tony be prosecuted?"
"Jessica should not have been dating Tony," Morefield replied as the House chamber dissolved in laughter.
Morrissey pressed again, only to have a Morefield respond, "You don't deal with hypotheticals."
Then he asked Morefield whether deadly force could be used regardless of the seriousness of the threat of harm. Morefield stammered his agreement.
)