View Poll Results: Do you favor Constitutional Carry in Virginia

Voters
86. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, without a doubt

    81 94.19%
  • Yes, but with reservations

    3 3.49%
  • Don't know yet

    1 1.16%
  • No, absolutely not

    1 1.16%
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 36

Thread: Constitutional Carry in Virginia

  1. #1
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,620

    Post imported post

    Three (3) states now enjoy the benefit of Constitutional Carry - Vermont, Alaska and just recently Arizona was added to the list. Permits are still available for those desiring to enjoy reciprocity with accepting states.

    While it might be a harder sell here in Virginia, I am interested in what you think it would take to accomplish this, presuming that you favor such a change.

    Constitutional Carry because it is the Right thing to do - pun intended.

    Yata hey
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Lynchburg, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,201

    Post imported post

    I believe that unlicensed OC and CC is the way to go with no variation on restrictions (as few as possible for both).

  3. #3
    Regular Member Marco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Greene County
    Posts
    3,844

    Post imported post

    Isn't that what "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." means.
    If you think like a Statist, act like one, or back some, you've given up on freedom and have gone over to the dark side.
    The easiest ex. but probably the most difficult to grasp for gun owners is that fool permission slip so many of you have, especially if you show it off with pride. You should recognize it as an embarrassment, an infringement, a travesty and an affront to a free person.


    ~Alan Korwin

  4. #4
    Regular Member bmartinxd45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Ashland, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    40

    Post imported post

    I am for it, however I will still keep my CHP license because I travel to Oklahoma and need it to carry there and in Arkansas.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    700

    Post imported post

    I don't know all the details about it but from what I saw from the other thread... what I would want different (so far):

    Do not want duty to inform
    Do not want disarming during LEO encounter
    Change it to allow non-permit holders to CC in establishments serving alcohol as well, in an effort to stem perks for permits

    Edited to add:
    I would more than likely keep and renew my permit for those times when/if I get convinced to travel to a reciprocal state.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Near The Beach, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    454

    Post imported post

    Agent19 wrote:
    Isn't that what "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." means.
    +1

  7. #7
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,620

    Post imported post

    To clarify, full, real Constitutional Carry does NOT include those restrictions evident presently in Arizona's new law.

    Yata hey
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    182

    Post imported post

    I would particularly support if it abolished the gun free school zones (colleges, secondary, & primary.)

    Schools are the number one place that I simply can not avoid and must disarm.

    Besides, I would like to think that a few teachers have guns to protect my kids when I'm not around.

    "Guns Don't Kill Kids. Gun Free Zones Kill Kids."

  9. #9
    Accomplished Advocate user's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Northern Piedmont of Virginia
    Posts
    2,373

    Post imported post

    Actually, Virginia's Constitution, Article 1, Section 13, is about as complete as you can get - the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was based on it. The problem is that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" has not been obeyed by our legislature, nor by our courts. And frankly, I think it goes too far, anyway. I wish the language were more reasonable, so that we won't have a history of ignoring it and making the less and less reasonable. It is reasonable to prohibit people who are presently insane or who have recentconvictions for violent felonies from having firearms. But the Constitution makes no provision for "reasonable regulation". So the Virginia Supreme Court is put in the position of having to say, "well, we didn't really mean it when we said'shall not be infringed."

    http://legis.state.va.us/Constitution/Constitution.htm


    [quote]

    And, just in case you're interested, here's the definition of "militia":

    ยง 44-1. Composition of militia.
    The militia of the Commonwealth of Virginia shall consist of all able-bodied citizens of this Commonwealth and all other able-bodied persons resident in this Commonwealth who have declared their intention to become citizens of the United States, who are at least sixteen years of age and, except as hereinafter provided, not more than fifty-five years of age. The militia shall be divided into four classes, the National Guard, which includes the Army National Guard and the Air National Guard, the Virginia State Defense Force, the naval militia, and the unorganized militia.
    ยง 44-4. Composition of unorganized militia.
    The unorganized militia shall consist of all able-bodied persons as set out in ยง 44-1, except such as may be included in ยงยง 44-2, 44-3, and 44-54.6, and except such as may be exempted as hereinafter provided.
    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.

  10. #10
    Campaign Veteran roscoe13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Catlett, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,134

    Post imported post

    double tap...
    "The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good." - George Washington

  11. #11
    Campaign Veteran roscoe13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Catlett, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,134

    Post imported post

    Well, it won't let me add after the quote for some reason...

    I disagree 100% with your position here. I would say that any criminal who can't be trusted with a firearm can't be trusted in the general population.

    Roscoe


    user wrote:
    Actually, Virginia's Constitution, Article 1, Section 13, is about as complete as you can get - the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was based on it. The problem is that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" has not been obeyed by our legislature, nor by our courts. And frankly, I think it goes too far, anyway. I wish the language were more reasonable, so that we won't have a history of ignoring it and making the less and less reasonable. It is reasonable to prohibit people who are presently insane or who have recentconvictions for violent felonies from having firearms. But the Constitution makes no provision for "reasonable regulation". So the Virginia Supreme Court is put in the position of having to say, "well, we didn't really mean it when we said'shall not be infringed."
    "The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good." - George Washington

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Near The Beach, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    454

    Post imported post

    roscoe13 wrote:
    Well, it won't let me add after the quote for some reason...

    I disagree 100% with your position here. I would say that any criminal who can't be trusted with a firearm can't be trusted in the general population.

    Roscoe


    user wrote:
    It is reasonable to prohibit people who are presently insane or who have recentconvictions for violent felonies from having firearms. "
    +1

    "No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -Thomas Jefferson


  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Richmond , Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8

    Post imported post

    I must have missed the part in the Constitution were it says you must have a chp to carry any way you like? Its sad this even has to be a discussion.

  14. #14
    Accomplished Advocate user's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Northern Piedmont of Virginia
    Posts
    2,373

    Post imported post

    roscoe13 wrote:
    Well, it won't let me add after the quote for some reason...

    I disagree 100% with your position here. I would say that any criminal who can't be trusted with a firearm can't be trusted in the general population.

    Roscoe


    user wrote:
    Actually, Virginia's Constitution, Article 1, Section 13, is about as complete as you can get - the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was based on it. The problem is that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" has not been obeyed by our legislature, nor by our courts. And frankly, I think it goes too far, anyway. I wish the language were more reasonable, so that we won't have a history of ignoring it and making the less and less reasonable. It is reasonable to prohibit people who are presently insane or who have recentconvictions for violent felonies from having firearms. But the Constitution makes no provision for "reasonable regulation". So the Virginia Supreme Court is put in the position of having to say, "well, we didn't really mean it when we said'shall not be infringed."
    I don't see that as an inconsistent position, and I don't disagree with you. And I think that the reasonableness of your position is precisely why the Constitution is ignored. Which suggests to me that the document ought to be brought into line with reality, but it's intellectually dishonest to simply ignore it; this opens the door for people to argue what constitutes "reasonable regulation".

    I'm not sure I want to improve the ability of the State to eliminate bad people. The same set of power-people in society who disregard the constitutions we've developed in order to legitimate their exercise of power are those whomwetrust toeliminate unfitpeoplethrough judicial proceedings. When we assume that independent-minded, law-abiding, socially responsible self-reliant behavioris good,we run the risk that the greater society can be made to see us as bad, according to a model that depends on shame, fear, and guilt, and which creates vast bodies of "law" in order to ensure that everyone is a criminal and can be "gotten". If you won't join up with The System (or as I see it, "the Beast"), you are a threat, unfit, and if The System can eliminate you, it will do so.
    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.

  15. #15
    Accomplished Advocate user's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Northern Piedmont of Virginia
    Posts
    2,373

    Post imported post

    halljt3 wrote:
    I must have missed the part in the Constitution were it says you must have a chp to carry any way you like? Its sad this even has to be a discussion.
    Exactly.
    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.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
    Posts
    3,806

    Post imported post

    bmartinxd45 wrote:
    I am for it, however I will still keep my CHP license because I travel to Oklahoma and need it to carry there and in Arkansas.
    Oh yeah? Where in Arkansas?
    Why open carry? Because 1911 > 911.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
    Posts
    3,806

    Post imported post

    user wrote:
    Actually, Virginia's Constitution, Article 1, Section 13, is about as complete as you can get - the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was based on it.
    Cite, please? This could be very useful.

    user wrote:
    It is reasonable to prohibit people who are presently insane or who have recentconvictions for violent felonies from having firearms. But the Constitution makes no provision for "reasonable regulation".
    That's called "giving up your rights by violating those of others." It's not an infringement, though I'm sure some will argue.

    On that note, I do worry about, raising the bar for felonies, as it has been called.
    Why open carry? Because 1911 > 911.

  18. #18
    Accomplished Advocate user's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Northern Piedmont of Virginia
    Posts
    2,373

    Post imported post

    AbNo wrote:
    user wrote:
    Actually, Virginia's Constitution, Article 1, Section 13, is about as complete as you can get - the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was based on it.
    Cite, please? This could be very useful.
    ...
    Constitution of Virginia, Article 1, Section 13.
    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.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Near The Beach, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    454

    Post imported post

    user wrote:
    AbNo wrote:
    user wrote:
    Actually, Virginia's Constitution, Article 1, Section 13, is about as complete as you can get - the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was based on it.
    Cite, please? This could be very useful.
    ...
    Constitution of Virginia, Article 1, Section 13.
    Section 13. Militia; standing armies; military subordinate to civil power. That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.

  20. #20
    Regular Member wylde007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Va Beach, Occupied VA
    Posts
    3,037

    Post imported post

    The Constitution of Virginia was scripted prior to the U.S. Constitution and was considered so well defined that much of it was lifted and inserted into the federal charter.

    That's grade-school civics.
    The quiet war has begun, with silent weapons
    And the newest slavery is to keep the people poor, and stupid
    Novos ordo seclorum ~ Mustaine

    Never argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

  21. #21
    Campaign Veteran roscoe13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Catlett, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,134

    Post imported post

    wylde007 wrote:
    The Constitution of Virginia was scripted prior to the U.S. Constitution and was considered so well defined that much of it was lifted and inserted into the federal charter.

    That's grade-school civics.
    Yeah, except most grade schools don't teach civics any more....
    "The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good." - George Washington

  22. #22
    Regular Member wylde007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Va Beach, Occupied VA
    Posts
    3,037

    Post imported post

    roscoe13 wrote:
    Yeah, except most grade schools don't teach civics any more...
    You'll hear no argument from me on that point.
    The quiet war has begun, with silent weapons
    And the newest slavery is to keep the people poor, and stupid
    Novos ordo seclorum ~ Mustaine

    Never argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Norfolk, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,000

    Post imported post

    wylde007 wrote:
    roscoe13 wrote:
    Yeah, except most grade schools don't teach civics any more...
    You'll hear no argument from me on that point.
    Civics was a 12th grade class at my school. It focused on doing the right thing for the benefit of society, not the individual.

    Much of it was touchy-feely feel-good stuff focusing on worrying about people rather than individuals. Talking with the teacher for that class, worrying about myself first before worrying about my neighbors showed that I wasn't very civically minded.

    Not my cup of tea. Though I'll make you a cup of tea... if I have enough to share. Damn that taking care of myself/ my house first upbringing.

  24. #24
    Regular Member wylde007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Va Beach, Occupied VA
    Posts
    3,037

    Post imported post

    darthmord wrote:
    It focused on doing the right thing for the benefit of society, not the individual.
    You and I both know that has nothing to do with civics.

    I shudder to think what a hatchet job was done on other subjects at whatever school you attended.

    Yipes.
    The quiet war has begun, with silent weapons
    And the newest slavery is to keep the people poor, and stupid
    Novos ordo seclorum ~ Mustaine

    Never argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

  25. #25
    Regular Member The Wolfhound's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Henrico, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    697

    Post imported post

    Until recently, I was not so radical. The words: "The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT be infringed" cannot be misinterpreted or misconstrued, only ignored. How do we reconcile the dangerous vilolent criminal and the insane with firearms ownership? I am not so wise as to have that answer. Perhaps in an armed society that situation would manage to work itself out with a healthy dose of self interest, who can say?.
    Appleseed, Virginia State Coordinator
    Are you a Rifleman yet?
    http://appleseedinfo.org

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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