Constitutional Carry in Virginia

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

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).

imported post

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

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.

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.

imported post

Agent19 wrote:

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

Click to expand...

+1

imported post

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

Yata hey

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."

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

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

§ 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.

Click to expand...

§ 44-4. Composition of unorganized militia.
The unorganized militia shall consist of all able-bodied persons as set out in § 44-1, except such as may be included in §§ 44-2, 44-3, and 44-54.6, and except such as may be exempted as hereinafter provided.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

imported post

double tap...

Click to expand...

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."

Click to expand...

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. "

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

+1

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

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.:cuss:

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."

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

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.

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.:cuss:

Click to expand...

Exactly.

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.

Click to expand...

Oh yeah? Where in Arkansas?

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.

Click to expand...

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".

Click to expand...

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.

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.

Click to expand...

Cite, please? This could be very useful.
...

Click to expand...

Constitution of Virginia, Article 1, Section 13.

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.

Click to expand...

Cite, please? This could be very useful.
...

Click to expand...

Constitution of Virginia, Article 1, Section 13.

Click to expand...

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.

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.