To: Mr. Steve Neil, The Catholic Virginian
Subject: Response to your most recent editorial
Date: 07/12/2010
Dear Mr. Neil:
As a matter of course, I deeply resent you exercising your enumerated and constitutionally protected right to free speech in order to disparage my enumerated and similarly protected right to keep and bear arms.
You appear to be woefully uninformed about Virginia dining establishments. There are no “bars” in the state of Virginia, only restaurants that may serve alcohol in addition to food; a subtle distinction, but a real one, nonetheless. You are also naive in the extreme if you believe that concealed weapons were not present in these establishments previously. True, law-abiding citizens were prevented from so carrying, but as news reports over the years have made clear, those who disregard other laws have had no qualms about disregarding a concealed carry ban either.
You are also woefully uninformed regarding Virginia's gun laws. You state that “Many people do not realize that Virginia law allows people with proper permits to carry a gun in the open.” This is laughably, demonstrably false. One needs no permit whatsoever to openly carry a firearm in Virginia. So long as age restrictions are met, and you are not a convicted felon, you can walk into any gun shop, and legally purchase a firearm. You may then legally place it in a holster and walk down the street with no requirement for any sort of a permit. You are only required to obtain a permit should you wish to carry your firearm in a concealed manner.
As to your question: “but why else would you go to a bar? Those who frequent bars don’t go for soft drinks or iced tea.” I can tell you that when I frequent a dining establishment I go for the food and, in most cases, companionship either with my wife of many years, or with friends and associates. I rarely drink even at home, so it is fallacious of you to assume that I go to an establishment merely to get drunk and cause trouble. Indeed, in the news report you quoted in your opinion piece, it was noted that 60 gun owners gathered in a restaurant in suburban Richmond to celebrate the repeal of an unnecessary restriction. It should also be noted that the gathering was peaceful. No one got drunk, no one “busted a cap”, no one was disorderly, and no one was arrested or charged with so much as a misdemeanor. So much for the “why else would you go to a bar” fallacy that you promote as insight.
As to why I would not simply avoid going where I expect trouble, I would ask you to explicitly point to any establishment, even one’s own home, where uninvited trouble is guaranteed to be absent. There are a number of famous cases in this country where people engaging in no risky behavior whatsoever found themselves in the middle of a criminal activity. Luby’s Cafeteria in Texas comes to mind, as does Virginia Tech, Columbine High School, the Amish School in Pennsylvania. None of the individuals murdered in these and other incidents had given their murderer even the slightest provocation. All were in supposedly “safe” locations. All were unarmed and unable to defend themselves.
Even staying away from public places is insufficient to completely avoid contact with criminally-minded individuals – witness numerous news article articles regarding home invasions, burglaries and the like. You are similarly not guaranteed safety merely walking down the street, as is readily apparent when reading news of muggings, rapes, robberies and murders committed in public places.
Make no mistake – the firearm others and I carry is not a magic talisman – it will not ward off evil any more than will holding up a cross in the face of a determined attacker. Like a seat belt in your car, however, it can increase the odds of survival if carried consistently. In short, I do not carry a weapon in order to start a fight – I carry it for my own protection and that of my loved ones should unanticipated and unprovoked danger appear suddenly.
You claim that people are intimidated when they observe a fellow citizen openly carrying a firearm. I have two responses to that. The first is that it is as much my right to carry a weapon to defend myself, as it is your right to publish an uninformed, biased op-ed piece. The only reason people are fearful is that we have for too long consented to being disarmed in public - buying into the false notion that the police can protect us. As more ordinary citizens embrace their right to protect themselves, the distress will fade away as the general public comes to realize that most weapons carriers are in fact peaceable citizens like themselves. Secondly, if by wearing my firearm openly I intimidate someone and thereby dissuade an attack, I say that’s a good thing, and am proud to have done even a small bit of public service.
