Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 35

Thread: Style Weekly likes SB1395

  1. #1
    Regular Member Repeater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,519

    Style Weekly likes SB1395

    In this week's edition of Punch Drunk, Jack Lauterback talks with A. Donald McEachin about SB1395:

    Shotguns and Shot Glasses

    Right now you can drink and carry a gun with no repercussions in Virginia. Does anyone else feel like they're taking crazy pills?
    That's false, if it's concealed. It's also false if you're a cop.

    In an effort to temper the never-ending derangement that is Virginia’s relationship with alcohol and guns, State Sen. A. Donald McEachin, D-Henrico, put forth Senate Bill 1395, which would make drinking while carrying a firearm illegal.

    Yes, that’s correct: Right now you can drink and carry a gun with no repercussions in Virginia. Seriously?! I feel like I’m taking crazy pills.

    That this isn’t already against the law is baffling and shows how red and deeply Southern this state still is. Regardless, McEachin’s bill seeks to at least counter the law that went into place a year ago, which allows for concealed weapons in bars as long as the holder has a permit and remains sober.

    Unfortunately it’s widely suspected that McEachin’s legislation, although it passed 12-1 in the Senate Courts of Justice Committee and 40-0 in the full Senate, ultimately will die in a House of Delegates subcommittee before it reaches the full body. But McEachin isn’t giving up. “I don’t subscribe to the notion that this bill won’t pass through the House of Delegates or else I wouldn’t have introduced it,” he says. “We already got 40 votes in the Senate, and with both parties working together I’m hopeful we can get the necessary votes in the House.”

    If it fails, it’ll be thanks to a bunch of old Republican bags on the subcommittee and heavy pressure on them from the (possibly drunk?) good ol’ boys to “uphold the Second Amendment!

    As for allowing concealed weapons in bars, McEachin says he’s not sure what the process would have been to repeal the law, but is focused on this new bill: “I think it will go through.”

    What else is there to say? We’ve already had one concealed weapons permit-holder in Lynchburg shoot himself in the leg while drinking in a bar. Next time a person will die, though I doubt it will change the stances of lawmakers or gun nuts. When it comes to firearms, rational thought is merely an afterthought for these people.
    So, these gentlemen are "old Republican bags" - really?

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    700
    A comment states:

    Its illegal to carry a CONCEALED firearm and drink. If you show it you can get as hammered as you want. Please check YOUR facts.
    I don't feel like registering on there to tell him that you can't be "under the influence" (hammered), even if it is openly carried and thus to get HIS/HER facts straight.

    Ever since Jack got all the attention he did from being his usual obnoxious self towards gun rights activist and got his face on NBC12, he's been making jab after jab at guns and gun rights in his column hoping for all the attention again.

    He's not worth it.
    Last edited by Curtis; 02-16-2011 at 01:00 PM.

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

    Cool He is a VERY squeaky wheel.

    However he is a squeaky wheel in an apparatus which serves no useful purpose and, rather than lubricate it, it would be best to simply cast it aside or put it on a shelf to remind others of the consequences of being dumb, noisy and useless.

    Say, isn't Lauterback the same guy who said if someone came into his "bar" weaing a gun he would "show them the street, asphalt first" or something to that effect?
    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.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Repeater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,519

    It's about McEachin

    Quote Originally Posted by wylde007 View Post
    However he is a squeaky wheel in an apparatus which serves no useful purpose and, rather than lubricate it, it would be best to simply cast it aside or put it on a shelf to remind others of the consequences of being dumb, noisy and useless.

    Say, isn't Lauterback the same guy who said if someone came into his "bar" weaing a gun he would "show them the street, asphalt first" or something to that effect?
    Please understand, this is about what McEachin said, not about what Lauterback thinks.

    McEachin is quoted as saying that SB1395 will pass the House:

    I don’t subscribe to the notion that this bill won’t pass through the House of Delegates or else I wouldn’t have introduced it.
    And:
    I think it will go through.
    MPPS #1 will be heard tomorrow. Virginia gun owners should be there tomorrow and see if the Donald actually meant what he said.
    Last edited by Repeater; 02-16-2011 at 01:50 PM.

  5. #5
    Regular Member wylde007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Va Beach, Occupied VA
    Posts
    3,037

    Wink

    Quote Originally Posted by Repeater View Post
    Please understand, this is about what McEachin said, not about what Lauterback thinks.
    Yes, but the Senator's comments have been exaggerated and editorialized in true Lauterback fashion.

    He and Dan Casey should get a room.
    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.

  6. #6
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069
    Gosh, an attention ***** telling lies and insulting people to get more attention?

    Whoda thunk it?

    Calling out a Liberal Liar is always worth signing up for. If you don't prove he's lying, who will?
    Last edited by ixtow; 02-16-2011 at 08:02 PM.
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  7. #7
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    In light of this week's developments in Philadelphia, I can't help but observe that if this law had been in place in Philadelphia in January 2010, it is quite likely that Gerald Ung would have been severely beaten and possibly critically injured or killed.

    I guess we can safely say that the Senator would prefer that Mr. Ung be injured or killed, rather than have been able to defend himself from a gang of drunken thugs.

    TFred

  8. #8
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,612
    Let me correct something if I may.

    Shouldn't that be the No Style Weekly ?
    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.

  9. #9
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Do we know what is actually meant by the term "loaded firearm"?

    And by that I mean is it defined either in statute or case law anywhere?

    TFred

  10. #10
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,612
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    Do we know what is actually meant by the term "loaded firearm"?

    And by that I mean is it defined either in statute or case law anywhere?

    TFred
    This the only "loaded" reference that I have ever found.

    What Does VA Consider A Loaded Firearm?
    4VAC15-40-60. Hunting With Dogs or Possession of Weapons in Certain Locations During Closed Season. H. Meaning of "possession" of bow, crossbow, or firearm and definition of "loaded crossbow" and "loaded firearm." For the purpose of this section, the word "possession" shall include, but not be limited to, having any bow, crossbow, or firearm in or on one's person, vehicle or conveyance. For the purpose of this section, a "loaded firearm" shall be defined as a firearm in which ammunition is chambered or loaded in the magazine or clip when such magazine or clip is engaged or partially engaged in a firearm.
    http://www.handgunlaw.us/
    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.

  11. #11
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    This the only "loaded" reference that I have ever found.

    What Does VA Consider A Loaded Firearm?
    4VAC15-40-60. Hunting With Dogs or Possession of Weapons in Certain Locations During Closed Season. H. Meaning of "possession" of bow, crossbow, or firearm and definition of "loaded crossbow" and "loaded firearm." For the purpose of this section, the word "possession" shall include, but not be limited to, having any bow, crossbow, or firearm in or on one's person, vehicle or conveyance. For the purpose of this section, a "loaded firearm" shall be defined as a firearm in which ammunition is chambered or loaded in the magazine or clip when such magazine or clip is engaged or partially engaged in a firearm.
    http://www.handgunlaw.us/
    Thanks for the reference. Does the phrase "for the purpose of this section" limit the usefulness of the definition for other purposes?

    Of course, the reason I ask is that the bill in question specifically references "loaded firearm."

    TFred

  12. #12
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,612
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    Thanks for the reference. Does the phrase "for the purpose of this section" limit the usefulness of the definition for other purposes?

    Of course, the reason I ask is that the bill in question specifically references "loaded firearm."

    TFred
    That's a loaded question.

    I would think that any new bill could easily be amended to state a "loaded firearm" as defined in 4VAC15-40-60
    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.

  13. #13
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    That's a loaded question.

    I would think that any new bill could easily be amended to state a "loaded firearm" as defined in 4VAC15-40-60
    Assuming that definition is "ok" with the legislators for application to this bill in question... it's rather amusing, and somewhat ironic that this bill would then permit a person to be intoxicated and carry an empty semi-automatic ::gasp:: firearm, but along with a loaded magazine in another pocket or magazine holder.

    As much as the anti-gunners hate semi-automatic weapons, this bill effectively prohibits the "less scary" revolver, in favor of the "horrible" semi-automatic.

    This would work much like California's Unloaded Open Carry provision. Of course, I suppose it would be prudent to note that the more intoxicated someone was, the less likely they could properly insert a magazine and rack that first round.

    Someone remind me again... where is this long list of drunk shooters that this law is supposed to be fixing??

    TFred

  14. #14
    Regular Member buster81's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,461
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    Someone remind me again... where is this long list of drunk shooters that this law is supposed to be fixing??

    It's about hypothetical drunk shooters. I think Dan Casey maintains the list.

  15. #15
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,612
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    As much as the anti-gunners hate semi-automatic weapons, this bill effectively prohibits the "less scary" revolver, in favor of the "horrible" semi-automatic.
    I have considered the question of a "loaded" revolver also - believe there is a definition somewhere in hunting regulations of DGIF that covers this but such alludes me right now. It goes so far as to include black powder being loaded when the gun is capped and charged.

    This below seems to cover all the bases with my edits:

    Utah 76-10-502. When weapon deemed loaded.
    (1) For the purpose of this chapter, any pistol, revolver, shotgun, rifle, or other weapon described in this part shall be deemed to be loaded when there is an unexpended cartridge, shell, or projectile in the firing position.
    (2) Pistols and revolvers Any weapon described in this part shall also be deemed to be loaded when an unexpended cartridge, shell, or projectile is in a position whereby the manual operation of any mechanism once would cause the unexpended cartridge, shell, or projectile to be fired in a firing position.
    (3) A muzzle loading firearm shall be deemed to be loaded when it is capped or primed and has a powder charge and ball or shot in the barrel or cylinders.
    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.

  16. #16
    Regular Member Repeater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,519

    No so hypothetical

    Quote Originally Posted by buster81 View Post
    It's about hypothetical drunk shooters. I think Dan Casey maintains the list.
    Consider the actual example of (former) DEA agent Timothy Glen Workman. He visits Roanoke, on assignment, and has many alcoholic drinks at O'Charley's in Valley View Mall. Later, while under the influence, he accuses Keith Edward Bailey of flirting with a girl Workman was interested in. They take it out to the parking lot, things heat up, and Workman shot and killed Bailey.

    There is more than enough evidence for a Sec. 18.2-808(J1) violation, yet the Roanoke cops gave Workman a free pass:

    Roanoke Commonwealth's Attorney Donald Caldwell criticized police for allowing Workman to walk around and speak with investigators after the shooting rather than cuffing him and isolating him like any other suspect.
    The Police did not accept the criticism.

    Bear in mind, this was Workman's second trial. The first began in 2002, and resulted in a guilty verdict. That was overturned on appeal.

  17. #17
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by Repeater View Post
    Consider the actual example of (former) DEA agent Timothy Glen Workman. He visits Roanoke, on assignment, and has many alcoholic drinks at O'Charley's in Valley View Mall. Later, while under the influence, he accuses Keith Edward Bailey of flirting with a girl Workman was interested in. They take it out to the parking lot, things heat up, and Workman shot and killed Bailey.

    There is more than enough evidence for a Sec. 18.2-808(J1) violation, yet the Roanoke cops gave Workman a free pass:



    The Police did not accept the criticism.

    Bear in mind, this was Workman's second trial. The first began in 2002, and resulted in a guilty verdict. That was overturned on appeal.
    I read the bill. It doesn't make murdering someone in cold blood any more against the law than it already is.

    And if he was in fact "on assignment" the new law may not apply to him anyway.

    Sounds like the story you reference is a problem with the Roanoke PD.

    TFred

  18. #18
    Regular Member vt357's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    490
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    I read the bill. It doesn't make murdering someone in cold blood any more against the law than it already is.

    And if he was in fact "on assignment" the new law may not apply to him anyway.

    Sounds like the story you reference is a problem with the Roanoke PD.

    TFred
    I think that's the point - this bill is unnecessary since murder is already illegal. And if the bill is necessary, then it should apply to everyone. It shouldn't exempt anyone, including police officers.

  19. #19
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by vt357 View Post
    I think that's the point - this bill is unnecessary since murder is already illegal. And if the bill is necessary, then it should apply to everyone. It shouldn't exempt anyone, including police officers.
    As Philip noted in his Alert yesterday, this bill has been hacked up.

    The last version on the website has this:

    The provisions of this subsection shall not apply to law-enforcement officers or military personnel in the performance of their lawful duties as law-enforcement officers.
    That seems to mean they intend it to not apply only to undercover officers. Are there any other circumstances to which that would apply?

    TFred

  20. #20
    Regular Member buster81's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,461
    Quote Originally Posted by Repeater View Post
    Consider the actual example of (former) DEA agent Timothy Glen Workman. He visits Roanoke, on assignment, and has many alcoholic drinks at O'Charley's in Valley View Mall. Later, while under the influence, he accuses Keith Edward Bailey of flirting with a girl Workman was interested in. They take it out to the parking lot, things heat up, and Workman shot and killed Bailey.

    There is more than enough evidence for a Sec. 18.2-808(J1) violation, yet the Roanoke cops gave Workman a free pass:



    The Police did not accept the criticism.

    Bear in mind, this was Workman's second trial. The first began in 2002, and resulted in a guilty verdict. That was overturned on appeal.

    I don't think that guy is on the list Dan Casey keeps. He should be though.

  21. #21
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,612
    Quote Originally Posted by buster81 View Post
    I don't think that guy is on the list Dan Casey keeps. He should be though.
    Dan Casey likely only keeps a list of the good guys he wants to castrate castigate - it's a liberal thing.
    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.

  22. #22
    Regular Member Repeater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    As Philip noted in his Alert yesterday, this bill has been hacked up.

    The last version on the website has this:

    That seems to mean they intend it to not apply only to undercover officers. Are there any other circumstances to which that would apply?

    TFred
    See, you noticed. McEachin himself created a huge loophole. How serious a problem would that be? Well, just casually searching the 'Net, I discovered these news stories:

    Accused Law-Breaking Cocoa Cop Loses Job

    Trial begins for cop who did not fear arrest

    Looking back further in time, of course there are more news accounts of LEOs behaving badly. Apparently, McEachin would excuse that, because it's "tradition" - yes, that's what he said in Committee.

  23. #23
    Regular Member Repeater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,519

    Tom Sizemore writes another slanted article

    Tom Sizemore writes another slanted commentary well, article:

    Bill targeting armed drinkers dies in House panel

    A unanimous stamp of approval from the state Senate wasn't enough to save a legislative attempt to keep loaded guns out of the hands of intoxicated people.

    Sen. Donald McEachin's bill, SB1395, had been passed by the Democrat-controlled Senate 40-0.

    But it died at the hands of four Republican delegates Thursday, probably the last gun-control measure to be considered by the 2011 General Assembly.

    ...

    McEachin's bill was prompted by the so-called "guns in bars" law passed by the Assembly last year, which allows concealed-weapon permit holders to carry their guns into restaurants and bars but prohibits them from consuming alcohol.

    That left what McEachin, D-Richmond, considered a large loophole: Patrons who carry weapons openly can drink all they want.
    "... can drink all they want" -- really?

  24. #24
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,612
    Quote Originally Posted by Repeater View Post
    Tom Sizemore writes another slanted commentary well, article:

    Bill targeting armed drinkers dies in House panel



    "... can drink all they want" -- really?
    Never thought I'd agree with such minions of the dark side, but he is right in my case and I do drink what I please and as much as I please.

    Course it's coffee, tea or ice water when I'm carrying, which is all of the time.
    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.

  25. #25
    Regular Member wylde007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Va Beach, Occupied VA
    Posts
    3,037

    Cool

    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    Course it's coffee, tea or ice water when I'm carrying, which is all of the time.
    Caffeine is a stimulant and, in high enough volumes, has been shown to affect judgment and impair motor skills, not improve them.

    Just sayin'.
    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.

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
  •