In Virginia, and elsewhere, gun supporters prepare to defy new laws

1
In the past two weeks, county governments from the central Piedmont to the Appalachian Southwest — Charlotte, Campbell, Carroll, Appomattox, Patrick, Dinwiddie, Pittsylvania, Lee and Giles — have approved resolutions that defy Richmond to come take their guns.

It mirrors a trend that began last year in western parts of the United States, where some law enforcement officials vowed to go to jail rather than enforce firearm restrictions, and has spread eastward. In New Mexico, 25 of 33 counties declared themselves Second Amendment sanctuaries after the state expanded background checks. In Illinois, nearly two-thirds of its counties have done the same.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/vi ... story.html
AMELIA COURTHOUSE, Va. — Families, church groups, hunt clubs and neighbors began arriving two hours early, with hundreds spilling out of the little courthouse and down the hill to the street in the chilly night air.

They were here to demand that the Board of Supervisors declare Amelia County a “Second Amendment sanctuary” where officials will refuse to enforce any new restrictions on gun ownership.

A resistance movement is boiling up in Virginia, where Democrats rode a platform on gun control to historic victories in state elections earlier this month. The uprising is fueled by a deep cultural gulf between rural red areas that had long wielded power in Virginia and the urban and suburban communities that now dominate. Guns are the focus. Behind that, there is a sense that a way of life is being cast aside.

In the past two weeks, county governments from the central Piedmont to the Appalachian Southwest — Charlotte, Campbell, Carroll, Appomattox, Patrick, Dinwiddie, Pittsylvania, Lee and Giles — have approved resolutions that defy Richmond to come take their guns.

It mirrors a trend that began last year in western parts of the United States, where some law enforcement officials vowed to go to jail rather than enforce firearm restrictions, and has spread eastward. In New Mexico, 25 of 33 counties declared themselves Second Amendment sanctuaries after the state expanded background checks. In Illinois, nearly two-thirds of its counties have done the same.

“My oath of office is to uphold the Constitution of the United States,” Amelia Sheriff Ricky L. Walker said Wednesday night as he waited for the supervisors to meet in this rural county west of Richmond.

If a judge ordered him to seize someone’s guns under a law he viewed as unconstitutional, Walker said, he wouldn’t do it. “That’s what I hang my hat on,” he said.

Some of the unrest is fanned by gun rights groups, such as the National Rifle Association and the Virginia Citizens Defense League, which have used social media and old-fashioned networking to offer boilerplate language for resolutions. But the movement is speaking to the anxieties of many who are unsettled by a state that has shifted from red to blue with shocking speed.

All of the top leaders in the new Democratic-controlled legislature hail from urban or suburban districts in Northern Virginia, Hampton Roads and Richmond. The liberal suburbs outside Washington have the largest delegation in the legislature. And the status of lawmakers from rural red parts of the state has never been lower.

“We need to send a signal to Richmond about Northern Virginia. We don’t want their influence to affect us down here. We’re very different people,” said Clay Scott, a 25-year-old construction project manager whose family has lived in Amelia for generations.

Democrats won control in the elections on the strength of suburban districts where gun violence was a central issue, amplified by a May 31 mass shooting at a Virginia Beach municipal building that left 12 people dead.

Poll finds Virginians focused on gun policy ahead of pivotal election

When the General Assembly convenes in January, Gov. Ralph Northam (D) has promised to move quickly with Democratic leaders to pass measures such as universal background checks, limits on the types and numbers of firearms that can be purchased and a “red flag” law allowing authorities to seize weapons from someone deemed a threat.

The proposals “were essentially on the ballot in November,” said Brian Moran, Northam’s secretary of public safety. “And the people have spoken through their votes.”

'Gun owners are awake'

The resolutions rocketing around the Virginia countryside all have similar language. Philip Van Cleave of the Virginia Citizens Defense League said he drafted one for Amelia to consider, along with about 30 other counties — out of 95 total — also taking it up. The matter was added to the Amelia agenda too late for it to be advertised so, by law, the board cannot vote on it until next month. Yet, a crowd of 300 or more turned out after hearing about it through word of mouth.

A similar resolution that passed Monday in Appomattox County pledged to oppose any efforts to “unconstitutionally restrict” the right to bear arms. It said the county would do this “through legal action, the power of the appropriation of public funds, and the right to petition for redress of grievances, and the direction to the law enforcement and judiciary of Appomattox County to not enforce any unconstitutional law.”

The concept is modeled after the “sanctuary city” stance that some localities have taken in response to federal immigration enforcement efforts. In those cases, local law enforcement officials decline to take voluntary steps to help the federal government detain or deport undocumented immigrants.

In theory, a Second Amendment sanctuary would be different. Refusing to carry out a judge’s order to seize weapons from someone would be breaking the law. That could mean jail time. Local agencies receive funding from the state, so even adopting the stance is provocative.

“The notion that law enforcement would not follow the law is appalling,” said Lori Haas, a longtime activist with the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. “I suspect that many of these counties and their elected officials are posturing in front of certain voters.”

As the sanctuary movement has spread around the country, Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence found that it generally has not led to active resistance. “As a practical matter, these are largely symbolic,” said Adam Skaggs, chief counsel and policy director at Giffords. “We haven’t seen cases where there are folks that are outright defying the law.”

Skaggs said the trend means that authorities in such states as Washington, Oregon, Colorado and New Mexico might be neglecting to use legal tools that could help prevent gun violence and suicide. “While this is largely a political or symbolic gesture, I still think it’s quite troubling,” he said.

At Amelia on Wednesday night, Del. John J. McGuire III (R-Henrico) took the opportunity to show up and announce that he is seeking next year’s GOP nomination to challenge U.S. Rep. Abigail Spanberger (D-Va.).

“I don’t understand what part of ‘shall not infringe’ they don’t understand,” he proclaimed on the courthouse steps as a darkness settled on the throngs who couldn’t get in. “I’ll fight my ass off for you.”

McGuire just won a second term in the House of Delegates in a nearby rural district. But he’ll be in the minority now, with Democrats posting a 55-to-45 advantage in the House and a 21-to-19 edge in the Senate.

Moran, the public safety secretary, didn’t attend the Amelia meeting but has been monitoring the phenomenon. He held town halls on gun control around the state over the summer, discussing solutions ahead of a special legislative session that Northam called in July to take up gun-control bills. Republicans adjourned that session after only 90 minutes, enraging Democrats and handing them a campaign issue in the fall.

“All of his proposals have been vetted in the courts,” Moran said. “The courts have determined that they do not violate the Second Amendment. We feel confident that law-abiding citizens should not be concerned that their rights will be violated.”

But to many residents in Amelia, any kind of gun restriction feels personal. They’ve heard that some proposals would prevent kids under 18 from owning guns and say people who would ban assault weapons don’t understand what they are.

Tony Easter, 60, said he learned about the proposed sanctuary resolution last week and spent four days driving to hunt clubs and friends’ houses around the county to drum up support. “My jaws are hurting from trying to explain this to people,” he said.

Easter grew up hunting in Amelia and has worked as a hunting and fishing guide. He’s active with the NRA and raised his daughters and son “in the woods,” he said.

“I live out here in the country; I’m a rural citizen,” Easter said. “We don’t agree with how Fairfax and Newport News and now even Chesterfield have dominated the state.”

He realizes, he said, that people in those places see guns differently — and that he doesn’t understand their circumstances any more than they understand his. But solving their problems shouldn’t mean changing his way of life, he said.

“What goes on in Fairfax can stay in Fairfax,” Easter said. “We just want to live our life the way we have been raised to live.”

Again and again at Wednesday night’s hearing, residents rose to speak about their first shotgun, about the hours spent stalking game with a father or grandfather.

Hannah Davis said she grew up hunting with her dad and eating what they killed. “The only reason I’m standing here today is because I was fed by wildlife,” she said.

Others said they feel safer in Amelia than in the city, specifically because so many people carry guns and know how to use them. And some warned of the need for protection in case of a government that goes too far.

“I am a proud descendant of a Revolutionary soldier that fought four and a half years to free our land,” said Troy Carter. “Our forefathers bled on this very ground in Virginia for this very reason. The Second Amendment is ours. Our forefathers fought for it. I’m sending this message to Ralph Northam because Virginia is here, and we are awake.”

Only one person out of the dozens who spoke expressed a different point of view. Allison Crews, 44, rose initially to thank residents for electing her to the Piedmont Soil & Water Conservation District, but then mentioned that she is a member of Moms Demand Action and believes in “sensible gun legislation.”

She drew light, polite applause. Afterward, Crews said she grew up in a family of hunters and thinks the urge to block all gun restrictions is misguided. “You can lead with fear or lead with love,” she said. “For me, love always wins.”

The main thing that impressed her about the public hearing, she said, was the number of people who showed up — far beyond anything she had seen in years of attending county meetings.

“I wish we’d see those crowds for things like water quality in the town, or the school system,” she said.

Amelia’s supervisors will vote on a resolution Dec. 18. The meeting has already been moved to the high school auditorium in anticipation of a big turnout.
It is an unfortunate human failing that a full pocketbook often groans more loudly than an empty stomach.

- Franklin D. Roosevelt

Re: In Virginia, and elsewhere, gun supporters prepare to defy new laws

2
MayhemVI wrote: Mon Nov 11, 2019 8:43 am So far I'm not seeing any Virginians in this thread. So let's just take a moment to ponder: Are Virginia's Democrats Democrats first, or Virginians first?

In other words, who here knows how any of these votes are going to go?
posting.php?mode=quote&f=40&p=738315

Yup, something like that. :coffee:
If liberals interpreted the Second Amendment the way they interpret the rest of the Bill of Rights, there would be law professors arguing that gun ownership is mandatory. - Mickey Kaus, The New Republic

Re: In Virginia, and elsewhere, gun supporters prepare to defy new laws

3
We walk the razor's edge between 2 incompatible perceptions of reality and what makes us safe and free.

'“I am a proud descendant of a Revolutionary soldier that fought four and a half years to free our land,” said Troy Carter. “Our forefathers bled on this very ground in Virginia for this very reason. The Second Amendment is ours. Our forefathers fought for it. "'

Am I the only one who sees the irony and hypocrisy in this statement? Virginia was a slave state, and committed treason to be able to keep those slaves 85 years later. It wasn't "to free our land" because Virginia wasn't TRULY free until Loving vs Virginia in 1967. So when people spout this kind of bullshit, where the ONLY amendment they ever respected was the 2nd, it's hard for me to believe they TRULY believe in 2A for EVERYONE, not just White Christian Republicans.

Yet we also know that gun seizure violates other Amendments as well, but Democrats don't see that in their panic.

Everyone wants SIMPLE solutions to a complex problem, and H.L. Mencken's cynical view on that "simple and wrong" is similar and compatible with Einstein's observation on repeating the same action and expecting different results.
"Even if the bee could explain to the fly why pollen is better than shit, the fly could never understand."

Re: In Virginia, and elsewhere, gun supporters prepare to defy new laws

5
The uprising is fueled by a deep cultural gulf between rural red areas that had long wielded power in Virginia and the urban and suburban communities that now dominate.
We need to send a signal to Richmond about Northern Virginia. We don’t want their influence to affect us down here. We’re very different people...
Classic urban - rural conflict.

Yankees go home, but leave your money here !
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: In Virginia, and elsewhere, gun supporters prepare to defy new laws

6
I was curious about the appropriation of the word "sanctuary" by the GOP. A sanctuary for things, not people, seems like a way to cheapen the term. They do this all the time with words like "liberty" and "oppression".

If a state were to ban tobacco or alcohol, would sanctuary counties arise like dry counties did? Why didn't the libertarians push for cannabis sanctuary cities and counties?

What about slavery or pedophilia? Can counties legally claim to be sanctuaries for that, too?
It is an unfortunate human failing that a full pocketbook often groans more loudly than an empty stomach.

- Franklin D. Roosevelt

Re: In Virginia, and elsewhere, gun supporters prepare to defy new laws

7
K9s wrote: Sun Nov 24, 2019 2:08 pm I was curious about the appropriation of the word "sanctuary" by the GOP. A sanctuary for things, not people, seems like a way to cheapen the term. They do this all the time with words like "liberty" and "oppression".

If a state were to ban tobacco or alcohol, would sanctuary counties arise like dry counties did? Why didn't the libertarians push for cannabis sanctuary cities and counties?

What about slavery or pedophilia? Can counties legally claim to be sanctuaries for that, too?
States' Rights have ALWAYS been conveniently cited by rightwing Southerners. When it came to slavery in free states, abortion, sanctuary cities, marijuana, and gun control, the 10th goes out the window.

But when it came to slavery, voter suppression, gerry-mandering, bible-teaching in public schools, hey then State's Rights is sacred!

In application, States' Rights has ALWAYS been bullshit, unequally applied, usually to the detriment of liberal states.
"Even if the bee could explain to the fly why pollen is better than shit, the fly could never understand."

Re: In Virginia, and elsewhere, gun supporters prepare to defy new laws

8
YankeeTarheel wrote: Sun Nov 24, 2019 2:26 pm
K9s wrote: Sun Nov 24, 2019 2:08 pm I was curious about the appropriation of the word "sanctuary" by the GOP. A sanctuary for things, not people, seems like a way to cheapen the term. They do this all the time with words like "liberty" and "oppression".

If a state were to ban tobacco or alcohol, would sanctuary counties arise like dry counties did? Why didn't the libertarians push for cannabis sanctuary cities and counties?

What about slavery or pedophilia? Can counties legally claim to be sanctuaries for that, too?
States' Rights have ALWAYS been conveniently cited by rightwing Southerners. When it came to slavery in free states, abortion, sanctuary cities, marijuana, and gun control, the 10th goes out the window.

But when it came to slavery, voter suppression, gerry-mandering, bible-teaching in public schools, hey then State's Rights is sacred!

In application, States' Rights has ALWAYS been bullshit, unequally applied, usually to the detriment of liberal states.
I think this was always true. Remember Reagan threatening to withhold state highway funds to force 55 MPH speed limits?

Or Trump Admin attacking state laws constantly (except pro-pollution, pro-business, anti-education, white supremacist, Christian supremacist, etc.)?
It is an unfortunate human failing that a full pocketbook often groans more loudly than an empty stomach.

- Franklin D. Roosevelt

Re: In Virginia, and elsewhere, gun supporters prepare to defy new laws

9
Claiming sanctuary goes back centuries and was respected when church and state were vying for supremacy.
Murder and theft were the most common crimes for which fugitives sought sanctuary in medieval Europe. Once a fugitive entered a cathedral, their pursuers could lie in wait for them outside, but they couldn’t enter to capture anyone. In addition, fugitives couldn’t bring a bow and arrow into the church to attack their pursuers from the windows, or any other weapon that they might use to defend themselves once they left.

While safe inside, fugitives might work out an agreement with the people they wronged in order to leave safely. Yet more often, fugitives had to go straight from sanctuary into permanent exile from their city, region or country. This was especially true in England beginning in the 12th century, when the country legally regulated sanctuary more than any other region in Europe.
In the end secular states gained supremacy over religion and sanctuary was no longer legal.
https://www.history.com/news/church-san ... iddle-ages

Not the first time that Reps have co-opted words, just think of the "Patriot Act" which has nothing to do with real patriots. A lot of states used to have blue laws, some still do. Stores weren't allowed to open on Sundays or if they did, isles containing things you couldn't buy would be roped off. Thanks to the ultra-orthodox parties in Israel public transit, businesses and restaurants close for sabbath (shabbat).

To me to the two most overused words are "truth" and "reform".
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: In Virginia, and elsewhere, gun supporters prepare to defy new laws

12
compromise? what do we get in return?

this is a constitutional right. it's not there to protect hunting or target shooting or home defense*, it's there so we'll be ready should there be another concord or lexington, where the "legitimate" government attempted to disarm the people. we've already allowed the govt to abridge it, starting with the NFA, and everything else since. but that's water under the bridge, over the dam, whatever. gun owners have given and given and given even as our government becomes more and more authoritarian, what have we gotten? that same government telling us we'll be safer? yeah,right.

*except to defend our homes against our own government.
i'm retired. what's your excuse?

Re: In Virginia, and elsewhere, gun supporters prepare to defy new laws

13
I really don't think there can be any compromise between two groups where one side says something is a fundamental right, and the other side says it is not. What is the point of compromise? Sort-of-a-right? The time for compromise was in the 80's when the gun control crowd at least still acknowledged that gun ownership is actually a right. And there was compromise in the Firearm Owners Protection Act, which gave a little and took a little. It probihited a national registry, loosened some restrictions on dealers, and banned the sale of new machine guns. Ever since then, though, the anti-gun crowd has moved more and more to an absolutist position that will not allow compromise. The last "compromise" they offered was in the 1994 assault rifle ban, to which they agreed to have it expire after ten years. The result of that, of course, was that ten years later they were horrified that it actually was allowed to expire, which was never really their intent.

The pro-gun crowd has mostly responded by becoming just as absolutist, and honestly I can't blame them for that.
106+ recreational uses of firearms
1 defensive use
0 people injured
0 people killed

Re: In Virginia, and elsewhere, gun supporters prepare to defy new laws

14
I live in a very pro-2A state with a huge divide between pro-2A and anti-2A. As the urban population grows and gun owning is consistently demonized, we will lose our rights unless we start having conversations now. Going out and carrying an AR on city streets doesn't help our cause. Universal background checks might.
It is an unfortunate human failing that a full pocketbook often groans more loudly than an empty stomach.

- Franklin D. Roosevelt

Re: In Virginia, and elsewhere, gun supporters prepare to defy new laws

16
The odd thing to me is that while SCOTUS has ruled it an individual right to keep and bear arms rather than a collective right, people continue to believe they can infringe on that right. I'm good with universal background checks - they fit in long-standing regulations and benefit us all. But that's about it for new gun regs for me. We've got plenty and they have shown to be as effective as prohibition and the war on drugs.

Re: In Virginia, and elsewhere, gun supporters prepare to defy new laws

17
Eris wrote: Mon Nov 25, 2019 12:46 am I agree that we need to be having conversations with gun haters, and I even support universal background checks, if done right, but I am under no illusion that UBCs are going to satisfy those who want to outlaw gun ownership entirely.
The NRA has always fought new gun laws as another step on the slippery slope to eventually banning private ownership of all firearms. Some anti-gunners have admitted that is their goal which emboldens right wing gun owners. I agree with dialog but our political system is based on compromise and I haven't seen the anti-gunners wanting to compromise. I'm for UBCs though I think what would be acceptable is not registering firearms only making sure purchasers can legally buy a gun. And I'd like to see the anti-gunners agree to national concealed carry reciprocity but that's probably too big an ask for those rabid groups.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: In Virginia, and elsewhere, gun supporters prepare to defy new laws

18
highdesert wrote: Mon Nov 25, 2019 11:26 am
Eris wrote: Mon Nov 25, 2019 12:46 am I agree that we need to be having conversations with gun haters, and I even support universal background checks, if done right, but I am under no illusion that UBCs are going to satisfy those who want to outlaw gun ownership entirely.
The NRA has always fought new gun laws as another step on the slippery slope to eventually banning private ownership of all firearms. Some anti-gunners have admitted that is their goal which emboldens right wing gun owners. I agree with dialog but our political system is based on compromise and I haven't seen the anti-gunners wanting to compromise. I'm for UBCs though I think what would be acceptable is not registering firearms only making sure purchasers can legally buy a gun. And I'd like to see the anti-gunners agree to national concealed carry reciprocity but that's probably too big an ask for those rabid groups.
Exactly. There's no reason that a background check requires registration.

There is mounting evidence (reported here and there on this forum) that California's gun laws have had the "unintended consequence" of LEO using them for profit (selling off roster handguns on the used market) and political advancement (dolling out CCWs to large donors or the politically connected). There's evidence that the various restrictions are facilitating black market gang ventures where firearms are manufactured and sold illegally. So while those of us that follow the law have our 2A rights infringed, there are people profiting politically/financially off of the regulations with the side benefit that the regulations have done nothing to reduce gun homicide. That is precisely how our failed experiment with prohibition "worked." It is precisely how our war on drugs "works." When will we realize that restricting the rights of the law abiding only creates markets for those who don't follow the laws? It's like shooting yourself in the foot, realizing that didn't work out so well and then shooting the other foot for good measure.

Re: In Virginia, and elsewhere, gun supporters prepare to defy new laws

19
While I hate the idea of arbitrary mag capacity laws and accessory bans, I don't know that anyone is going to ask our advice. If anti-2A candidates continue to demonize gun owners, we won't be able to discuss anything with the gun ban voters. We are already unfairly seen as shills for the NRA no matter what we say. It is just going to get worse if we don't discuss compromises. If they don't see us as people, politicians will take away our rights like the rest of the groups they dislike. End of rant. :)
It is an unfortunate human failing that a full pocketbook often groans more loudly than an empty stomach.

- Franklin D. Roosevelt

Re: In Virginia, and elsewhere, gun supporters prepare to defy new laws

20
I have had moderate success with the anti gunners in my Family and within my circle of friends by telling them I will comply with all laws that are Constitutional and the Constitution says that my Right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Any laws infringing on the 2A are illegal *until* you repeal the second amendment. The law is clear and the process is perfectly well documented. Any laws limiting or infringing on my gun rights are illegal laws and, not only am I not bound to follow laws that are not Constitutional, I am duty bound as an American who has taken The Oath to disobey them.

The answer is clear. If you want my guns you'll have to repeal the second amendment like they did prohibition.Until it is repealed any laws that limit my rights are unconstitutional and I am duty bound to break them.

VooDoo
Tyrants disarm the people they intend to oppress.

I am sworn to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

Re: In Virginia, and elsewhere, gun supporters prepare to defy new laws

21
I guess I am just trying to find a way to reach them without "siding" with the NRA. The fact that they have either never held one or claim to come from a "hunting" family means that they just don't get that shooting targets is a sporting endeavor. As the younger generations grow to see guns as evil, I don't think the 2A has a lot of hope in the next century.
It is an unfortunate human failing that a full pocketbook often groans more loudly than an empty stomach.

- Franklin D. Roosevelt

Re: In Virginia, and elsewhere, gun supporters prepare to defy new laws

22
highdesert wrote: Mon Nov 25, 2019 11:26 am ... I agree with dialog but our political system is based on compromise and I haven't seen the anti-gunners wanting to compromise. ...
I suspect we will see less compromise over time. When people take the position that the opposition are "literal nazis" -- that leaves no room for dialogue at all. It's the same on the right, where people take the position that the opposition are "literal communists" in the vein of Stalin or something equally horrific. There's no negotiating when you view the other side as the incarnation of evil and if current trends are indicative of the future, I only see the divide getting worse.

If we were to have a rational discussion though, the Antis have not been all that trustworthy as bargaining partners and have taken every compromise not for what it is, but as a springboard to grab more. They aren't negotiating in good faith and recently, they don't even pretend to be -- ballot initiatives that depend on ultra-blue metropolitan centers are the a demonstration of that willingness to use force.

Re: In Virginia, and elsewhere, gun supporters prepare to defy new laws

24
The rhetoric of the whole thing has become obtuse and, frankly, silly. We (gun owners) have already compromised with the Anti's by allowing infringement. And what have we gotten in return for our compromise? More demands up to and including Beto telling us "Hell yeah, we are taking your guns!"

I have had good success here lately in just telling them "No. You are not." Well, we'll make a law that makes you a criminal if you possess these things. "That's not legal...it's unconstitutional and I am not bound by an illegal law." You'll end up in jail! "Maybe. Do you really want to make a law abiding mature man a criminal because he won't comply with an illegal law? And what do you think I'll do about that?"

We need to make this dialog simple. I will not comply. Arrest me, fine me, vilify me, jail me. I. Will. Not. Comply. Usually it stops the conversation which is as good as I can do now. No one is gonna compromise so let's just control the crash and when they actually pass these laws we need to...not comply.

VooDoo
Tyrants disarm the people they intend to oppress.

I am sworn to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests