VA: No place for guns at council sessions

[HerrGlock]

http://content.hamptonroads.com/story.cfm?story=131574&ran=120390
No place for guns at council sessions

The Virginian-Pilot
© September 1, 2007

The fevered words directed toward the Norfolk City Council Tuesday night by the Virginia Citizens Defense League offered another reminder of the dangerous double standard Virginia observes on firearms in public spaces.

For reasons of safety, citizens are not allowed to openly carry weapons into courthouses in Virginia, or the state Capitol. How can anyone think it is a good idea to allow someone with a serious grievance to argue with a sidearm strapped at his hip?

Such logic, however, has been lost on members of the legislature. A few years ago, they buckled under pressure from Second Amendment absolutists and carved out an exception permitting guns in school board and council chambers, making pointless any protection provided by metal detectors or bag searches.

The General Assembly's concern for the 2nd Amendment doesn't apply to its own chambers. Tuesday evening's meeting shows why. That's when the VCDL exploited the privilege granted by delegates and senators, showing up en masse in the 11th floor chambers of Norfolk City Hall, defiant and well-armed.

They had a legitimate complaint: the mistaken arrest of a VCDL member for carrying his sidearm at Harborfest. Several years ago, the General Assembly revoked the authority Norfolk relied on to enact an ordinance preventing folks from carrying guns to a municipal party, but city officials never went back and tidied up the code.

Some officers unwittingly tried to enforce it, and, according to the VCDL, did so far too roughly. The complaint deserves proper investigation and, where warranted, remedy and consequence. But any official inquiry would be done in spite of the VCDL's rude behavior, not in response to it.

The organization's members faced no threat to their lives in City Council chambers, so carrying guns to the proceedings was only meant to intimidate the people they were addressing.

The show of force, combined with contempt and name-calling (Norfolk police were variously depicted as bullies, thugs and goons, while the council members were dismissed simply as bigots) was intended to provoke an overreaction from Mayor Paul Fraim, rather than to seek genuine relief or correction. Although his composure was strained, the mayor didn't take the bait.

This kind of thing would never happen at the General Assembly. Had the members of the VCDL showed up to address state lawmakers, they would have been denied entry by the Capitol Police until they disarmed, checked their weapon at the door, or locked them in a car.

In adopting its own safeguards in April 2004, the joint rules committee of the House of Delegates and the Senate recognized the danger of guns all over their work place. The committee banned anyone from carrying weapons into the Capitol and the General Assembly office building but their own members, law enforcement agents, or concealed weapons permit-holders.

For reasons dramatized Tuesday night in Norfolk City Hall, members of city councils and school boards deserve at least the same safeguards.

(Comments link at the bottom of the page)

Letters to the Editor:
letters@pilotonline.com

[HerrGlock]

So, let me get this straight. Lawful people were carrying firearms. No one was threatened by them, no one was harmed and the people were there to address a grievance yet you believe this shows cause as to why people shouldn't be allowed to carry firearms?

Is this because you now have to explain to your children why you have been saying that only criminals carry guns and anyone with a gun who is not a cop only carries it to commit crimes and they have seen that you are wrong?

You say the only reason they were carrying them is to intimidate. Perhaps that's the only reason you would carry one and the only reason you can come up with to carry one, but obviously you have no grasp on the self defense concept. If you got a bill passed that they could not carry in the meeting, what would you have them do with the guns? Leave them in the car to be stolen and later used in crimes? Leave them at home? You believe that the people should be denied their choice of defensive measures from the time they leave their house, go to dinner, go do a bit of shopping, and then go to the meeting plus being denied their defensive measures after the meeting for the entire time they are out afterwords?

Maybe you can make things zap in and out of existence for short periods of time, but the rest of us are incapable of doing that and you are calling for either a criminal's shopping spree in the parking lot of the meeting hall or for people to not be able to have a choice of defensive measures for the entire time they're out if they even think they're going to be going to the meeting hall.

Or did you not think that far ahead?

[EAJuggalo]

Two glaring factual errors stand out to me in the article. "city officials never went back and tidied up the code." If I recall correctly this ordinance was passed in Feb 2007, after the Norfolk City Council had been informed that they couldn't regulate legal carry, it was not some ordinance that had been on the books for years. Second, Whats the difference whether it's open carried or concealed. VA gives those with a Concealed Handgun License the choice as to which way to carry for the most part, I would hazard a guess that there were more firearms being carried that night than what was visible.

[vafish]

Originally posted by EAJuggalo
Two glaring factual errors stand out to me in the article. "city officials never went back and tidied up the code." If I recall correctly this ordinance was passed in Feb 2007, after the Norfolk City Council had been informed that they couldn't regulate legal carry, it was not some ordinance that had been on the books for years. Second, Whats the difference whether it's open carried or concealed. VA gives those with a Concealed Handgun License the choice as to which way to carry for the most part, I would hazard a guess that there were more firearms being carried that night than what was visible.

One glaring factual error (or omission) in your post

No Concealed Handgun Permit is required to open carry a handgun in Virginia.

There is no law against open carrying a handgun, thus it is legal.

Some people choose to open carry because they don't want to get the governments permission to be able to carry a gun.


Also one Glaring factual error in the original article.

You CAN openly carry in the state capitol, IF you have a CHP.

It's kind of fun walking into the state capitol and seeing all those people walking through the metal detector, then you walk through and it beeps like crazy, you hand the security guard your CHP and they have you walk over to a State Police officer. SP takes a look at it and waves you on.

[EAJuggalo]

I was going to go down that road as the second factual error until I remembered that open carry is legal in VA without a permit. So I was left with one and a supposition. It's still an anti article by a reporter whom can't be bothered to get the facts correct or do any research.

[mitchshrader]

you left out a few things. one, he's flat wrong to take the position he takes.

two, no harm has been done and he's claiming 'hot words' are sufficient cause to disarm the populace.

what, now you can't raise your voice or use pejoratives if you own guns? free speech OR guns? that's his thesis?

if they can curse, scream, froth, and snivel, WITHOUT a gun, then they can do so just as much WITH one.

yes?

i didn't see 'pick one' on the bill of rights, anywhere.

[vafish]

Originally posted by EAJuggalo
... It's still an anti article by a reporter whom can't be bothered to get the facts correct or do any research.

Agree on that!

[Minuteman]

Originally posted by EAJuggalo
It's still an anti article by a reporter whom can't be bothered to get the facts correct or do any research.


But he still got into the paper and our position was not. Score another one for the anti's.


:patriot:

[Kevin108]

The VA Pilot's editorial staff is lousy at fact checking and VERY anti. I write in all the time. They won't publish me, but a couple other local papers have. :thumbsup:

The letter I sent in over this article:

The Pilot editorial says, "How can anyone think it is a good idea to allow someone with a serious grievance to argue with a sidearm strapped at his hip?" It sounds to me like this individual fears what he would do if arguing while possessing a firearm and projects what he can envision himself doing to everyone else.

Last Tuesday offered many examples of how the Pilot writer is wrong. Heated words were exchanged for over 45 minutes and miraculously all the guns stayed holstered! Amazing!

The Harborfest incident was but one example of harassment of gun owners who carry openly. Two other gentlemen also spoke at the meeting - one black, one white, both harassed on multiple occasions starting almost a month after Mr. Szymecki was targeted. The police certainly should have known the facts by then, yet the harassment continues.

Gun owners were far from the only ones presenting the City Council with complaints about police harassment. Council members (at least the ones that stayed in the meeting to hear out their citizens) reacted as if they were being told pink elephants were stealing flowers in the Botanical Gardens - they smirked, they rolled their eyes, and they continued to ignore the problem.

==================================================

Here's a better version of the article with comments from the VCDL President Philip Van Cleave.

For reasons of safety [exactly whose safety are we talking about? - PVC] citizens are not allowed to openly carry weapons into courthouses in Virginia [you can't carry concealed either - PVC], or the state Capitol [WRONG! - permit holders can carry concealed or openly at the Capitol building - PVC]. How can anyone think it is a good idea to allow someone with a serious grievance to argue with a sidearm strapped at his hip? [Well, the police do that all the time! Is the paper suggesting that the police be disarmed if they plan on verbally confronting a law-breaker? After all that is exactly what VCDL was doing when we addressed Norfolk City Council, isn't it? - PVC]

Such logic, however, has been lost on members of the legislature ["Logic"? Oh, that is rich coming from whoever wrote this opinion ;-) ]. A few years ago, they buckled under pressure from Second Amendment absolutists and carved out an exception permitting guns in school board [WRONG AGAIN, sigh, the law covering school board meetings has not changed - PVC] and council chambers [WRONG AGAIN! Norfolk City Council never had a ban on carry of firearms in their chambers - PVC], making pointless any protection provided by metal detectors or bag searches.

The General Assembly's concern for the 2nd Amendment doesn't apply to its own chambers [WRONG AGAIN! As stated earlier, we can carry in the General Assembly - PVC]. Tuesday evening's meeting shows why. That's when the VCDL [Well, at least they got our name right! - PVC] exploited the privilege granted by delegates and senators, showing up en masse in the 11th floor chambers of Norfolk City Hall, defiant and well-armed. [So, speaking against a pattern of civil rights
violations is 'defiant.' I know where the Pilot would have come down in the 50's during the civil rights protests! And WRONG AGAIN!! Law makers did NOT grant anyone the PRIVILEGE to show up at City Council armed. Every law abiding citizen has that RIGHT. The General Assembly just insured that localities couldn't infringe upon that RIGHT. - PVC]

They had a legitimate complaint: the mistaken arrest of a VCDL member for carrying his sidearm at Harborfest. Several years ago [Several years ago? WRONG AGAIN! Try 19 years ago...in 1987!! - PVC], the General Assembly revoked the authority Norfolk relied on to enact an ordinance preventing folks from carrying guns to a municipal party, but city officials never went back and tidied up the code. ['Tidied up the code'?!? The paper makes it all sound so innocent. Just a little bureaucratic snafu. Boy, do I wish this was the person the police had put through the wringer instead of Chet. I'll bet this opinion piece would have had a very different tone. - PVC]

Some officers unwittingly tried to enforce it, and, according to the VCDL, did so far too roughly. [Unwittingly? Ah - so innocent. It took the police over an hour to come up with their 'unwitting' violation of state law. Incompetence and/or maliciousness would be more like it. - PVC] The complaint deserves proper investigation and, where warranted, remedy and consequence. But any official inquiry would be done in spite of the VCDL's rude behavior, not in response to it. [We are talking NORFOLK here! Nothing would happen if we didn't push the issue. Where does this person live exactly? Couldn't be in the Tidewater area or they would have known better - PVC]

The organization's members faced no threat to their lives in City Council chambers, so carrying guns to the proceedings was only meant to intimidate the people they were addressing. [Is that why the police at the meeting were carrying guns - to intimidate City Council? I carry my gun 24/7 for self-defense. Crimes can happen anywhere and at any time. Sounds like the paper would rather have us leave our guns in the car to provide a hundred criminals with free firearms to use in future crimes. Brilliant thinking,
Virginian-Pilot! Why were none of these evil gun owners arrested for shooting up the place? If there was any threat of danger, why wasn't the room swarming with police, instead of just one uniformed officer by the door (and probably 2 or 3 in plain clothes in the audience? - PVC]

The show of force, combined with contempt and name-calling (Norfolk police were variously depicted as bullies, thugs and goons, while the council members were dismissed simply as bigots) was intended to provoke an overreaction from Mayor Paul Fraim, rather than to seek genuine relief or correction. Although his composure was strained, the mayor didn't take the bait. [WRONG AGAIN! The only reaction we wanted from the Mayor was to do his job by taking control of his police force and doing something with the rogues in that force! - PVC]

This kind of thing would never happen at the General Assembly. Had the members of the VCDL showed up to address state lawmakers, they would have been denied entry by the Capitol Police until they disarmed [WRONG AGAIN! - PVC], checked their weapon at the door [WRONG AGAIN! - PVC], or locked them in a car [WRONG AGAIN! - PVC].

In adopting its own safeguards in April 2004, the joint rules committee of the House of Delegates and the Senate recognized the danger of guns all over their work place. The committee banned anyone from carrying weapons into the Capitol and the General Assembly office building but their own members, law enforcement agents, or concealed weapons permit-holders. [FINALLY THEY GET ONE RIGHT! Right at the very end, too. I hate to break the news to the Pilot (how's that for a flip in rolls?), but most of the people carrying at the Norfolk City Hall on Tuesday had concealed handgun permits anyhow, but almost everyone decided to carry openly. We can, and many of us do, carry openly at the General Assembly, too. - PVC]

For reasons dramatized Tuesday night in Norfolk City Hall, members of city councils and school boards deserve at least the same safeguards. [Uh - what 'safeguards' would those be? Knowing that their meeting is not only protected by the police, but has the additional security provided by many law-abiding gun owners who are carrying, too? - PVC]

==================================================

Related reading:

At gunpoint and in cuffs in downtown Norfolk
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum54/3298.html

Harassed at Town Point Park in Norfolk
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum54/3368.html

Norfolk illegally arrests VCDL member
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum54/3634.html

Norfolk City Council Aftermath
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum54/4470.html

[RussP]

Norfolk's problem is they have a few elected officials and employees acting improperly on behalf of the city.

:cool:

[Dinho]

before i got to herrglock's 2nd post i was thinking, "so let me get this straight... they are saying people shouldn't carry guns where they will confront people in debate because they will shoot someone and wreak havoc yet that is what these citizens did and no incident came about" but he beat me to the punch.

for those of you from virginia, i admire greatly your ability to organize yourselves and conduct yourselves in such a manner of which any gun owner can be proud. keep up the good work!:thumbsup:

[HerrGlock]

Originally posted by Dinho
before i got to herrglock's 2nd post i was thinking, "so let me get this straight... they are saying people shouldn't carry guns where they will confront people in debate because they will shoot someone and wreak havoc yet that is what these citizens did and no incident came about" but he beat me to the punch.

:supergrin:

So far, they've not answered my email. I'm holding my breath, though :animlol:

Seriously, though, send your comments too. They might at least think about it before they publish this trash again. They might not, but if they know a lot of people are watching, they might.

[Dinho]

you got it! ill take care of it now:thumbsup: