It item #1, notice our Reich changes the number of people required to be killed before it is considered a mass shooting. The number that is always used is 4. He is using 6. That greatly reduces the number of shooting during the AWB years. He’s probably using 4 for the years after the AWB sunset. Any one betting against me on that one?

We don’t know the exact timing – he may or may not have had time to beat the murderer to the punch.

The Mandalay WAS a gun-free zone by policy. In fact the guard that first ran into the murderer was UNARMED and could have stopped the massacre before it started had he been able to return fire.

I we don’t try, we can’t succeed. It’s easy to always come up with reasons to not lift a finger, unfortunately.

We are simply reminding President Trump that National Reciprocity, something he said multiple times that he supports, needs to be on a front burner. The petition signing takes a mere minute or two.

We are pushing hard on this as we need to get to 100,000 signatures by August 17 for maximum exposure. With a large tally we can also point Congress at the petition as a way to show how much support there is.

Tin man,

There is no absolute predicting these things. Similar things were said when I was interviewed for a 60 Minutes segment, which turned out great (posted on the VCDL website). Also, there were concerns when Nightline did a segment on VCDL at one of our picnics in Tidewater, that also turned out very well (also posted on VCDL website).

Look at it this way – if we didn’t respond to requests from the media, then the other side would never get any push back on their lies and deceptions. We were hoping for the best, but the audio recordings hedged that bet.

Actually the case is about defamation and not libel.

VCDL filed “per se”, which has a different set of rules for libel.

How did this case turn out?

The Roanoke Times statement that the Virginia Citizens Defense League is providing her with a lawyer is false and they have been notified by me, the president of that group.

More gun control is not the answer and bringing back those gun-control bills would be wasting everyone’s time. How about being honest yourself, Delegate Toscano, since you claim to want an honest discussion on guns? Guns can already be carried legally in a church, if the church, as a private property owner, allows it. The bill you are referring to repeals an old Blue Law that makes it unclear if a church can allow carry during a service only. Repealing that law empowers places of worship to set their own policies on guns 24/7 and keeps the governments nose out of the church’s security decisions.

Mr. Farago has plenty wrong in that article, but a big one is saying that English common law had a duty to retreat. Virginia has had English common law for self-defense since 1607 and has always been a stand-your-ground state (unless you are part of the “problem”, in which case one must retreat as far as possible).

Mr. Farago has plenty wrong in that article, but a big one is saying that English common law had a duty to retreat. Virginia has had English common law for self-defense since 1607 and has always been a stand-your-ground state (unless you are part of the “problem”, in which case one must retreat as far as possible).

Yes, it is hard to stop an assassination or execution, where the bad guy is going to draw deliberately and shoot at point blank range. However, the good news is that that is rarely what happens in the real world. In my case, the person said something shoved the gun in my chest and hesitated every so briefly. But that was long enough in my case.

You can't be indecisive one the person is clearly out to kill someone. You must act and act quickly in such a case. In the second part (convenience store) I was pushing my own envelope by waiting almost too long to take on the bad guy who had ordered everyone to the floor.

There is no doubt the bad guy has the advantage. Only he know when and how he is going to attack. You are always having to respond after the attack has begun. But, bad guys are usually poorly trained, if trained at all, and that should give you back a lot of that advantage.

The bottom line is the only gun fight you are guaranteed to survive is the one you don't get into at all. But if you must get into one, you simply don't have very long to make up your mind about what action you are going to take and when you are going to take it. A quick response can catch the bad guy off guard as much as his initial attack caught you off guard.

The gun-grabbers like to say, “No one wants to take your guns away!” We have known that is a lie and Rosenthal is another brick in the wall we can point to and say, “Oh, YES they do.”

“To be fair, editing or shortening one’s response to a question is a common practice in journalism — written, film and otherwise. In fact, this article is itself a compilation of shortened quotes from all the parties involved. That’s how it works. Readers, viewers, listeners don’t have the time to hear everything that is said. If journalists didn’t edit responses, a 500-word story would be a 5,000-word story, a 1.5-hour documentary would be a 10-hour documentary. So, yes, things have to be cut out.”

THIS WAS AN APOLOGY, NOT PART OF THE STORY! She had plenty of room and time to put the whole transcript up or just put up the audio for all to hear. One can put a massive amount of text on a web page. An apology should have listed the whole 4 minute exchange, unedited. We didn’t expect her to put on the 2 hours of the entire interview, just the full Q&A for the question that she manipulated in the film.

“To be fair, editing or shortening one’s response to a question is a common practice in journalism — written, film and otherwise. In fact, this article is itself a compilation of shortened quotes from all the parties involved. That’s how it works. Readers, viewers, listeners don’t have the time to hear everything that is said. If journalists didn’t edit responses, a 500-word story would be a 5,000-word story, a 1.5-hour documentary would be a 10-hour documentary. So, yes, things have to be cut out.”

THIS WAS AN APOLOGY, NOT PART OF THE STORY!

And let’s keep things in perspective. Even if VPC wasn’t lying and distorting the numbers, there are over 12 MILLION concealed handgun permit holders in the US! 400,000 here in Virginia alone.

So not allowing someone to protect themselves from being beaten to death is dangerous? Dangerous for who?

We need to continue to walk away, no, we need to run away, from gun control.

Bought and paid for by Bloomberg.

In the U.S. in 2010, 72,000 people were stopped from purchasing a gun by the Brady check. BUT the feds only prosecuted 44 for it (In the entire U.S.), and of those only 13 were found guilty – IN THE U.S.! Tell me again that the Brady Check and “universal background checks” aren’t just another anti-liberty scam. Oh, and the mass shooters for a very long time have all gotten their guns after having a background check done. Didn’t make a hill of beans of difference. Sadly, Mr. Plum doesn’t know which end of a gun the bullet comes out of, but he’s still happy to legislate gun control anyhow.

I build bridges where they make sense. In this case it wasn’t just one bad idea or misguided idea, it was a litany that would make McAuliffe proud. That sounds like a bridge to no where useful.

Yet all your ideas are ones I hear from gun-controllers: taxes, secret lists, junk science, etc. Just a coincidence I’m sure.

I could see these exact same proposals coming from Governor McAuliffe – even calling a tax a “fee” to somehow make the tax seem less onerous. I think most are tired of these word games, played over and over again by people like the Governor.

Brian – As President of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, I can assure you that you would not get endorsed again now that we know you are a gun-controlling wolf in sheep’s clothing.

Let’s talk about some of your proposals, shall we?

The $20 fee for a NICS check IS A TAX. And you are raising it on the backs of gun owners. Background checks are a waste of time and effort. They need to be repealed, not made even more onerous.

The terrorism watch list is a secret list, with no way of knowing if someone on the list should be on the list or how to get someone erroneously on the list off. The President could have a field day adding names of political foes onto that list, with no oversight. There’s no such thing as an “expedited appeal” in a federal bureaucracy.

If you repeal the three-day must issue provision, the government can shutdown gun sales forever or for extreme amounts of time. The current law forces them to be efficient. You would be giving them a blank check to do with as they please.

Violence committed with a gun, as opposed to any other kind of weapon, is NOT a public health issue. A public health issue would be to figure out why some people want to kill other people, regardless of the tool they use to do so. Dead is dead, be it by gun, knife, rock, hammer, axe, tire iron, etc. You fix the problem of people wanting to harm innocents and you solve the issue of all violence, including that caused by the misuse of a gun.

“None of CSGV’s prescriptions, save banning guns for the law-abiding, would have stopped him.”

And even that would not stop someone bent on mayhem and murder.

The question to ask is WHY put that item on the sign – what purpose does it have? Why is it a negative: “Concealed handguns are prohibited, unless…” As opposed to a positive: “Concealed and openly carried handguns are welcome (concealed requires a concealed handgun permit or being a police officer).”

Only one reason: to discourage and confused citizens. One of the tv stations asked someone to read the wording and tell them if a person could carry. The person couldn’t tell.

THAT’S the reason for the protest. Government trickery is not a good thing. Yes, another analogy could have been used by me: “Women in dresses are not allowed except as permitted by law.” or “No gays and lesbians, except as permitted by law.” The principle is exactly the same.

Chas – can I put your anti-gun translations in a VA-ALERT?

There were some factual problems with the article.

BTW, we have posted some of the video from that dinner on the VCDL.org site. You might want to watch it. It includes Bruce’s statement (that he made with the blessings of management because so many other patrons were curious about what was going on.

All in all, everyone had a good time and the video will be useful come next legislative season.

Men using real guns just like those won Eric the ability to have his person opinion published in a newspaper. Hopefully he will crack a history book one day and find out that freedom isn’t free and appreciate the lives cut short to give us our freedom from tyranny.

Villainizing a piece of metal is just silly, anyway. Teaching your children to FEAR something, instead of respecting it, is doing a disservice to the child.

If you read the article above, VCDL had no involvement in the walk. I was simply asked for a comment by the reporter.

You can carry either way, Allen. It’s not a ban at all.

You must have an interesting definition of “respect,” Robo. Using your definition of respect, you could have similarly written, “I respect Latinos, but do not wish to be around them.” Truth is you DON’T respect the rights protected by the 2nd Amendment.

Yes – I guess I need to learn how to say exactly the same thing using pure emotion and no logic. That might get through to them.

None of the stores that MDA is claiming ban guns do that. They have all put out basically the same statement (paraphrasing): we prefer you don’t carry, but it you do, it’s OK as we will not hassle you and we will still serve you with a smile.