Click on image to join today!
Posted on 07/04/2004 10:13:00 PM PDT by Stoat
FAIRFAX, VA -- Virginia Right-to-Carry permit holders are no longer subject to the state’s one-gun-a-month restriction, thanks to a law effective July 1. Fifteen additional pro-gun laws go on the books helping to improve the Second Amendment rights of Virginians. All new statutes -- supported by the National Rifle Association (NRA) -- were passed by the Virginia General Assembly and signed by Governor Mark Warner.
"This has been a landmark year for the Second Amendment in the Commonwealth of Virginia," said Chris W. Cox, NRA’s chief lobbyist. "Today Virginia’s law-abiding gun owners have more rights after strong support from the Virginia General Assembly, Governor Warner and citizens across the state."
One positive change to Virginia statute excludes holders of valid Right-to-Carry permits from the limitation of buying only one handgun a month. The law, originally sponsored by Delegate Bill Janis (HB 404), also exempts purchases made by collectors for the purposes of improving their collection.
Other measures, sponsored respectively by Delegate Bob McDonnell and Delegate Scott Lingamfelter (HB 1144 and HB 1302), make needed improvements to the laws governing firearm purchases by removing unnecessary restrictions on residents of the Commonwealth. Four additional statutes strengthen preemption laws and eliminate onerous local firearm ordinances. And, Virginia broadly expanded the number of states whose Right-to-Carry permits it will recognize.
"Not only did 16 pro-gun bills become law, but numerous anti-gun proposals were soundly defeated this legislative session," added Cox. "NRA commends Virginia for taking a giant step forward in protecting our Second Amendment freedom."
Please visit http://nraila.com/CurrentLegislation/Read.aspx?ID=1068-L for a complete list of Virginia’s new firearm laws.
Bang!
I may be late with this as I don't check the NRA site EVERY day (ashamed expression on face) but anyone who is a news junkie and checks lots of sites frequently to keep up on things might be interested in knowing that the NRA now has RSS newsfeeds. You can sign up for them here:
http://www.nraila.org/XML/Default.aspx#RSS
If you aren't familiar with RSS newsfeeds, it's a method of getting news headlines into your inbox (with an email client add-in) or in a 'frequently' free newsreader. It's really convenient because you can scan lots of headlines from numerous news sites in the time it would normally take to go to one web page.
For Outlook users, I'm using an add-in called Newsgator which works perfectly and I love to pieces. You can learn more about it here:
http://www.newsgator.com
If you don't use Outlook, a great FREE newsreader that I really like also is Newsdesk, which you can learn more about here:
http://www.wildgrape.net/
There are lots of other paid and free RSS newsreaders, and if you like to read a lot of news I'd recommend looking into it :-)
With the signing of this, Mark Whiner just launched his next campaign...is he running for Senate in 2006 or 2008?
I can't see, for the life of me, why anyone would need more than one gun a month, unless they were in the gun business. But, unlike the libs, I figure it's none of my business.
No doubt he's running for Big Jawn's seat (which he expects to be vacant) in 2006.
No, John Warner isn't up again until 2008. Allen is up in 2006.
There have been a number of occasions where I've felt I needed more than one gun per month. Especially when the prices are good!
Saying no one "needs" more than one gun per month is like saying no one really "needs" a four-bedroom, three-bath home on five acres of land.
That means he's "gunning" for Allen's seat!
I think a lot of it applies to people who are collectors or who just go on periodic buying binges. It's very easy, for example, to go to a gun show and find more than one pistol that you would like to purchase. You may only do that once a year -- or even less often -- but the old rule would prevent you from doing that.
I used to be somewhat anti-gun, and as a slightly depressive alcoholic, I still don't want loaded firearms around my own house. But I have also decided that the only group of people who are affected by gun laws are those who are willing to obey laws in the first place.
Disarming those people -- or even restricting their purchases -- may save a life or two, but overall, it isn't a good public policy.
If you can figure out some way to get firearms (and especially narcotics) out of the hands of criminals, I'd be all for that.
Thank you for the ping!
Ya gotta learn to think like an oppressive government for the answer to this. Before you know if somebody IS buying more than one gun a month, you have to know the exact extent of his "collection" all the way down to the type, model and serial number of each one in a national database. This is called registration. Speaking as a history teacher, I can tell you that "registration ALWAYS precedes confiscation." They couldn't care less if folks buy one gun a month or more. The goal is to find out who has what and where it is, so they can go pick them up. Mayor Dinkins of New York proved the concept when he registered all the "assault shotguns" right before he confiscated them or forced their removal. The same thing is proving to be the case in California. It was true in 1936 Germany. It was true in communist Russia (my dad saw it there). Heck in the times of Alexander the Great they had sword control! Even that is happening right now in Australia.
The bottom line is that if "they" want to restrict your RIGHT to own a firearm (any kind of non crew-served firearm, even a machinegun) they want your freedom. Freedom is distinguished from liberty in that "freedom" is the condition of being in a "nonSLAVE" situation as opposed to "liberty" which is being able to do as you please.
Wow. Thanks for posting this - I have a VA CCW.
I imagine that there are a lot of things you do that I just can't see but that's not your problem is it?
Re your post #9. Mark Warner played a BIG role in raising taxes unnecessarily in Virginia this year. Unless the votes of the liberals in northern Virginia (those suburbs which could be considered not a part of Virginia but an outpost for immigrants to the state who want to work for Uncle Sam and private companies supplying same) can overcome the votes of the rest of the state, Mark Warner has no prayer of becoming a senator...at least from Virginia.
His signing-off on gun laws is just a cover, easily recognizable as such.
Oh hey, I know that well. I lived thru it. But Warner will continue to lie on his positions and distort the state finances to make himself look good. Don't get me wrong, I think (and pray) that Virginians will see thru this.
But he's gonna try.
Yep...Warner's a hardcore COMMIE...MUD
"I can't see, for the life of me, why anyone would need more than one gun a month, unless they were in the gun business. But, unlike the libs, I figure it's none of my business."
Perhaps it might help to look at it this way. Suppose I told you that you only 'needed' to be free to speak once a month? How about you only 'needed' to go to church once a month? The ability to purchase a gun is a right. Once a month gun limits are a form of rationing rights.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.