Into the Gulf

A pro-Second Amendment group calling for more gun restrictions prepares to lobby a statehouse where gun rights prevail

by

by

Comments (22)

Comment Feed

Stop Conflating Gun Regulation with Banning Guns

I get really tired of hearing that those who want reasonable gun regulation such as Moms Demand Action are anti-2A and want to grab guns. I really wish gunthusiasts would get their historical facts straight. At the time the 2A was being drafted, personal gun ownership was assumed. Everyone had a gun. AND GUN REGULATION WAS UBIQUITOUS. Boston prohibited having a loaded gun in one's home. Other cities required that guns be stored in an armory. And so on and so on. Even the 2008 Heller case that, for the first time in 200 years of precedent and history separated the 1st and 2nd clauses of the 2A to find an individual right to bear arms, dealt only with hand guns and specifically acknowledged that guns can be regulated without violating the 2A. Many members of Moms are themselves gun owners. Attacking them as gun grabbers is to conflate the desire to reasonable gun regulation with attempts to ban guns. Nothing could be further from the truth. We regulate everything from cribs to cars and yet there are many who resist regulating the one thing that is designed to kill: guns. Doesn't make sense to me.

Shela Dean 320 days ago

On Universal Background Checks In Virginia

Every time that I read the Constitution, I see nothing about the sale of arms not being infringed. But perhaps, ironically, I am interpreting it literally.
Beyond the Constitutionality of UBCs, they are effective. Since UBCs were enacted in Colorado and Connecticut, both of their homicide rates have dropped. By contrast, when Missouri dropped mandatory background checks, their homicide rate has went through the roof.
Yes, folks, UBCs are Constitutional and effective. But are they necessary? Well, that depends. How much is the life of an American worth to you? I cannot speak for everyone, but to me, it is worth a whole lot more than the price of a bullet.

Jonathan Romans 321 days ago

Burning bridges and compromise?

These groups worked with the VAG Mark herring for over a year to damage repricosity of CHP permits, in a bypass move of the General Assembly, because they know it would not pass.
A bridge burned.
It's common sense to attack the most permitted, vetted and checked gun owners, right? I've never been to a lobby day. I've never been politically active. The attack on my CHP changed that. I am bringing myself, my CHP holding wife, and two friends who are CHP holders who have never been to Lobby Day, or active, on Monday. Thats +4 activists alone in my very small circle that were angered / created out of the latest attacks on the 2A, and CHP holders. I filled my car easily. That's a microcosm. How many more on a larger scale were created with these well planned, end around legislation assaults on law abiding people? People who just wanted to be left alone.

These people have awakened many, non partisan, non political types. If you wanted 'compromise' you shouldn't have gone after those of us on the high ground, good law abiding CHP holders. Your bridges are now burned. Those of us whom may have supported ''conditional - as in access for everyone to NICS) universal background checks' will now no longer give you an inch of consideration.

And yet again, the divide grows.

Mark Thompson 326 days ago

Anti-gun folks have more group names then members

It is funny how each anti-gun spokesperson claims to represent a different group or in some like Lori Hass - multiple groups. I suppose when you have little grassroots support you need to fake it.

Paul Moog 326 days ago

"Common-sense" regulations

Not a single one of the "commonsense" regulations that have been proposed in my 10 years of watching the Virginia General Assembly would have done a single thing to stop any shooting that has happened in the Commonwealth.

That seems contrary to the concept of "common sense".

For example - they don't want to ban my handgun -- only the sale of magazines that fit it. Playing with semantics and technicalities seems the only way these groups can sell their ludicrous infringements on freedom. That, too seems contrary to the concept of "common sense".

These are not pro-anything stances:
- Opposed to permitted carry of a handgun on a college campus
- Opposed to allowing for sale magazines designed to fit the handgun
- Opposed to allowing people to spend their money as they see fit

Tess Ailshire 326 days ago

Really?

These are NOT pro-Second Amendment groups. If you work to limit Second Amendment freedoms at every turn, that is the classic definition of anti-Second Amendment. The characterization of these groups as pro-Second Amendment is quintessentially Orwellian. So please tell us, how would you characterize actual pro- second Amendment groups like the NRA, GOA, and VCDL. Let me guess, terrorists, right?

Alan Rose 326 days ago

Yes, Really

Until you've been a member of a group such as Moms Demand Action, you have no idea what they stand for. As an actual member, I can assure you that all we want is reasonable gun regulation. Many of the members of Moms are themselves gun owners. Would it surprise you to know that at the time the 2A was being written, gun regulation was ubiquitous? E.g., it was illegal to have a loaded gun in your home in Boston. Other cities required that guns be stored in an armory. Study your history and then talk to me about 2A rights. Even the 2008 Heller case, which departed from 200 years of legal precedent and history to for the FIRST time ever separate the first and second clauses of he 2A, held that the regulation of guns was permissible under the 2A. Get your facts straight.

Shela Dean 320 days ago

Nonsense

The idea that MDA supports the 2nd Amendment is preposterous on its face. Has MDA ever sponsored legislation that could be considered pro-gun rights? If the answer is no (and it is) then it is by definition NOT a pro-2nd Amendment group. Saying it is doesn't make it so and nobody on either side of the debate is fooled.

Charles Lathrop 326 days ago

Not Nonsense

Until you've been a member of a group such as Moms Demand Action, you have no idea what they stand for. As an actual member, I can assure you that all we want is reasonable gun regulation. Many of the members of Moms are themselves gun owners. Would it surprise you to know that at the time the 2A was being written, gun regulation was ubiquitous? E.g., it was illegal to have a loaded gun in your home in Boston. Other cities required that guns be stored in an armory. Study your history and then talk to me about 2A rights. Even the 2008 Heller case, which departed from 200 years of legal precedent and history to for the FIRST time ever separate the first and second clauses of he 2A, held that the regulation of guns was permissible under the 2A. Get your facts straight.

Shela Dean 320 days ago

GUNSENSE

Mr. Lathrop, Guns do not have Rights -- they are an "inanimate object", aren't they? People, conversely, DO have rights. To Live. To Worship. To Assemble. To unfairly infringe on the general public's sense of well-being due to your own fears of ISIS (or whatever the case may be) has nothing to do with "GUN-RIGHTS", but your own selfishness. We support legislation that puts the lives of families ahead of the firearm rights of dangerous people. Our stance protects the Second Amendment, yours allows felons, terrorists, abusers and those under protective order access to weapons. Try again.

Gena Reeder 320 days ago

Gun-violence prevention

Thorough article on an impt topic for Moms! It was stunning to go to a Va House subcommittee meeting at the Capitol last winter and watch GOP House members kill bill after common-sense gun bill. Crazy 73zmthing is it was a subcommittee on Public Safety.

One bill killed would have prohibited signs at Va gun shows that read: No background checks in this line.

Another bill killed would have not allowed convicted domestic abusers with protective orders to possess guns. (Come on -THIS BILL GOT KILLED!)

GOP House members articulated that the best way to deal w/ domestic abusers is for the victim to get a pretty pink gun. I guess they expect victims to sleep w/ one eye open waiting for an attack and if kids caught in crossfire (duel) so be it.

At any rate-Join Moms and come to the Capitol this session and laugh and cry at the crazy bills the pro-gun folks introduce and watch a lotta common-sense bills get killed.

We need your voice.

Susan Ahern 330 days ago

Regarding bills that 'got killed'

Convicted domestic abusers, and people who are subject to a protective order, are already barred from purchasing firearms by Federal law. Passing the law at the state level would no effect on people legally purchasing firearms, and would do nothing to prevent such people from illegally obtaining firearms.

I have never seen a sign stating 'No background checks in this line' at any gun show. Any suggestions as to where I might find one? I am sure the ATF would be VERY interested in any dealer with such a sign, as that dealer is blatantly violating the law.

Judy 326 days ago

domestic abusers

do not need to turn in weapons they already own.

anononononon 320 days ago

Background Checks and Shows

By law, if you are a dealer, a background check is required. It doesn't matter if it's at a gun show or a shop or anywhere else. If you are selling guns, as a business (the law is clear on what is and what is not a business), you have to do a background check. If we are to have a discussion on the topic, let's be accurate.

Charlie Kilo 326 days ago

Gun violence prevention

Thank you Richmond magazine for such a well balanced article. It is vital for Americans from all walks of life to take an active role in reducing gun violence. I'm glad to see just such a group featured.

Karen Peters 330 days ago

Well balanced?

This "article" (read "propaganda piece") is about as "well balanced" as a teter toter with a pile of anvils on one side and a cotton ball on the other.
At least it, and your comment are good for a laugh.

CoreyR 326 days ago

Gun violence prevention

Thank you Richmond magazine for such a well balanced article. It is vital for Americans from all walks of life to take an active role in reducing gun violence. I'm glad to see just such a group featured.

Karen Peters 330 days ago

Well-balanced?

I only saw information coming from one direction. And that's well balanced to you?

Philip Van Cleave 326 days ago

Excellence in journalism

Impressed by the facts in the article. Moms Demand Action is a research-based group with reasonable safety requests for gun owners (many of whom are members). Keep up the good work!

Dana 330 days ago

Gun violence prevention laws

MOMS Demand Action supports the 2nd amendment, but we think our legislators can do A LOT more to protect the citizens of Virginia and the country. Start with universal background checks. This is a well written and thorough explanation of our message. See you in Richmond!

Doris Evens 330 days ago

Love these ladies

What wonderful activists, so refreshing to see such kind, even keeled folks finding a very middle of the road, balanced solution. I'll be joining them at the legislature

Catherine 330 days ago

Gun violence prevention

Excellent article by Tina Griego. Yep, there is plenty of room to support the right to own a gun AND reducing the number of deaths from firearms in Virginia. Well-said!2

Mary Huber 330 days ago