Virginia gun laws

[EX Carnival man 223]

I noticed the media dropped the story real fast about the men on the right who had permits to carry guns and did. I also noticed in a riot no one got shot. What does that say about law abiding citizens that carry guns? The media asked the police chief if his officers felt threaten by the demonstrators that were armed. His response. NO.   https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/charlottesville-police-chief-defends-officers-police-response-at-violent-rally/2017/08/14/23eff70e-8136-11e7-b359-15a3617c767b_story.html?utm_term=.66b85433af5c

[NJGF 375]

Interesting story and I also had not heard that the demonstrators were armed. The chief also confirmed what the President had said that both groups came at each other armed with sticks, etc.

[EX Carnival man 223]

It seems to be the worlds best kept secret.   

[voyager9 3,434]

And yet the NYT was calling for a ban on Open Carry because "the protesters in VA were armed."

[EX Carnival man 223]

I'm very surprised the NRA or other pro-gun sights haven't picked-up on the fact on one was shot and how the armed people conducted themselves in a riot. 

[voyager9 3,434]

21 minutes ago, EX Carnival man said:

I'm very surprised the NRA or other pro-gun sights haven't picked-up on the fact on one was shot and how the armed people conducted themselves in a riot. 

Nobody in their right mind would jump into this turdy punch bowl unless they were dragged in. 

[jackandjill 683]

52 minutes ago, EX Carnival man said:

I'm very surprised the NRA or other pro-gun sights haven't picked-up on the fact on one was shot and how the armed people conducted themselves in a riot. 

And NRA did the right thing by staying out of this. Unless they want their balls fried in sesame oil

[Mrs. Peel 7,157]

2 hours ago, voyager9 said:

Nobody in their right mind would jump into this turdy punch bowl unless they were dragged in. 

 

1 hour ago, jackandjill said:

And NRA did the right thing by staying out of this. Unless they want their balls fried in sesame oil

Great points! My big concern is that something bad WILL happen during one of these protests... that some armed militia person, losing his temper (or even in justifiable self-defense) shoots a protestor. What a mess that would be! Even if the protestor was antifa with a history of violence, the media would spin them as a saint... a fallen hero! 

In some respects, that might have even more impact than a school shooting. Protestor thinks: "What a minute? You mean, if I show up to a protest in my full riot gear... and hammer away at someone with my bat... he might actually SHOOT me?" That would have a chilling effect on protests, don't you think? And the left certainly won't tolerate that. They want MORE people protesting on the streets, not fewer.

I used to think people who talked about civil war were conspiracy theorists wearing their tinfoil hats too tightly... but now I think: ok, maybe not full-on "war"... but I could certainly imagine some major civil unrest - like the 60's - heading our way.  I just saw a report of the huge number of Confederacy statues vandalized all over the country just in the last day or so. Things are getting a little unhinged already.

[voyager9 3,434]

Civil unrest?  Sure. You saw it in Baltimore and other cities.  They burn out (either literally or figuratively) eventually.  None of them have momentum or national spread. BLM, right or wrong their cause, was the closest and even that wasn't wide spread.  The current scuffle is the same. A small group of assholes pissed of and fought with another group of assholes. The media gets it and fans the flames and "normal" people get pissed and post to Facebook. Until they have to go to work, or pick up the kids or anything else. 

[Mrs. Peel 7,157]

Just now, voyager9 said:

Civil unrest?  Sure. You saw it in Baltimore and other cities.  They burn out (either literally or figuratively) eventually.  None of them have momentum or national spread. BLM, right or wrong their cause, was the closest and even that wasn't wide spread.  The current scuffle is the same. A small group of assholes pissed of and fought with another group of assholes. The media gets it and fans the flames and "normal" people get pissed and post to Facebook. Until they have to go to work, or pick up the kids or anything else. 

I hope you're right, of course!  (I mean, you do have your own column, "Ask Voyager.." so you must be right... ummm, right?)

I've just been really shocked by what people find acceptable these days --- people (even legislators) outright calling for a POTUS to be assassinated...?  This is insane. Actions tend to follow rhetoric. Look at those police assassinations and attempts... no doubt in my mind that sprang from some of the ugly rhetoric at BLM events. That's what worries me. There's a LOT of anger by a LOT of different groups right now. And we've got someone in the role of POTUS who, unfortunately, tends to douse fires with gasoline. Not helpful.

[jackandjill 683]

Lets not forget ONE important thing. MSM will NEVER report anything NRA says in the positive light. NEVER. 

[jackandjill 683]

IF no was hurt or killed, MSM would have picked on the "gun touting" aspect. 

Journalism 101:

1. Pick up the MOST sensationalist aspect of the story.

2. Keep it simple so the unwashed masses can focus on ONE thing you want them to focus. 

3. Profit!

[NJGF 375]

This is much more to this story than we are hearing from most media outlets. I might not like the views of many groups but every group has a right to peacefully march and protest.

The left and the media no longer believe in these true American values. Unfortunately one crazy driver took this to a place he should not have gone and the entire group is being assumed guilty.

The left has been using violence for a long time (think WTO, and during the election). The media and politicians feed the frenzy. I have no idea how far this is going to go but the good thing is that these are still relatively small groups on all sides.So let the Nazi's and BLM and antifa march (with more separation next time) and celebrate the rights that all citizens have in this country (not just the ones we agree with).

[Mrs. Peel 7,157]

Well, I'll be damned... just learned that the ACLU  announced yesterday that they will no longer represent hate groups if they're armed (regardless of whether they're legally armed).

Though I can certainly appreciate people not wanting to legally defend Nazi's (armed or not)... you must keep in mind that the ACLU has never allowed morality to affect their prior decisions on who to defend. They made their choices purely on first amendment arguments, often defending the indefensible. For instance, the ACLU even represented NAMBLA at one point (if you don't recall them, NAMBLA is the North American Man Boy Love Association - it would be difficult to find a more morally reprehensible group than that pack of pedophiles and pederasts). With this new position, it seems to be not the hate that offends the ACLU, but the fact that their newest donors happen to hate guns!  

One could argue that this is a bad development - showing one more not-so-subtle alignment of forces against 2A rights... here's one interesting opinion piece that makes that point nicely:  http://www.nationalreview.com/article/450615/aclu-backs-down-it-will-no-longer-defend-protesters-when-guns-are-involved

[jackandjill 683]

13 minutes ago, Mrs. Peel said:

Well, I'll be damned... just learned that the ACLU  announced yesterday that they will no longer represent hate groups if they're armed (regardless of whether they're legally armed).

....

Thats funny. I wonder what ACLU thinks of legal representation and Due Process for "hate" groups. I like to see ACLU petition to change US Constitution excluding first amendment, due process and few other individual rights to anyone associated with "hate" group. That will be a day. 

I used to donate to ACLU every now and then, due to my feeling of "individual rights" even for scumbags. I guess I rather be investing in firearms with all that money saved. 

ACLU New Motto: We will defend your 1st as long as you give up your 2nd. 

[Old Glock guy 1,127]

It has always amazed me how much the ACLU loves the First Amendment, but hates the Second.

I'm guessing they like #'s 3-10 as well, but they struggle with that pesky Second.