Senate Committee Disposes of Sunday Hunting Bill

The Senate Agriculture, Conservation and Natural Resources Committee met this morning and heard SB850, Senator Chap Petersen's legislation to allow hunting on Sunday.  Unfortunately, the committee voted 13-2 to kill the bill.  Only Senator's Petersen and Marsden, both from Northern Virginia, voted to report the bill.    Speaking in favor of the bill were DGIF Board Member Jimmy Hazel; Jake McGuigan, Director, Government Relations, National Shooting Sports Foundation, Virginia's Secretary of Natural Resources Doug Domenech, NRA's manager of hunting policy Daren LaSorte.  VSSA also registered it's support.  Both NSSF and the Governor's office talked about the economic benefits that allowing Sunday Hunting would have on the Commonwealth.

Speaking against the bill were The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), various individuals from around the Commonwealth, the Virginia Farm Bureau, the Virginia Horse Council, Virginia Foxhound Association, and Kirby Burch with the Virginia Hunting Dog Alliance.  HSUS tried to proponent's economic benefit argument by saying "Bird Watchers are also an economic benefit.  The Farm Bureau representative said that wildlife and livestock should have one day of rest during the hunting season.  Mr. Burch expressed a concern that if the bill were approved, it would began the erosion process against hunting.  He was likely referring to another assault agains hunting with hounds that was undertaken in 2009.

The issue is dead for this session but the momentum that was gained through the positive press from around the Commonwealth the last three weeks likely means the effort will continue to gain support.  There are legitimate concerns that have been expressed by landowners who have to contend with a handful of hunters that do not show common courtesy when retrieving their hunting dogs.  These are not the majority however and the issue will surely be back at next year's legislative session.

Sunday Hunting to be Heard in Senate Agriculture, Conservation and Natural Resources

Senator Chap Petersen's SB850, repeal of the Sunday Hunting Ban, is on the docket Monday morning in Senate Agriculture, Conservation an Natural Resources.  It is important that if you have not already done so, that you contact members of the committee by email and urge them to support the bill. Governor McDonnell is supporting the bill, mainly because of the positive economic impact that allowing Sunday Hunting will have in Virginia.

Based on the current vote count, the main opposition to the bill is coming from rural legislators, both Democrat and Republican.  Below is a list of committee members that you should focus on when send your email asking them to support the bill.

Hanger, Watkins, Reynolds, Puckett, Ruff, Blevins, Obenshain, McDougle, Northam, Stuart, Marsden

After letting committee members know how the bill may increase your opportunities to hunt, you should focus you comments on the positive impact that the bill will have on Virginia's economy.  Specifically:

• An economic impact report released by the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) has found that allowing Sunday hunting would result in the creation of an estimated 4,000 new Virginia jobs. The report also notes that these jobs would pay more than $105 million in wages and contribute approximately $300 million in additional economic activity to the commonwealth.

• The NSSF report also notes that these jobs would pay more than $730 million in wages and contribute approximately $2.2 billion in additional economic activity to those states.

• According to the DGIF 2006 survey of hunters, over three-quarters (77.5%) of responding hunters believed that Sunday hunting would increase the amount of time to hunt and 63% said it would increase “opportunities for hunters to try new places to hunt in Virginia.” This could mean increased revenues for hotels and restaurants if hunters travel more to hunt new locations.

• Allowing hunting on Sundays would likely increase hunting license sales, and increase sales for sporting goods stores, guides, restaurants, gas stations, taxidermists, meat processors and others. It's popular with a majority of sportsmen and would have no impact on resource management.

If you can attend the committee meeting, it will be begin at 9:00AM in Senate Room B in the General Assembly Building behind the Capitol on the corner of 9th and Broad Streets in Richmond.  We need a large turnout for this meeting to show that hunters overwhelmingly support repeal of the Sunday Hunting Ban.  

Results of Tonight's Militia, Police and Public Safety Subcommittee 1 Meeting

Below are the results of tonight's Milita, Police, and Public Safety Subcommittee 1 meeting:

Bills that VSSA Supports:
HB1411 Reckless handling of firearms; revocation of hunting license - Reported 3-0 with amendement, 2 not voting
HB1552 Concealed handgun permits; amends language relating to issuance of de facto permits -  Reported 3-0 with 2 not voting
HB1699 Restoration of firearms rights; requires audio tape or recording be made of hearing - Reported 4-0 with amendment, 1 not voting
HB1856 Concealed handgun permits; holder may obtain replacement for lost or destroyed permits -Reported 4-0, 1 not voting
HB1857 Firearms; documentation of residence for certain military members - Reported 4-0, 1 not voting
HB 2386 Concealed weapons permit; authorizes person to obtain permit to carry any lawfully possessed weapon - Passed by with letter on a voice vote

Bills that VSSA opposes:
HB1600 Libraries; locality may adopt an ordinance that prohibits firearms, etc., on premises - No action taken this meeting.
HB1813 Handguns; prohibits possession of firearm in Capitol and General Assembly Building - Passed by indefinately (PBI)
HB2005 Firearms shows; promoter shall display materials developed by State Police at entrance - No action taken this meeting.

The bills reported out will now go to the full committee and could possibly be heard tomorrow.

House Militia and Police Subcommittee #1 to Hear Gun Bills at 5:00 PM

The House Militia, Police, and Public Safety Committee will meet at 5:00 PM tonight and hear a number of firearm bills.

The following is a of the bills that will be heard that VSSA supports:
HB 1411 Reckless handling of firearms; revocation of hunting license. 
HB 1552 Concealed handgun permits; amends language relating to issuance of de facto permits.
HB 1699 Restoration of firearms rights; requires audio tape or recording be made of hearing.
HB 1856 Concealed handgun permits; holder may obtain replacement for lost or destroyed permits.
HB 1857 Firearms; documentation of residence for certain military members.
HB 2386 Concealed weapons permit; authorizes person to obtain permit to carry any lawfully possessed weapon.
HB 2445 Juvenile information dissemination; info. shall be disseminated to State Police or Attorney General.

Bills that will be heard that VSSA opposes:
HB 1600 Libraries; locality may adopt an ordinance that prohibits firearms, etc., on premises.
HB 1813 Handguns; prohibits possession of firearm in Capitol and General Assembly Building.
HB 2005 Firearms shows; promoter shall display materials developed by State Police at entrance.

VSSA's lobbying team will be at the subcommittee hearing.  Check back later tonight for results of the subcommittee hearing.

Bills Seek to End Sunday Hunting Ban

There were articles in state newspapers this weekend and today on the effort to end the ban on Sunday hunting in Virginia.  A hunting blogger in Chesterfield even contacted this blog last week pushing the issue. 

In the Senate SB850, sponsored by State Senator Chap Petersen, would allow unrestricted hunting on Sundays.  The bill in the House of Delegates, HB2443, would allow hunting with bows, including crossbows, on Sunday.   In the past, the issue has never made it out of committee.  But according to a 2006 survey of hunters by the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (DGIF) a majority of hunters support ability to hunt on Sunday.  This is much different than the survey conducted by DGIF in 1997 which should a majority opposed to repealing the ban. 

The hunting community is not of one mind on the subject as the clip from a recent WTKR news story illustrates:
 
There are several reasons however for supporting the option to hunt on Sunday.  First, in tough economic times, many people are working two jobs to make ends meet.  The option to hunt on Sunday provides an opportunity for those who cannot get out any other day of the week.  Second, family responsibilities also may make it harder to get out on a Saturday.  Anyone with children knows that extracurricular activities on Saturdays can run most of the day, whether it is football, cheering, or soccer.  Even some of these activities are taking place on Sunday now.  Having the option to hunt on Sunday means one would no longer have to choose between attending our children's activities and hunting.

But there are also important reasons related to continuing our hunting heritage to support the option of Sunday hunting.  DGIF numbers show that the number of hunting licenses issued annually is half what it was in 1974. Further, DGIF says hunting licenses are down 1 percent to 2 percent every year.  The number of licenses purchased in 2010 decreased 3.3% from 2009, going from 253,425 in  to 245,185 in 2010. As the number of hunters decrease, DGIF looks to find other ways to make up the lost revenue - i.e. increased hunting fees.  This has the effect however of pricing more hunters out of the sport.  If a hunter decides to hunt deer during the early muzzleloader season, it now costs $54.  That's $18 for the state resident hunting license, $18 for the muzzleloader license, and $18 for the big game tag. 

When they raise fees, DGIF doesn't just raise them on the resident hunting license, they go up on all three.  So, if the current increase of $5.00 that DGIF is seeking is approved by the Board, that same hunter will now pay almost $70 to hunt deer.  In these tough times, that may be enough for some to not go afield.  If we still had the 250,00 hunters that hunted in 1974 but that no longer hunt, in our ranks, these fee increases would not be necessary.

Further, it is increasing difficult to find a place to hunt as farmland is turned into subdivisions and strip malls.  I used to hunt 15 minutes from where I lived as a teenager.  Now I drive almost an hour because the land where I used to hunt in 1974 is now occupied by a major housing development.

We should be looking for ways to increase opportunities to hunt, not decrease them.  With the numbers not moving in the right direction, Sunday hunting may be one way to help reverse the decline.  The General Assembly should give hunters the choice of choosing whether or not to hunt on Sunday.  Currently, they don't have that choice.

Ammunition Magazines Get Attention in Virginia

On the last day to introduce legislation for this session of the General Assembly, Delegate Betsy Carr introduced HB2524, a ban on "firearms magazine designed to hold 20 or more rounds of ammunition."  On Sunday, the Washington Post ran an article claiming that since the expiration of the Clinton Gun Ban, the number of firearms with high-capacity magazines seized by Virginia police "has rebounded sharply."

Last year in Virginia, guns with high-capacity magazines amounted to 22 percent of the weapons recovered and reported by police. In 2004, when the ban expired, the rate had reached a low of 10 percent. In each year since then, the rate has gone up.

Christopher Koper, head of the anti-gun Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) told the Post:

Maybe the federal ban was finally starting to make a dent in the market by the time it ended.

But Koper, was quoted by the Washington Times in August of 2004 saying something just the opposite.  Koper conducted a study of the law for the U.S. Department of Justice's National Institute of Justice (NIJ) as a professor at the University of Pennsylvania.

"We cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation's recent drop in gun violence. And, indeed, there has been no discernible reduction in the lethality and injuriousness of gun violence,"

The report was even more definitive:

"It is thus premature to make definitive assessments of the ban's impact on gun violence. Should it be renewed, the ban's effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement." 

All of this "analysis" by the Post was part of the series titled "The Hidden Life of Guns" that the paper ran last October.  With the events of a couple of weeks ago, the data collected by the Washington Post is giving new life to those who wanted to make the link, but had no proof,  that the Clinton Gun Ban reduced crime.

Don't look for HB 2524 to go very far in the Virginia General Assembly.  But don't be surprised to see the national gun ban groups use the Post's propaganda to push President Obama to at least make a push for again banning the sale of large capacity ammunition clips.

It will be interesting to see if Obama continues his "new tone" in his State of the Union address tomorrow night or if he succumbs to pressure from the Brady Campaign and others to use the opportunity to take advantage of the Arizona shootings to push some new gun control measures.

Air Rifle Bill on Senate Local Government Docket Tuesday

State Senator Roscoe Reynolds' SB757 is on the docket for tomorrow's Senate Local Government Committee.  This bill requires that any ordinance which prohibits the shooting of pneumatic guns in certain areas shall have, among its exceptions, an exception to allow the firearm to be discharged on private property with permission of the owner when discharge is conducted with reasonable care to prevent a projectile from crossing the bounds of the property.  This is important regulation as suburban localities continue to add onerous distance restrictions on the discharge of air rifles without considering that ranges can be set up in garages or even in the back yard in a safe manner.  Please contact the following members of the committee and urge them to vote yes on SB757:

 Quayle, Martin, Hanger,  Ruff, Obenshain, Herring, Smith, Marsden, Stanley

Allen to Announce Bid for Former Senate Seat

In what is no suprise to most who follow politics in the Old Dominion, Roll Call Politics reports this morning that former U.S. Senator George Allen will announce in an email to supporters that he is running for his old seat now held by Democrat James Webb. 

His website, GeorgeAllen.com, teased supporters Sunday with the vague banner message, “Stay tuned.” Webb defeated Allen in one of the biggest upsets of 2006, but the incumbent has not declared whether he will run for re-election. Webb told the Washington Post last month that he expects to make a decision by the end of March.

Webb has yet to announce whether he will run for re-election but there is some speculation that he may not run.

Tea Party leader and former Allen staffer Jamie Radtke has already announced that she is running.

News and Advance Pushes for Closing So-called "Gun Show Loophole"

Today's News and Advance has an editorial today titled "Reflecting the Will of the People?" that takes the General Assembly, and specifically the House Militia Police and Public Safety Committee, to task for annually killing legislation that is aimed at closing the non-existant "gun show loophole," using the results of a poll conducted in December by Christopher Newport University (a similar poll was released by CNU during the General Assembly session last year).  The lastest poll claims that 80% of the respondents support background checks on all firearm purchases at gun shows. 

Media General News Service reported recently that a survey of 1,097 Virginians conducted in mid-December found that more than eight out of 10 respondents would favor a law that requires the purchasers of all firearms at gun shows to go through background checks.

That’s more than 80 percent. Usually when you get 80 percent approval on a given proposal, it becomes law. But not in the General Assembly of Virginia.

Who's to blame according to the News and Advance?  You guessed it, legislators influenced by "well-funded lobbying interests" including the NRA.

One way the majority uses the rules against measures that have broad public support is to assign the bill to a committee with the assurance that it will not get out of that committee and that only a few delegates have to vote against the measure to kill it for the session. That is especially true in subcommittees, where only a few delegates can kill the bill.

Last November, the News and Advance's sister Media General publication, the Richmond Times Dispatch, editoralized about the so-called "gun show loophole" after the Washington Post's series "The Hidden Life of Guns" which traced 341 of the guns used in the 511 incidents in which law-enforcement officers have been shot during the past decade. The RTD looked and the numbers provided in the Post series and concluded the following:

There is simply little proof that gun shows provide a significant proportion of the guns used to commit crimes, including homicides.

The RTD concluded that until there is more hard evidence of the connection between guns used in crime and guns sold at gun shows by private sellers, any bills directed at curbing private sales should meet the same fate as they have in the past.  The News & Advance should heed the advice of its sister newspaper.

Knowing What You Can and Can't Do to Protect Property

The Virginian Pilot has a story today about a former Suffolk police officer who used a firearm to, according to the news report, to stop an alleged robbery of personal property.

A week ago today, he'd just come home from the hospital. Shortly before 3 a.m., police said, Duck saw a man trying to load a dog box from Duck's lawn into a pickup.

Duck got his gun, went to the window, and yelled at the man to move to the front of his vehicle. Instead, he jumped into the passenger side of his pickup, and Duck, a retired Suffolk police officer, started shooting, police said.

Charles Duck only wounded the intruder.  But two law professors say Duck may not have been justified in shooting. 

"In Virginia, you do not have the right to use deadly force to merely protect property or to evict that trespasser," said Darryl Brown, a professor at the University of Virginia Law School.

The incident is currently under investigation. According to the law professors interviewed by the Pilot, a citizen is only protected by law in using deadly force if he believes his life in in danger.  Those who worked with Duck in his days as a police officer say he was especially good at sizing up  criminal situation.  We will have to wait and see if he was equally as good in sizing up this one.

Baltimore Sun Should Stick to Analyzing Maryland Legislation

Rob Kasper posted an opinion article today on the Baltimore Sun Editorial Blog Second Opinion that takes the Virginia General Assembly to task for considering legislation that would ban firearms at the State Capitol but continue to allow them elsewhere.  It is clear from Mr. Kasper's post that he knows nothing about Virginia's legislature.

Del. Hope argued that since guns were not permitted in airports, the U.S. Capitol or federal courthouses, they should not be allowed in the Virginia legislature. He said the bill would improve security for lawmakers, their staff members and visitors. But what he considered good for lawmakers, he apparently didn’t see any need to extend to the general public; even if his bill passed (and after the show of arms last week, it probably won’t) it would still leave in place relatively permissive standards for carrying concealed weapons. Interestingly, it comes at the same time that Virginia Gov. Robert F. McDonnell lifted a ban on people openly carrying firearms in state parks.

Just because a bill is sponsered by a legislator does not mean it is being "considered."  If Mr. Kasper knew anything about the General Assembly, he would know Delegate Hope's bill is not likely to even get a hearing in the House Militia, Police and Public Safety Committee.  Further, does Mr. Kasper think that Delegate Hope had any prayer of repealing Virginia's concealed carry statute, enact a law banning openly carrying a firearm (the Code of Virginia is silent on open carry which is why it is legal to do so) or overturn the Supreme Court's McDonald decisions which found the Second Amendment is a fundamental right?

Nor is Kentucky likely to pass the legislation being proposed to ban firearms in their state captiol.  As with U.S. Representatives and U.S. Senators, state legislators are free to propose legislation during their legislative sessions.  It does not mean that the bills have a serious chance of passage.  Look at the number of gun control bills that have been proposed year after year in congress  over the last 15 or so years only to grow mold in committee, never to be heard.

Mr. Kapser should spend his time analyzing legislation in his home state because he clearly does not have any idea of how things work in Virginia.

Action on Air Rifle Bill Postponed

Yesterday, State Senator Roscoe Reynolds, who has sponsored SB757, a bill removing some restrictions on shooting air rifles on private property, asked that the bill be passed by for the day in the Senate Local Government Committee.  Some of the members wanted more time to research issues related to the bill.

SB757 would require localities that have ordinances regulating air rifles (mainly suburban counties), to include an exemption for shooting on private property with permission of the owner when discharge is conducted with reasonable care to prevent a projectile from crossing the property boundary.  Virginia has experienced an increasing problem of localities passing regulations restricting shooting of air rifles within certain distances of other buildings or dwellings without taking into consideration that air rifle ranges can be set up in garages or outdoors in such a way as to insure the BBs or pellets do not cross the property line.

Senator Reynolds request gives gun owners more time to lobby committee members.  Please contact them by phone and email and politely ask them to report SB757.  It will likely be on the docket next Tuesday at 2:00 pm.

The Committee Members are:
Lucas (Chairman), Marsh, Quayle, Martin, Hanger, Ticer, Reynolds, Puller, Ruff, Obenshain, Stanley, Herring, Locke, Smith, Marsden.

You should concentrate your efforts on Senators Quayle, Herring, and Marsden as they are the swing votes on this committee.

Urgent Legislative Alert

The Senate Local Government Committee meets today at 2:00 PM.  On the Docket is S.B. 757,  Senator Roscoe Reynolds bill that would require that any local ordinance which prohibits the shooting of pneumatic guns in certain areas must have among its exceptions, an exception to allow the firearm to be discharged on private property with permission of the owner when discharge is conducted with reasonable care to prevent a projectile from crossing the bounds of the property.  This bill addresses a problem that is spreading throughout the Commonwealth where localities require there be large distances between dwellings or buildings without recognizing that many people can set up an air rifle range in a basement or a garage, or in many cases, a back yard in such a manner as to not cause the likelihood of harm to their neighbors.  Please email the committee members immediately and politely urge them to support this commonsense legislation.

The committee members are:

Lucas (Chairman), Marsh, Quayle, Martin, Hanger, Ticer, Reynolds, Puller, Ruff, Obenshain, Herring, Locke, Smith, Stuart, Marsden

Gun Control Opportunists

Kim Strassel has a great OP/ED in yesterday's Wall Street Journal titled Gun Control Opportunists and she starts out talking about how some politicians just can't resist the urge to use a tragedy for political gain.

Within days of the Arizona tragedy, New York Democratic Rep. Carolyn McCarthy renewed her call for a ban on high-capacity clips and said she'll reintroduce legislation. She's been joined by fellow New York Rep. Peter King, one of the only outspoken Republicans on gun control, who said he wants a new law that would make it a crime to knowingly carry firearms within 1,000 feet of high-ranking officials (which conveniently includes congressmen.) In the Senate, New Jersey Democrat Frank Lautenberg intends to pursue parallel legislation to Ms. McCarthy's on clips that carry more than 10 rounds of ammunition. And New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has piped up, again, in favor of expanding the sort of burdensome restrictions his city places on the Second Amendment to the nation as a whole.

But it's not just the politicians who look to advance an agenda.  We have all come to expect gun control groups like the Brady Campaign to waste no time in sending out email missives within hours of a shooting, in hope of turning tragedy into a political victory.  But unlike the early 90's when gun control still polled relatively well, the country has turned more firmly away from gun-control arguments. Americans have learned that things like bans on large ammunition magazines and semi-automatic rifles only burden the law-abiding, while failing to stop criminals or the mentally ill from obtaining firearms or doing great harm.

More proof that the average American is smarter than politicians or gun control advocates is the CBS News poll taken after the Tucson shootings, showed that most Americans don't believe stricter gun-control laws would have prevented the shooting. The Gallup organization has reported that support for  gun control laws has steadily faded over the past two decades. Far more common this week has been the response of Arizona Rep. Trent Franks, who said he wished there had been "one more gun" in the Tucson mall that day—that one in "the hands of a responsible person" who could have stopped the shooter.  Other congressmen, like North Carolina's Heath Shuler, said he will be carrying more and will encourage his staff to get carry permits if they don't already have them.

It has been reported that the leadership of the House of Representative has not desire to go down the gun control road.

Pima County Sherriff Says Arizona Gun Laws Contributed to Saturday's Shooting

It didn't take long for the usual suspects to begin calling for more gun control in the wake of Saturday's shooting in Arizona.  Law abiding gun owners have come to expect the gun ban lobby to use a tragedy to advance a political agenda.  You can add Pima County Arizona Sheriff Clarence W. Dupnik to the list of those who at least think Arizona's gun laws made it easier for the shooter, Jared Lee Loughner to commit his horrible act.

"We're the Tombstone of the United States of America," Dupnik said, referring to the Arizona town known for its gun-slinging past. "I have never been a proponent of letting everybody in the state carry weapons wherever they are. That's almost where we are."

But the narrative from others talking to the media are focusing more on "heated political rhetoric" instead of gun control.  Secretary of State Hillary Clinton compared the Arizona shootings to the "extremism faced in other countries."  Even the Brady Campaign added a reference to "heated political rhetoric" to their missive on the shooting.

The narrative of those on the left, including the Pima County Sheriff,  goes something like this - the horror could be traced to the influence of American conservatives; members of the Tea Party; right leaning pundits Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck; former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin; and Fox News.  But none of the rantings of the shooter even mention any of them.  Sheriff Dupnik told Fox News' Megyn Kelly that the "vitriol" of the country's harshly polarized political climate was partly to blame, arguing that unbalanced individuals are uniquely "susceptible" to vitriol. Dupnik added:

We see one party trying to block the attempts of another party to make this a better country.

Kelly asked Dupnik if he had any proof that Loughner was "influenced by political vitriol" to which he responded it was his opinion.

Fox News Special Report panel member Charles Krauthammer thought that all of the talk of this being political was irresponsible with there being no evidence that politics played a role in Loughner's actions.



The statists will use anything to try and take away freedom, whether it is our Second Amendment freedom or our right to freedom of political speech. We must be vigilent, and we must not allow them to use the acts of one individual to paint us all with a broad brush.

Fox News has a poll on their Fox Special Report web site asking  visitors whetherthey support increasing gun control.  Take a minute to visit the web page and respond to the poll.

DGIF Seeking Authority to Sell Individual Big Game Licenses

Delegate Tony Wilt has pre-filed a bill that would authorized the Board of Game and Inland fisheries to establish separate licenses to hunt either deer, bear or turkey.  Currently, big game hunters buy one license that include tags for all three at a cost of $18.00.  This is in addition to purchasing a resident hunting license and any special season licenses (archery, muzzleloader) that a hunter may choose.  Under HB1553, if DGIF establishes separate big game licenses, they would no longer sell a combined license for hunting deer, bear and turkey.  The legislation specifies that separate licenses for hunting bear, if established, would cost $25.00.  Licenses for deer or turkey could not exceed the cost of a state hunting license, currently $18.00.

The impact of this legislation could be costly to hunters.  For instance, if an individual wants to hunt the early muzzleloader deer season and then hunt bear and the fall turkey season under current law, he or she pays $54 - $18 for the resident state hunting license, $18 for the resident muzzleloader license, and $18 for the "Big Game Tags" that include tags for all three big game species.  Under HB1553, that same hunter would pay $97 - almost double the current cost.  There would be the $54 listed above ($18 of which would now be just for a deer tag) plus an additional $25 for a separate bear license (as specified in the bill) and $18 for a separate turkey license.

At a time when we are trying to increase the number of hunters, this bill would almost double the cost for a number of hunters.  It should be noted that DGIF is supported almost solely on fees charged for licenses and other sportsmen paid fees.

In related news, DGIF has proposed hunting, fishing, and trapping license fee increases, and the establishment of admittance, parking, or other use fees for certain Department-owned facilities. A public comment period opened December 16, 2010 and closes April 14, 2011.  It is important that sportsmen make their voices heard on this important issue.  Please go to the DGIF web site and post your comments opposing or supporting the proposed changes.

Twisting Words to Make a Point

Virginia Tech shooting survivor and gun control advocate Colin Goddard has an Op/Ed on CNN's web site calling for colleges to remain self-defense free zones.  To his credit, Goddard begins the piece by listing the main failures in the system that allowed Virginia Tech to happen - Tech failed to notify students of the original shootings earlier that morning (previously cited by USDOE as a failure on Tech's part), weaknesses in the mental health system in addressing Cho's problems, and the courts, who failed to appropriately note a judge's ruling that could have prevented Cho from purchasing his firearms.  But, he eventually gets around to what he and his employers at the Brady Campaign view as the real culprit in the mass shooting, and indeed most mass shootings - the lack of background checks on private firearm sales, especially those at gun shows.

Goddard finishes his OP/Ed by pulling a 12 year-old quote from Wayne LaPierre out of context to make his point - that if the head of the NRA says there should be zero-tolarance for guns at schools, then carry on college and university campuses is a bad idea.

The head of the National Rifle Association, Wayne LaPierre, said it well after the Columbine tragedy in 1999: "We believe in absolutely gun-free, zero-tolerance, totally safe schools. That means no guns in America's schools, period ... with the rare exception of law enforcement officers or trained security personnel. We believe America's schools should be as safe as America's airports. You can't talk about, much less take, bombs and guns onto airplanes. Such behavior in our schools should be prosecuted just as certainly as such behavior in our airports is prosecuted."

Never mind that LaPierre was talking about K-12 schools.  College students are adults and most states require concealed carry permit holders to be 21, meaning most students would be juniors or seniors before they would even qualify.  The point is, if a 21 year-old is able to carry concealed if they are anywhere else other than a college campus, then why not allow that same person to do so on campus?

Mike Adams had different message last week over on Townhall.com.  He later talked about his article, Full Metal Yellow Jacket ,with NRANews host Cam Edwards:



Adams' message is, keeping law abiding students disarmed makes them a sitting duck at the mercy of any criminal that they may happen upon.

Texas is currently considering allowing concealed carry on it's college and university campuses. Goddard says proponents of carry on campus have not explained how such a law would be enforced and states that adding carry on campus will complicate how police deal with an active shooter on campus. What Goddard does not say is we have a model for college carry - Utah. There have been no incidents on the campuses in that state. Nor have there been any problems right here in Virginia on the campus of Blue Ridge Community College.

Texas has the votes to pass the legislation and Governor Perry has said he would sign the bill. Arizona may also consider college carry during its legislative session. Bills in Virginia so far have never gotten out of committee. My guess is once we have more states with successful college carry, Virginia may well join the list of those allowing carry on campus.