RoadDawg
Nos nostraque Deo
- Dec 6, 2010
- 94,381
It would actually make AntiFA training a felony. Because they actually DO train for exactly what this bill proposes to outlaw.
So maybe they didn’t think it through.
Virginia senate bill 64...
- Thread starter Muleskinner
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast
Member Benefits:
No ad networks! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
It would actually make AntiFA training a felony. Because they actually DO train for exactly what this bill proposes to outlaw.
So maybe they didn’t think it through.
RoadDawg
Nos nostraque Deo
- Dec 6, 2010
- 94,381
"All laws are subject to abuse, pretty much at the whim of those in charge." ergo, there should be no laws
I am sorry that you are offended but this does not "make any and all firearms training" a felony as it states in the OP.
The only real plausible claim presented in this thread is that it could be used to shut down open carry rallies. To know whether that is possible, one would have to know VA case law on "intimidation." Also, you have to convince 12 people and a judge that you intended to intimidate people.
And claiming that an open carry rally is “intended for the purpose of intimidation”... is ridiculous.
No person should ever be intimidated by a group of honest citizens who are exercising their COTUS rights to KABA.
The purpose of the rally is education. NOT intimidation.
RoadDawg
Nos nostraque Deo
- Dec 6, 2010
- 94,381
A[Maryland]Farmer;5712531 said:
It’s a gun “site”. And folks aren’t making excuses... or explain anything away. They’re trying to help folks understand the truth about the topic so that no one finds themselves spreading false information from alarmists.
We must be careful when band wagons come by... so we don’t jump into the wrong ones and end up going down a road that harms our cause.
kingfish
Active Member
- Jan 15, 2008
- 785
What you emphasized in bold is subjective. It can be interpreted in such a manner that one in power can prosecute their political enemies. Can civil disorder be construed as merely shouting at a rally? It can be used to stifle the 1st amendment or become another red flag type law
RoadDawg
Nos nostraque Deo
- Dec 6, 2010
- 94,381
Civil disorder is not subjective. Certain elements of any reported “crime”... including civil disorder... are defined in law. If the elements don’t exist... then the crime does not exist. Claims can be made. But, the claims must be supported in court with evidence. The bill... as written... requires that intent be shown as an element of the action.
The state is therefore required to prove that the parties engaged in the training... intended and were aware of the intention to train for committing an act of civil unrest.
Simply training at a gun range to shoot... or participating in re-enactments... or playing war on a paintball field... would not be sufficient to bring the charge.
And... if the state can prove with evidence... that the parties conspired to train for any civil unrest event... then the conspiracy alone would be enough to bring charges against the parties involved. Conspiracy to commit crimes is already a felony offense.
pcfixer
Ultimate Member
We can discuss ways in which civil unrest violations can occur, including the federal statute prohibiting such activity and any possible penalties. We will also look at a recent and unusual example of what the government deemed "civil disorder" when a man brought firearms to a courthouse, and where you can go if you are charged with a violation of this crime against the government.
Civil Disorder Defined
The federal law against civil disorder can be found at 18 U.S.C. § 231 and can be violated in three distinct ways:
Teaching or demonstrating to any other person the use, application, or making of any firearm or explosive or incendiary device, or technique capable of causing injury or death to persons, knowing or having reason to know or intending that the same will be unlawfully employed for use in, or in furtherance of, a civil disorder which may in any way or degree obstruct, delay, or adversely affect commerce or the movement of any article or commodity in commerce or the conduct or performance of any federally protected function;
Transporting or manufacturing for transportation in commerce any firearm, or explosive or incendiary device, knowing or having reason to know or intending that the same will be used unlawfully in furtherance of a civil disorder; or
Committing or attempting to commit any act to obstruct, impede, or interfere with any fireman or law enforcement officer lawfully engaged in the lawful performance of his official duties incident to and during the commission of a civil disorder which in any way or degree obstructs, delays, or adversely affects commerce or the movement of any article or commodity in commerce or the conduct or performance of any federally protected function.
If a person in convicted under this statute, they face up to five years in federal prison and/or a hefty fine.
Example of Civil Disorder at a Courthouse
Riots and protests aren’t the only place we've seen this law in action. In 2011, Darren Huff, believing President Obama was in violation of treason laws due to an unsubstantiated allegation that the president wasn't a natural born citizen, was convicted of carrying a firearm with the intent that it be used unlawfully in furtherance of civil disorder.
Huff admitted to devising a plot to go to the a Tennessee courthouse and "take over" the city by executing a citizen's arrest "warrant" for President Obama and several other government officials. He was planning to do this while armed with a loaded Colt .45, an AK-47, and 300 rounds of ammunition. While Huff did meet up with other like-minded individuals near the courthouse, he ended up returning to his home in Georgia after being unable to garner enough support from those in attendance. Huff was later arrested on a federal warrant and sentenced to prison.
Civil Disorder Defined
The federal law against civil disorder can be found at 18 U.S.C. § 231 and can be violated in three distinct ways:
Teaching or demonstrating to any other person the use, application, or making of any firearm or explosive or incendiary device, or technique capable of causing injury or death to persons, knowing or having reason to know or intending that the same will be unlawfully employed for use in, or in furtherance of, a civil disorder which may in any way or degree obstruct, delay, or adversely affect commerce or the movement of any article or commodity in commerce or the conduct or performance of any federally protected function;
Transporting or manufacturing for transportation in commerce any firearm, or explosive or incendiary device, knowing or having reason to know or intending that the same will be used unlawfully in furtherance of a civil disorder; or
Committing or attempting to commit any act to obstruct, impede, or interfere with any fireman or law enforcement officer lawfully engaged in the lawful performance of his official duties incident to and during the commission of a civil disorder which in any way or degree obstructs, delays, or adversely affects commerce or the movement of any article or commodity in commerce or the conduct or performance of any federally protected function.
If a person in convicted under this statute, they face up to five years in federal prison and/or a hefty fine.
Example of Civil Disorder at a Courthouse
Riots and protests aren’t the only place we've seen this law in action. In 2011, Darren Huff, believing President Obama was in violation of treason laws due to an unsubstantiated allegation that the president wasn't a natural born citizen, was convicted of carrying a firearm with the intent that it be used unlawfully in furtherance of civil disorder.
Huff admitted to devising a plot to go to the a Tennessee courthouse and "take over" the city by executing a citizen's arrest "warrant" for President Obama and several other government officials. He was planning to do this while armed with a loaded Colt .45, an AK-47, and 300 rounds of ammunition. While Huff did meet up with other like-minded individuals near the courthouse, he ended up returning to his home in Georgia after being unable to garner enough support from those in attendance. Huff was later arrested on a federal warrant and sentenced to prison.
Lawyers have taken over to the point they have their own language. What other occupation has so much job security .. and can create more with new laws that we need lawyers to decipher. If someone wants to give me shit about this thought, write it in "American" LOL.
PowPow
Where's the beef?
King George III would be quite proud of the new Virginia legislature.
This reminds me of Trumps inauguration......
“ Committing or attempting to commit any act to obstruct, impede, or interfere with any fireman or law enforcement officer lawfully engaged in the lawful performance of his official duties incident to and during the commission of a civil disorder which in any way or degree obstructs, delays, or adversely affects commerce or the movement of any article or commodity in commerce or the conduct ”
“ Committing or attempting to commit any act to obstruct, impede, or interfere with any fireman or law enforcement officer lawfully engaged in the lawful performance of his official duties incident to and during the commission of a civil disorder which in any way or degree obstructs, delays, or adversely affects commerce or the movement of any article or commodity in commerce or the conduct ”
rob
DINO Extraordinaire
"All laws are subject to abuse, pretty much at the whim of those in charge." ergo, there should be no laws
I am sorry that you are offended but this does not "make any and all firearms training" a felony as it states in the OP.
The only real plausible claim presented in this thread is that it could be used to shut down open carry rallies. To know whether that is possible, one would have to know VA case law on "intimidation." Also, you have to convince 12 people and a judge that you intended to intimidate people.
You do not have to convince anybody. They can shut it down and charge you, forcing you to spend your resources defending your actions. Even if they lose in court, they still win...
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
tall.guy88
Ultimate Member
This is very concerning. The Dems can interpret this law any way they choose. Just look at how Maryland uses its conceal carry laws to deny citizens on a monthly basis. Its all up to interpretation. I am concerned about this. Not being a Virginian Im not sure what I could do. Im busy with a career and family but I hope those Virginians wake up and fight this bill before it becomes law.
tall.guy88
Ultimate Member
Check out the Virginia Citizens Defense Leagues Facebook page. They are organizing and telling others how you can help. Some manufacturers are encouraging using a coupon code "Virginia" when buying a gun this year and a percentage will be donated to the cause of 2A in Va. The dems are looking to replicate any success in Virginia to move gun control to other states.
VCDL Page - Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc.
https://www.facebook.com/VCDL.ORG/?ref=br_rs
VCDL Page - Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc.
https://www.facebook.com/VCDL.ORG/?ref=br_rs
- Feb 12, 2019
- 56
Calm down Francis no one is jumping on a bandwagon.
The hard to swallow pill is, folks refusing to see how this
vaguely worded law will be abused are the reason we've lost so many rights. From Bump stocks are stupid, to no one needs a 30 round magazine, to background checks are that big of an inconvenience, now to this. The people here explaining away these infringements just help perpetuate the infringements.
rcreynolds
Member
- Nov 4, 2015
- 65
Firearms and militia training??? What are they really afraid of?
rcreynolds
Member
- Nov 4, 2015
- 65
But not like say CNN, Bobster?
Here is a link to the video from the Fairfax board meeting last night:
http://video.fairfaxcounty.gov/player/clip/1558?meta_id=49710
Please open this video to make this the most popular session in Fairfax County history!
On a phone, scroll to the very bottom to 4:30 and click "Public Comment."
http://video.fairfaxcounty.gov/player/clip/1558?meta_id=49710
Please open this video to make this the most popular session in Fairfax County history!
On a phone, scroll to the very bottom to 4:30 and click "Public Comment."
Renaissance Man
Member
Don't be Naive
To NOT understand that this law could--and just might--be used to the extreme is naive. The wording is vague enough that the authorities could arrest those they deem to be in violation of the (proposed) law and let the lawyers and court deal with the legality of the arrest. It is obvious that this law would hinder our rights to challenge a tyrannical government. It our duty to establish a military of citizen soldiers as a counterbalance to both Federal and State military forces. Establishing such a military citizen force requires assembling, arming, and training such a force. Think about it. There is no reason for this law to exist, except to create a premise to severely hinder the creation of such a force. I am no fan of extremism Left or Right; however, my question is: why create this law in the first place?
To NOT understand that this law could--and just might--be used to the extreme is naive. The wording is vague enough that the authorities could arrest those they deem to be in violation of the (proposed) law and let the lawyers and court deal with the legality of the arrest. It is obvious that this law would hinder our rights to challenge a tyrannical government. It our duty to establish a military of citizen soldiers as a counterbalance to both Federal and State military forces. Establishing such a military citizen force requires assembling, arming, and training such a force. Think about it. There is no reason for this law to exist, except to create a premise to severely hinder the creation of such a force. I am no fan of extremism Left or Right; however, my question is: why create this law in the first place?
clint west
Member
proving intent
so next parade that police participate in, could black lives matter prove intent because they hold a patent on feeling intimidated by police?
I didn't see an exemption for the government in the law. perhaps there is an implied assumption in some other statute that only goverment should have weapons
so next parade that police participate in, could black lives matter prove intent because they hold a patent on feeling intimidated by police?
I didn't see an exemption for the government in the law. perhaps there is an implied assumption in some other statute that only goverment should have weapons
