VCDL Outcome of Meetings: Winchester, Prince George Cty

[Bob A]

Report from the VCDL President.

Sadly, he was he only one who showed up at the Winchester meeting. You want to keep carrying your firearm? Better show up and say so. You're getting close to Maryland, and that's not a Good Thing.

Yesterday I needed to be in two places at one time. Both Prince George County and the City of Winchester are looking at ordinances that affect gun owners. Here are the results of those two meetings: City of Winchester The City Council got many emails and calls from gun owners on the proposed ordinance change. That was important and those contacts affected the course of the discussion somewhat. However, I'm glad I made the six-hour round trip drive, as I was the only gun owner who showed up at the meeting, which I found disappointing. Luckily the other side wasn't there in force, either: one person spoke in support of the City’s gun bans. The proposed changes to Winchester's gun-ban ordinance would remove the ban on carry at permitted events. It would also make clear City employees have the right to store guns in their vehicles while parked on City property. Those two items VCDL was comfortable with. But the proposed ordinance went further and would redefine the term "firearm" to include pneumatic guns. When I addressed City Council, I told them that redefining the term "firearm" to include pneumatic guns would be like redefining poultry to include cows, which makes no sense. I told them that changing the definition of “firearm” was clearly an attempt to get around the fact that localities cannot ban the carry of pneumatic guns. I told them that change would violate Virginia's Dillon rule and open up the City to another lawsuit. To her credit, the City Attorney agreed with my comments on pneumatic guns and told City Council that the term should be removed from the ordinance. She said they could create a new ordinance that would provide control over the discharge of pneumatic guns at a future date. The city Council members seemed to all be in agreement with removing the language about pneumatic guns. However, there was much disagreement over whether to repeal the language banning guns at permitted events. The City Attorney explained keeping that ban was expensive because of what the City would have to do to make the ban enforceable. Some on the Council agreed that the gun ban at permitted events should be repealed, but the majority wanted to keep the ban. They wanted to come up with some kind of modification to the wording that would make enforcing the ban easier. City Council asked the City Attorney to create language that would say that the prohibited areas are within 50 feet of permitted events. What the City Attorney failed to communicate to City Council was that even with such a modification to the ordinance, an eye-popping number of signs would still have to be posted all over Winchester by law whenever they hold events like their Apple Blossom Festival. City Council's proposed wording would do nothing to eliminate that requirement and is still going to need a huge amount of resources from the city. Meanwhile the City Attorney also told City Council that she thought all the various gun bans that City has are constitutional, while admitting that the ordinance and the enabling state-law might be affected by the Supreme Court ruling in Bruen. That answer will be coming soon, as we are expecting a ruling on the lawsuit against Winchester to come up sometime in August. When asked by one of the City Council members if having a firearm in a residence or business was affected by the ordinance during a permitted event, she said no to both. That is correct for a residence but is clearly wrong for businesses that are open to the public and are either being used by a permitted event OR ARE ADJACENT TO A PERMITTED EVENT. So, a store owner who has a gun in his place of business for self-defense would be in violation of this ordinance if his business was participating in, or was merely adjacent to, a permitted event! In the end, City Council decided to postpone consideration of the proposed ordinance change until their next meeting, when they will have the updated wording drafted by the City Attorney. VCDL, in turn, will be watching what the City does. Prince George County I authorized VCDL Executive Member Leyla Myers to speak on my behalf at the Prince George County Board of Supervisors meeting. She sent me a report after the meeting and I also watched the video of the meeting. Unlike the zero turnout in Winchester, Leyla estimated that there were between 150 to maybe 170 gun-owners present. Eleven people spoke against any further restrictions on firearm discharge and no one spoke in support of having more restrictions. After everyone spoke, the County Attorney made his presentation, which gave the Board various options. The Board decided to take no action at this time, but to continue to watch the situation on firearm discharge in the County. The ad hoc firearms committee that presented the options for regulating discharge to the Board is to be kept alive for looking into other possible solutions over time. There is no doubt in my mind that the large turnout and activism from gun owners in Prince George County made a major difference. A Board member made the comment that this had become a bigger issue than they planned. Well, if government goes after our gun rights, they are touching the "third rail" and VCDL will make sure that third rail is fully energized. ;-)