Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Glockers of the Old Dominion' started by Slinger646, Feb 17, 2007.
I believe you mean reeks of "anti." The cowboys of the VDCL wreaks our public image.
Thanks for the spelling correction. It's one thing to say an organization like the VCDL could use some improvement, but to say that they "wreak" our public image is rediculous. Will no longer comment on your "cowboy" theme as it is beyond words. Reminds me of Saddam.
The "Cowboys" are hurting the public image of gun owners by not breaking the law?
The "Cowboys" are hurting the public image of gun owners by standing their ground and exercising their rights?
The "Cowboys" should wear buttons that say "Im not the NRA, we stand up for gun rights even when not popular."
The theory, by police Lt. Barnes is crap. The VCDL members were obeying the law and were hassled because some "Retired Marine" who "has never seen anything like that in 57 years" didnt like it.
The VCDL does not go "fishing for lawsuits".
But boy oh boy, are they ever "Cowboys" because they exercise their rights.
God bless LEOs. They have a hard job and the laws change very often and there are very many laws to remember anyway, but when a citizen refuses to break the law when instructed to by an LEO, the citizen is not at fault and should not be considered a maverick.
You think they VCDL members where bringing down the image of gun owners by not breaking the law when instructed to do so?
Imagine how it would look if they DID follow the incorrect instructions of the MPD?
Try a head line that reads:
"7 members of local gun rights group arrested for firearms felony"
Yeah, that A LOT better for the image of gun owners.
I have been a proud member of the NRA and the VCDL for a few years now. In that time I have seen the VCDL protest and fight for gun rights and individuals, even if they are not members, all over this state in a professional and intelligent manner that promotes the gun owner community far better than the NRA.
While at the NRA HQ when going through the pistol instructor course I was speaking to one of the NRA-ILA attorneys going through the class as well and the subject of the VCDL came up. He stated that he didnt like them because they were "too extreme". I asked if that was because they fought for every member or person who's rights were infringed or because they dont just pick and choose the popular fight?
I never got a straight answer from him. Shocking I know.
JerseyCitySteve, how exactly did these "Cowboys" damage the image of gun owners?
Good sig line and considering how you conduct yourselves in public darn accurate.
Let me give you some political advice. If a LEO abrogates "your rights," don't argue with the man. Didn't you dad tell you not to argue with the police?
Leave quietly and then go to court. Argue your case in the cool air of the courtroom. The VDCL did great things to change laws and ensure equal application of the law. The Norfolk park situation comes to mind. But in your face open carry is a political loser.
I wish we could poll the other citizens who were at the pizza place that evening. I wonder what they think of the VDCL. I know what Wyatt Earp would think.
My father taught me that an honest and free man should not fear the police. He taught me to stand for what is right, even when it is unpopular. When dealing with the law, be professional and courteous. Do not be afraid.
Have you ever been to a VCDL event? Ever gone out on a group outing or dinner with VCDL members?
We do not swagger around as a group of desperados desperately seeking to scratch an itchy trigger finger.
We are regular citizens. Some of us open carry exclusively, most conceal carry (legally of course). When the law dictates that we can not carry concealed, but do not have to disarm, we follow the law.
We are not a loud or rambunctious group. We dont stare people down or act in a rude fashion. When questioned by regular citizens or LEO's alike, we are professional and courteous. There has never been an incident to my knowledge where a VCDL member has been rude to LEOs or citizens or refused to leave an establishment.
When asked to leave an establishment we do.
According to the accounts and reports, it seems like the LEOs were the aggressors.
Considering this whole incident took place because a customer "had never seen anything like that in 57 years" and felt that it wasnt right is a shame.
And if the VCDL members were such reckless cowboys destroying the image of gun owners by their actions, why were they not arrested?
Im sure at least one of the eight responding officers could have thought up at least one charge to arrest them on.
This is case of honest citizens doing NOTHING WRONG and respectfully refusing to propagate the idea that owning a firearm and carrying one is wrong.
We live in a world where most of the exposure people, non-gun owner and gun owner alike, get regarding firearms are horrible and tragic events.
Gun ownership is often vilified and considered taboo because of people's limited exposure and ignorance. If the VCDL members did get up and leave right away, even though they dont have to, they would have made EVERYONE in there anti gun. You know why? Because they would have seen the cops come in and the members leave without presenting that they were OBEYING THE LAW, all that would have done is make people think Well, they MUST have been wrong. If I were innocent I wouldnt leave.
When VCDL members OC by law and refuse to be bullied they help fight the negative image and force LE agencies to make sure their officers and dispatchers know the law.
You say poll the people in the pizza parlor.
Yes, some might feel the VCDL members are in the wrong.
Yes, some might feel the VCDL members were doing nothing wrong.
Yes, some might side against LEOs automatically.
But, some might become curious and learn about the law.
Regardless, this incident will cause people to become knowledgeable of the law.
Some may become anti gunners and if they do that is a shame.
But, some may come to terms that gun rights and the fight for them isnt about a firearm on your hip or your ability to go duck hunting, but instead it is actually a fight ABOUT CIVIL RIGHTS!
Im a gun owner and have grown up with and loved guns for about as long as I can remember. But it was only after I went to a few VCDL meetings did I realize that the fight for the 2nd Amendment is really a fight about my CIVIL RIGHTS.
The way you are classing us VCDL members and lumping us in a bad light says a lot about you.
Did you think Rosa Parks was a "cowgirl who is uppity" too?
I admit this case is not as extreme as what Mrs. Parks faced, but harassment over civil rights and mistreatment IS harassment and mistreatment. The only thing that varies is the intensity of the incident.
BTW, Wyatt Earp would not have thought a single thing. He would have rolled in, asked a few questions, seen that the law wasnt being broken and left.
He was a man when guns were veiwed exactly for what they are. Tools. Nothing more, nothing less.
In case you missed it the first time I said it, or missed it in the various other places that the details of this incident are posted, I will repost part of what I wrote a couple days ago:
"LE showed up and created a loud and unnecessary confrontation. In the process they confirmed that no laws were being broken and learned that the citizens would not be intimidated. Then, the officers pressured the manager into asking them to leave, presumably to "save face". At that point, they left."
They tried to explain to the officers that their behavior was legal, but the officers refused to listen. (See the second paragraph of page 15 of the FOIA pdf available at http://www.vcdl.org/Tonys/MCPD_FOIA_Response.pdf ) They did not argue, but instead, tried to have an adult conversation. When it became obvious that such a conversation was not possible, they just left.
They were in the restaurant for nearly 45 minutes, and only one person (someone, who by their accent, almost certainly spent the majority of their "57 years" in a state other than VA - otherwise he would have likely seen folks carrying guns prior to this particular night) gave them a second look. As one who openly carries on a regular basis, it is my experience that few people even notice, and of those who do, most don't care. In 10+ years of nearly daily Open Carry I have only had one person make a negative comment.
Rosa Parks didn't argue with the police.
Actually, I was a member of the VDCL. I approved of their early work. I strongly disapprove of the VDCL's in your face public display of firearms.
Speaking of the civil rights movement, the issues were decided in the courts. Public opinion was solidly against the Reverend King and Ms. Parks.
Argue in the courts and not in the Pizza places. Don't forget what started the "Gunfight at the O.K. Corral."
I'm not calling anybody a liar, Heaven forbid. Participants are caught up in the moment. Is there account from a disinterested third party?
OK, I'll bite. If someone waved a magic wand and you, Steve, were president of VCDL (not sure who VDCL is that you were a member of), what would you ask VCDL members to do when dining out at a restaurant that serves alcohol:
A. Leave your gun in the car
B. Just carry *concealed* and keep your mouth shut about it
C. Carry openly if you wish to carry
And, let's say that an incident like the one at Tony's happened. Would you:
A. Tell the gun owners they deserved to be treated badly by the police because they were open carrying. End of story
B. Assuming they left without saying a word, cover their litigation fees in a lawsuit against Manassas
C. Take the matter up with Manassas government
BTW, we just did a mailing to almost 1,000 gun owners in Manassas about this. That should stir the pot a little.
Never argue with LEOs. Courts are for arguing.
I let my membership lapse.
I want to say I like you and your fellow members. We are on the same side, in the sense that MLK and Malcolm X were on the same side. I disapprove of these public displays that lead to arguments with the police. All it takes is one jumpy person loosing his nerve and we'd have another OK Corral.
I assume you choose 'B' for the second question. What was your answer for the FIRST question?
We have 140,000+ CHP holders, many open carrying at restaurants and have been doing so for 10 years, how come now OK Corral yet? We have 30+ every month after VCDL meetings in NoVA. Not a single problem that I have ever heard of. Nobdy fleeing the building in panic, no SWAT teams. Just 30+ people having a good time.
Question #1 is A.
Question #2 is B.
True. Rosa Parks did not argue with the police. She was arrested though for doing NOTHING WRONG and refusing to submit to someone elses will when she had no obligation to.
And you are welcome to your distain for the "in your face public display" methods used by VCDL members and firearm owners who refuse to disarm for some misguided notion by the public at large that carrying a firearm is a bad thing.
But I, along with other members of the VCDL and hopefully all people who carry a firearm for personal protection, will continue to carry within the boundaries of the law and refuse to be intimidated or treated as social pariahs because someone is irrationally uncomfortable.
When I carry open or concealed I am on my best behavior. Do you know why? To help to dispel the incorrect image that when a citizen has a gun that they are bad or that it is against the law.
Only through confronting this wrong public image can we overcome it.
You mean all the protests, sit-ins and boycotts were done "in the courts" as well??
OK - thanks for your candidness, Steve.
I guess that's the biggest gap between us. You don't see a need to be armed 24/7, while I do. I am armed whenever I legally can be. And leaving my gun in the car when I can legally bring it with me is NOT an option for me and many other people.
Open carry in restaurants is not an in-your-face thing for me, but I will take whatever options the law gives me. If someone is 'uncomfortable' with the choice thrust upon me by the General Assembly, too bad.
If we ever repeal the restaurant ban, I'm sure I will be carry concealed most of the time. Until then, I don't make the laws, but I do obey them.
Keep in mind the 57 year old "Marine" apparently was so upset by the event, he and his wife finished their meal and left 45 minutes after observing the VCDL memebers come in and exhibiting their "in your face" attitude by not making a scene and trying to enjoy their meal quietly.
I'll tell you what upsests me. When you ask police on this board. What laws will you enforce? Is every law sacred even if you feel it is morally wrong, and goes against your ideals.
Each time they respond. We don't choose the laws we enforce. We just follow them
Well if they were following them in Manassas they would have never said anything to these men. Because they weren't breaking the law.
What's amazing is if they arrest ticket or talk to you about a paticular behavior then you are breaking the law.
But when they are harrassing you for no reason IE no law breaking on your part. Then your a cowboy, and a rebel looking to push the limits.
This feeds into my idea which is alot of officers have a chip on their shoulder to begin with. Is it smart to argue with them. Probably not because your gonna loose. Shouldn't you be able to discuss an issue with them remain civil and common sense prevail? But that isn't how it seems to go.
"If you fail to exercise a right for fear of losing it, you already have."
The Tony's incident is primarily about abuse of authority, and getting distracted by the Open/Concealed carry debate accomplishes nothing.
A 'gang banger' with a machete can 'walk' into a room.
According to the media, however, a gun-owner in a suit & tie, with a $1,200.00 defensive firearm in a $150.00 holster can't do that.
For some reason we're always reported as 'swaggering' into the room, (whatever that is) with a 'cannon' strapped 'gunslinger style' to our hip.
As for the VCDL being too extreme, isn't that what "Shall Not Be Infringed" (PERIOD - END OF SENTENCE) -- is all about?
VCDL is only as extreme about the 2nd as the media is about the 1st.
My Position: (FWIW) I PREFER to carry concealed, BUT when the law or other circumstances dictate that I carry openly, I am within my rights to do so. The fact that the very sight of my defensive sidearm freaks out the occasional uneducated liberal is their problem and does not abrogate my rights.
I keep an NRA membership even though I believe they have 'compromised' too many times. That's where we came up with the 20,000 or so 'reasonable' (but ineffective) gun laws on the books today.
There can be no compromise on an absolute right and VCDL refuses to do so.
Best and stay safe...
Eggman, I hope to see you and many other VCDL members and non members on here monday.