More On The "Bloomberg Gun Giveaway"

We reported the other day, with dismay, on the controversy brewing over a so-called "gun rights" group that plans to give away a couple weapons, including a semi-automatic pistol, and a lot of ammunition this week in Fairfax County to raise money for the legal defense of some gun shops targeted with civil suits by New York City.

It's an interesting, and growing, controversy. The latest is in today's Washington Post, which reports that Fairfax County prosecutors are looking into the possibility that the giveaway is an unlawful lottery.

Ah, lawyers and politics--nothing like it!

Here's some additional thoughts on the matter. First, in a Post story earlier this week, the president of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, Philip Van Cleave, reportedly said "[t]hese guns are going to law-abiding, decent people who won't hurt anyone with them."

We think that would be cold-comfort to the families of Detective Vicki Armel (pictured here) and Officer Michael Gabarino, two Fairfax County police officers gunned down just over a year ago. Their assailant was Michael Kennedy, a mentally disturbed 18-year-old who literally outgunned police with semi-automatic weapons he took from his father.

Now we assume that Brian Kennedy, the gunman's father, was the kind of upstanding citizen, meaning no harm to anyone, that Van Cleave is referring to. Nonetheless, his heavy weapons--hardly necessary for typical hunting--fell into the hands of a deranged family member, resulting in three needless deaths (young Michael Kennedy was finally killed by police in the incident, resulting in a tragedy for the Kennedy family as well).

So, regardless on the Citizens Defense League's intent, Fairfax police and citizens have good reason to be alarmed about their handing out weapons in Fairfax County, especially a semi-automatic handgun. Police ought to stop by the League's meeting and let them know what they think.

A couple other things. Our original post generated a few comments, including from Van Cleave, intimating that New York City's undercover sting operations in Virginia were some kind of "vigilante justice" or (from another commenter) constituted "Bloomberg conspiring with private individuals . . . to violate federal statutes against purchasing firearms by prohibited individuals." (And a less helpful comment calling us an "idiot.")

In the end, a court will have to determine, in the context of a civil lawsuit, whether any gun shop owner acted unlawfully. However, the premise that there is something wrong with having NY conduct a "sting" operation in a Virginia store strikes us as baloney.

First off, New York did not send its own law enforcement officers to Virginia to go after anyone for a criminal violation. That would clearly be a breach of jurisdiction, one we would not support. Any criminal prosecution of a Virginia gun dealer will have to come from Virginia police or federal authorities.

Instead, New York utilized Virginia citizens to gather evidence for a civil lawsuit. They started by identifying gun shops that were the source of the weapons in multiple murders in NYC. They then asked Virginia citizens to cooperate in conducting an operation to see if those gun dealers would make unlawful straw purchase sales (the fear being that straw purchasers are running guns from Virginia to NYC). This is a fairly common technique --the use of private investigators--to gather evidence for civil cases, and there is nothing wrong with it.

If New York was dumping hazardous materials unlawfully in Virginia, and Virginia responded by using investigators from New York to generate evidence for a civil suit here, no one would think that was strange.

But when it comes to guns, there is an element that thinks anything goes. If the NRA and its allies treated cars the way they do guns, no one would need a license; anyone, any age could drive; drunk driving would be ok; cars wouldn't need inspections; they couldn't be taxed; and no one could be sued just because they had an accident driving one.

Personally, we support the right of adults to own firearms. But firearms are dangerous and we support meaningful regulation of firearms, and firearms dealers, just as we do of other dangerous instruments.

Kaine Weighs In On Anti-Bloomberg Gun Law

Yesterday we reported on the dispute between Va. AG Bob McDonnell and New York City regarding NY sting operations aimed at Virginia gun dealers. McDonnell said he would enforce a silly Virginia law that makes it a felony to engage in a sting operation without state police or federal law enforcement authorities present.

We were happy to see that Gov. Kaine--who should have had the spine to veto this special interest legislation that makes his state look like a bunch of redneck gun nuts--has at least said Virginia should take its own steps to enforce its own gun laws. (See Washington Post story here.)

We think Governor Kaine should go further--he should designate a State Police task force to work in COOPERATION with NYC officials to investigate Virginia gun dealers suspected of illegally selling firearms that wind up involved in NYC murders. By the same token, if NY has info concerning laws broken here, it should have someone trustworthy to share that info with.

By the way, that someone is NOT Bob McDonnell. We would be shocked to see McDonnell do anything at all to curb illegal gun sales in Virginia, as he is completely in the hip pocket of the gun dealers and their allies.

What about it Governor Kaine--let's see action, not just words.

Embarrassing Virginia Challenges New York To A Duel

Will Virginia Attorney General Bob McDonnell challenge New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg to a duel? Seems like the right way to work this one out.

It seems that McDonnell has written a letter to Bloomberg threatening legal action if New York City does not cease and desist from conducting "sting" operations at Virginia gun dealers. (See Washington Post story here.)

How embarassing for us progressive Virginians!

All this stems from a series of stings New York conducted awhile back, in which some Virginia gun dealers (picked because firearms from their shops were used repeatedly in NYC murders) illegally sold guns to buyers posing as straw purchasers.

After New York brought legal proceedings against some of the dealers, what did Virginia do? Did it say, "oh my, we ought to be the ones enforcing these guns laws, and shame on you dealers"? Of course not.

Instead, the dealers went to the NRA and other gun groups and got the ever cowardly Virginia legislature to pass a law saying that another state cannot conduct a sting operation in Va. without a Virginia or federal law enforcement official present.

Of course, that's about as useful as requiring that Shi'ite police officers in Iraq accompany US forces on any operation against the Mahdi Army. Somehow, the Mahdi Army just happens to always be tipped off.

To its credit, New York gave Virginia the figurative finger and said "fugheddaboutit". New York shouldn't be intimidated. The law--which sadly a number of Democrats in Va. also voted for, and even more sadly, Gov. Kaine signed--is probably unconstitutional. We'd like to see NY press the issue and force a court confrontation, in which we think McDonnell will be smacked down.

One thing the law does show, however, is that the NRA is not at all serious when it says we don't need more gun control laws, we just need better enforcement of existing laws. BS. The NRA, whose Board of Directors includes at least one gun dealer cited numerous times for unlawful sales, has gone out of its way to protect and immunize gun dealers, rather than work on enforcement. They don't give a darn about safety--all they care about is arming the citizenry to the teeth.

And by the way, to add insult to injury, the Virginia Citizens Defense League (which sounds like a place OK City bomber Timothy McVeigh would have been welcome) is, according to the Post, holding a "Bloomberg Gun Giveaway" in Fairfax County next week--barely a year past the tragedy at the Sully police station that took two police officers' lives--to give away "a handgun, a long gun, lots of ammunition, and other prizes.

Wouldn't it be nice if Fairfax police officers turned out in force at this event to protest the obvious insult to their comrades' deaths? (It's next Thursday, 7:30 pm, at the Mason Government Center in Annandale.)

Fix Virginia's Insane Gun Laws

It never surprises us just how strident the NRA is, but maybe, just maybe, they can agree that handguns shouldn't be sold to persons legally judged to be a danger to themselves or others, such as Virginia Tech shooter Seung-Hoi Cho.

Federal law in fact does prohibit sale of a handgun to someone judged to be a danger to himself or others, but unfortunately, the feds rely on the states to provide that information to the national database. Virginia, in turn, only provides that info to the database on patients involuntarily committed to a mental hospital.

Cho was never committed. But a judge did order him to undergo outpatient treatment, which, in many other states would have been enough to put his name into the database.

Virginia should fix this loophole on its own. But if it doesn't, Congress should override and set clear standards for the states. Perhaps the NRA could assist?

Meanwhile, we're also learning that Cho used 33-round clips of ammunition that would've been barred under a federal law that expired after Bush took over. And, he used hollow point rounds, which inflict greater damage, and thus account for many of the horrific wounds doctors had to treat last week in those students who were injured.

You certainly won't find the NRA supporting any restrictions on clip size or types of ammunition. We guess hunters need those huge semi-automatic clips just in case a herd of wild deer charge them, and they must like blowing out the insides of animals with hollow points--all the more of an excuse not to have to actually eat them.

We've also noted some of the gun nuts saying the real problem was that Virginia Tech students and faculty needed to be armed, so they could fight back. This is such a stupid argument we won't even begin to get into it. However, we will note that two armed police officers in Fairfax County were murdered last year by a deranged young man--also mentally ill, like Cho--who simply had them outgunned with his heavy NRA-sanctioned weaponry.

Virginia Tech Tragedy

The news is numbing: one student, armed with pistols easily purchased anywhere in gun-happy Virginia, killed and injured more people, mostly young, on the Virginia Tech campus than a typical car-bomber in Iraq.

Our hearts go out to the victims' families and friends in this awful tragedy. We hope for comfort and healing to the injured who managed to survive. We await with trepidation for the names of the dead from our region, wondering if anyone we know will be touched by the loss of a loved one.

We now know that the killer was a Virginia Tech student, a senior in the English department. What motivated him to go on such a rampage? Why is it in our violent culture that people who are affronted--perhaps by a lover's jilt, or a worker's snub--feel compelled to take their revenge on randomly selected innocent victims?

Imagine if this happened every day. What a horror--and yet that is precisely the case in Iraq, a country with one-twelfth the population of the U.S.

What of the enablers--the gun fanatics who insist that there should be no regulation of firearms. The VPI killer was armed with a 9 mm pistol. At one time, federal law limited the size of the ammunition clip one could use with a 9 mm, but that law expired with the Bush/Cheney regime. Yet, the Enabler in Chief plans to attend the memorial service today at VPI. Will he evince a change of heart? Will he say this incident has forced him to look into his soul, to summon the willpower to stand up to the heartless lobbyists of the NRA, who insist that hunters need the leeway to shoot prairie dogs with automatic weapons?

There is no use for a 9 mm pistol other than to kill people. This is a large caliber weapon, and it shows in the Tech tragedy, where doctors have described as "horrific" the wounds they treated on those fortunate enough to survive the shootings.

It wasn't that long ago that Virginia was in the national eye for another shooting tragedy, when a mentally unstable young man in Fairfax County used semi-automatic weapons to outgun police officers, killing two.

Will this latest incident prompt any reconsideration in the Virginia legislature, any thought that maybe Virginia shouldn't be one of the easiest places in the U.S. to purchase just about any kind of firearm one pleases? Firearms that have nothing to do with legitimate hunting and everything to do with murder?

The tragedies pile up; the politicians mouth their hollow condolences. But nothing changes.

For the grieving families, their is no comfort. The lost children could've been ours. We shed our tears with you.

Right Wing Judicial Activism: Heinous Gun Decision In D.C. Circuit Court

Talk about judicial activism! The right wingers on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals have tossed out the District's 30 year old ban on handguns, asserting that the Second Amendment provides an inviolable individual right to own a handgun.

This case is certainly headed for a major confrontation in the Supreme Court.

Unfortunately, the District says it will first seek en banc review by the entire D.C. Circuit, which will only delay the inevitable Supreme Court battle by several months to a year. We say, skip that review, which is not mandated before a petition to the Supreme Court.

Instead, get this case going so that it is argued in the high court in 2008 during the midst of a wide open presidential campaign. We want the voters to see the arrogance of the National Rifle Association and its allies on full display.

Indeed, the NRA gestapo has gone so nutso that it's not above figuratively shooting its own members if they don't toe the line. Recently, a lifelong NRA member and popular host of a outdoor television show on hunting, Jim Zumbo, had the temerity to suggest, in his blog, that military assault weapons had no place in hunting, especially of small game such a prairie dogs.

Oh my, the hue and cry that followed! For that one little reasonable observation, Zumbo is now persona non gratis in the paranoid world of the NRA. My goodness, how DARE he deprecate the rights of assault weapon wielding hunters to machine gun down a few prairie dogs for sport! (For more, see here.)

We assume that hyper-conservative jurist Larry Silberman, who authored the majority opinion striking down the D.C. gun law, has no qualms with the NRA's party line. (We're looking for his car so we can photograph the "guns don't kill people" bumber sticker.) Silberman couldn't resist adding a footnote--completely irrelevant to the legal issue presented--observing that "the black market in handguns in the District is so strong that they are readily available (probably at little premium) to criminals" despite D.C.'s law."

Two observations Judge Larry: 1. Those illegal handguns mostly come in from Virginia, where NRA's headquarters are located, and Maryland, both of which have numerous gun dealers who have repeatedly violated federal laws regulating gun sales, laws that the NRA has done everything in its power to dilute.

2. Your logic leads to the legalization of all illicit drugs, since, to paraphrase you, "the black market for illegal drugs in every state in the nation is so strong that drugs are readlily available (probably at little premium) to criminals." Indeed, if we apply a test of effectiveness to our laws, most will fail.

While the political pendulum is gradually swinging back to the middle, this heinous gun decision shows the lasting price we'll be paying for the Bush years.