Activism

Update:  More press coverage at the bottom, and I'm working on getting some more event pictures.

We got pictures from four of the Seven venues at which we had Restaurant Ban Repeal celebrations. 

Click All Images for full sized version

First up is Mona Lisa's Pizza in Norfolk.  We had somewhere around 60 attendees.  Somewhat less than the number that RSVP'd , but not a bad showing.

Next up is "Girls With Guns" reporting from Topeka's in Charlottesville:

Here are the pictures from the dinner. We had a small but enthusiastic showing and everyone had a nice meal. About a dozen in attendance. I guess the gorgeous weather kept a lot of people outside!

Ted Deeds Reported in from Uncle Julio's in Woodbridge:

I'd estimate we had about 50, maybe a max of 53 people (were expecting about 70+). The event was very smooth, no media. No problems. Cake delivered and devoured, 1 piece for each VCDL person there. We toasted VCDL and the win we had.

Click Here for more pictures from Woodbridge

And Dave Yates sends these pictures from Champps in Reston, commenting that the pictures should be forwarded to anti-gun Virginia Senator Janet Howell, in who's district Champps is located.

Click Here for more pictures from Reston

UPDATE:  Another picture and a short video from Champp's submitted by member Ron Brahin

O'Charley's in Richmond got some media coverage in the Richmond Times Dispatch including this video

and a bit less objective reporting from NBC Channel 12, who felt it necessary to include the overtly disparaging term "gun lovers"

The fact that their editorial decision-making process even considers it acceptable to use disparaging terms when referring to law abiding citizens (and potential viewers) speaks volumes to their supposed objectivity on this particular subject. Media Bias? Perish the thought.

However Fox Channel 5 in DC did demonstrate a bit less overt hostility to gun owner's rights in their more balanced piece including an interview with VCDL EM Ed Levine.

Overall, I'd say we had a pretty good day, both in terms of the obvious expanded recognition of the rights of law abiding citizens in the state of Virginia, and in terms of raising public awareness about the issues.

I'll update this post with more pictures or media coverage as I come across them.

Update:  Pretty good piece in the Washington Post:

"Honestly, the likelihood of using it is very slim," said Bill Clark, 34, of Springfield, who was discreetly carrying his Sig Sauer .380-caliber semiautomatic handgun tucked under his shirt. "But I'd rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it."

And a short little mention on CBS Channel 6 Richmond.

Members of the Virginia Citizens Defense League and others brought their firearms with them to the O'Charleys on Mayland Drive in the West End, to celebrate the new state law that allows people with concealed carry permits to bring their guns inside bars and restaurants, provided that they don't drink alcohol.

Lobby day 2010 was a great success. According to the Virginia News Source, Capital Police estimated the crowd at 2400. 

Of course that included both VCDL members and those who showed up for the "Tea Party"protest and may well have included the 75 or so that showed up for the anti-gun rally, so I think our estimates of about 1,000 for VCDL supporters is probably pretty accurate.

The image to the right is a "stitch" of two pictures I took while trying to encompass the entire crowd. This was during the VCDL rally, not the earlier Tea Party rally which was conducted at the same location.

as usual, click all images for bigger version


Of course, some bloggers and others reporting on the event tried to paint the rally as a bunch of whacko extremists. I'm not going to bother linking to any of them (they don't deserve the traffic) but they were out there.

My experience was quite different. There was a group of people wandering around in what appeared to be matched camouflage uniforms, they had no patches or other markings identifying the group they were representing and there were only about a half-dozen or so of them that i saw.

The camouflage was vastly outnumbered by the suits and ties in attendance.


Mainly what I saw was a large group of ordinary people.


Regular "Joes" and "Joannes" just like you and me.


Peaceably assembled to petition their government.


As is their right and DUTY.


Of course there was a large (and wholly unnecessary in my opinion) Police presence. The Capital Police were professional, courteous and unobtrusive and were a credit to their profession...as usual. I found it ironic, however, that there were so many police available in what was undoubtedly and by far the safest part of Richmond that day.


There were, of course, a good number of political signs. Some of the Tea Party/Tenth Amendment rally signs were carried over into the VCDL Rally, but that's unsurprising since many VCDL Members also support the Tea Party/10th Amendment movement and vice versa.


And I have to admit that my favorite sign was one of the Tea Party/10th Amendment signs and had nothing to do with gun rights.


Although my favorite sign holder was one of ours.


During the rally, we had a parade of excellent speakers rallying the troops and emphasizing the importance of the right that protects all others.

Photos of speakers courtesy of, and reprinted with the permission of Virginia Gun Info.com.


Phillip Van Cleave, VCDL President


Bruce Jackson, VCDL Executive Member


Delegate Bill Carrico (District 5)


Delegate Mark Cole (District 88)


Scott Lee, WVRA Richmond, 1040am


Ted Deeds, Law Enforcement Alliance of America


Donna Holt, Virginia Campaign for Liberty


And Patrick McSween, ex-Chairman for the Republican Party of Virginia and Constitutional lawyer


Of course, all through the day, before after and even during the rally, VCDL members and supporters were swarming the General Assembly building doing the work that we were there to do and the point of the whole day: Demonstrating the will of the people to our Senators and Delegates by lobbying them about pending legislation.


You couldn't turn a corner without running into a delegation with orange "Guns Save Lives" stickers.


One thing I noticed was that the groups seemed to be smaller this year than last. At first, I wondered whether our turnout had been lower than we'd hoped, until I remembered that this was a part of the plan for this year: more groups made up of less individuals in each group. The idea was to more efficiently cover all the Delegates and Senators while keeping the groups small enough that we didn't block hallways or overflow offices.

I think that was a great strategy and greatly increased our efficiency and effectiveness. I'm sure we'll stick with that plan in the future.


A posting about lobby day wouldn't be complete without acknowledging that we did have opposition present.

The anti's showed up in force...or, at least, what passes for "in force" in an unpopular astroturf movement financed by a couple of deep-pocketed, liberal foundations and who's entire agenda is built upon the mistrust and fear of their fellow citizens.

But I digress.

As noted in my teaser post, the anti's rally was significantly less robust than our own.


I would estimate their numbers at around 75.


Not exactly overwhelming.


One thing we noticed about the anti's this year: Last year they had copied the concept of our "Guns Save Lives" stickers but their stickers with anti-gun slogans were in yellow.

This year, their stickers were in exactly the same shade of orange as ours. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery and all that, but I have to wonder what they were thinking?

Did they think that, when wandering the halls of the GA Building, legislators would see all the "Guns Save Lives" stickers and assume that they were all affiliated with the anti's? That using the same color stickers would give the impression that their numbers were greater than they really were?

Methinks they didn't noodle that one out very well. VCDL members have been wearing bright orange "Guns Save Lives" stickers and buttons for years. Anyone familiar with our movement sees those orange stickers and assumes that the wearer is a supporter of gun rights. I made the same mistake myself a couple of times until I realized what was going on. Basically, I would imagine that the anti's plan did the complete opposite and gave the appearance that they were on our side.

Not a very intelligent move on their part. Which is unsurprising when you really get right down to it.

All in all, we had a very good day. The weather was beautiful, we had a very good turnout and I believe we got our word out in an effective way.

I guess time will tell. We're battling committee assignments that are stacked against us, but we finally have a governor who presumably won't veto every pro-liberty bill that crosses his desk. Our job isn't over, it's just beginning...but what an auspicious beginning it was.

There are a few more pictures that I didn't use in the post that you can view on our Photobucket Page if you're interested.

We're Winning.

Evidence:

click images to make bigger

Pro-Gun Crowd	Anti-Gun Crowd
Pro-Gun Crowd	Anti-Gun Crowd

Thos pictures were from as close to the same angles and distances as I could get...and they don't actually do it justice, I don't have a wide angle lens and the pro-gun crowd was so MUCH bigger that it was impossible to portray the scope.

I'd say our crowd was somewhere between 800 to 1,000. The Anti-gun crowd had maybe 75.

At any rate...more to come.

Our friends at VSSA report that the proposed change to Sussex County Ordinances requiring conditional use permits for rural shooting ranges is back on the agenda.

The Sussex County shooting range/conditional use permit issue will be back on the agenda for the Sussex County Board of Supervisors meeting on Thursday, January 21, 2010. The meeting is scheduled for 7:30 p.m. at the General District Courtroom of the Sussex Judicial Center, 15080 Courthouse Road, Sussex, VA 23884.

As we mentioned when this item previously came up: These types of ordinances have been used in many areas to harass and shut down long established shooting ranges after urbanites moved into the area and realized that people actually shoot guns at such facilities.

Anyone who enjoys shooting at the several well-established and popular shooting ranges and clubs in Sussex county would be well served by attending this meeting and expressing displeasure at the plans.

About 40 or so VCDL members attended the Norfolk City Council meeting last night to express our displeasure with Mayor Fraim's membership in Bloomberg's Mayors Against illegal Guns group.

I was actually planning to speak, but due to work, I ended up getting to the meeting late and so didn't have the opportunity.


After the normal city business, Phillip spoke eloquently about the fact that several members of MAiG have recently dropped out after realizing that the organization is not anti-illegal gun, but anti-gun period. He raised excellent points about Bloomberg's activities and the group's penchant for filing nuisance lawsuits to harass legitimate businesses out of existence.

Two different anti-gun speakers spoke...one representing "The Virginia Center for Public Safety" which strangely seems uninterested in anything relating to public safety unless it involves gun control; also interestingly, the group was formerly known as "Virginians Against Handgun Violence".

To refresh your memory, The Virginia Center for Public Safety is that class act that recently accused Bob McDonnell of being "content to let felons, terrorists, buy firearms at gun shows" regardless of the basic fact that those acts are already federal felonies. I guess they think felons and terrorists buying guns should be...um...illegaler. Yea, that'll stop it.

Another interesting point: look at the byline at the bottom of that piece. Josh Horwitz? Where do I know that name? Hmmmm....Isn't he involved in another anti-gun organization called "Coalition to Stop Gun Violence?" Why yes...yes he is.

Hmmm. The Virginia Center for Public safety, formerly Virginians Against Handgun Violence, who is in cahoots with the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence...anti-gun organizations all...support the anti-gun Mayors Against illegal Guns.

But MAiG isn't REALLY anti-gun, right?

Never mind the fact that MAiG opposed the recent bill that would allow vetted, background checked and permitted Concealed Handgun Permit holders...the single most law abiding demographic in the United States...from exercising their natural right of self defense across state lines. Because, they only oppose ILLEGAL guns...or something.

Never mind the fact that Bloomberg's minions AGAIN recently went "undercover" and filmed activity that they FREELY ADMIT in their own video is already illegal, and, rather than turning the evidence of criminal behavior over the the proper authorities and demanding that the current laws be enforced, they publicized the video of criminal behavior as propaganda in support of criminalizing currently LAWFUL activities.

"See: those people are breaking the law, so what we obviously need is....another law."

I guess the MAiG's statement is actually true in a certain sense: They only oppose illegal guns...they just want ALL guns to be illegal.

But I digress.

The anti's were up to their same old "astrotruf" tricks and the two ladies who spoke were ostensibly representing two different groups of "concerned citizens" who I'm sure spontaneously and independently arrived at the meeting to speak without even realizing the other was going to be there. As is customary, after each of the women spoke, they asked their supporters stand up. Strangely, the same ten or so people stood up after both speakers.

Typical tactics of the anti's. They can't garner support for their positions by telling the truth, so they lie...as the VACPS representative did throughout her presentation...and they can't come close to matching our numbers of activists, so they form multitudes of tiny astroturf groups consisting of the same handful of people so that they can count the members over and over to inflate their numbers.

And, as usual, I digress again.

Getting back to the meeting, I was unsurprised when Mayor Fraim unabashedly declared his support for the MAiG mission. Of course he couched it in terms of denying that the group is anti-gun, evidence to the contrary notwithstanding.

Mayor Fraim has a long and storied history of anti-gun policies...while at the same time mouthing platitudes about how he supports the Second Amendment. He is just as anti-gun as Bloomberg so it is no surprise that he supports the anti-gun policies of MAiG. And, being a cowardly politician, it is no surprise that he vehemently insists that he doesn't REALLY believe what his policies clearly demonstrate that he does.

The Freedom Rally held outside of Richmond Saturday went well.  It was hard to get an accurate count because we were so spread out and people were coming and going throughout the course of the afternoon and evening, but, from my wanderings and taking counts of knots of people standing here and there, I'd say somewhere about 250 people at any given time were lined up along the road to the Republican Roundup site.

We did get a little press coverage, Richmond's CBS affiliate, WTVR Channel 6 reported on it. 

Note Mr. Cantor's evasion of the issue (at about the 1:45 mark):

"This is private property; the Innsbrook management company has made their policies and I think these people have a problem with the Innsbrook management folks."

Sorry, Mr. Cantor...but our problem is with you and the Republican leadership.  Innsbrook has every right to set their policies on their private property, and you have the right...nay, the RESPONSIBILITY to hold an event like this in a venue that respects the rights that you supposedly support.

Innsbrook can control the policies on their property, but they cannot control the decision to hold your event on their property. 

A typical politician, you avoided addressing the issue by passing the buck. I would submit that your refusal to accept responsibility for your own decisions and actions calls into question your suitability to serve as a representative and servant of the people.

Mr. McDonnell's response wasn't much better:

"Eric and I are both very strong supporters of the Second Amendment, as are all my ticket mates."

So they support the Second Amendment, just not the people who exercise the right protected by it?

Hmmm.

Also, here is a youtube video of the correspondent talking to Phillip.

We also made the front page of the Community News section of "Downtown Short Pump", who reported an attendance of "several hundred" VCDL members.

A couple of the political bloggers at the "roundup" took note of the protest.  Rick Sincere posted video of the speeches, including Linwood Cobb's trite and condescending dismissal of our protest "Don't pay any attention to that".

I suppose that Mr Cobb won't mind, then, if we gun owners don't pay any attention to the Republican Party come election time.

As a lowly blogger, I don't claim to speak for VCDL leadership, but here's my take on it:

The Virginia Citizen's Defense League is a non-partisan organization that supports those who support our rights.  Many of the people present at the Republican Roundup do have a history of supporting gun rights and I appreciate that and support them as a result.  But that very support for gun owners is what makes the hypocrisy of this issue all the more distasteful.  If they can dismiss the position of people with whom they ostensibly AGREE with such elitist, condescending disdain, how well can we expect them to represent the interests of their constituents on other issues?  Issues we may not see completely eye to eye on?

As far as I'm concerned, actions speak much louder than words.  Mr. Cantor and Mr. McDonnell can mouth platitudes in support of the Second Amendment all they want, but if this is any indication of how they will actually act toward gun owners...

Better to be stabbed in the front by a known enemy than stabbed in the back by a supposed ally.

If you weren't able to attend and want to see what you missed, there's more on the freedom rally (with pictures) below the fold.

Continue reading "Freedom Rally Report" »

...linked from a short article in Parade Magazine online regarding the criminal use of body armor with a one line acknowledgment at the end that " body armor provides potentially lifesaving protection for civilians—everyone from judges to journalists."

As of this writing, restrictions on body armor are favored by 62% to 38%.

I don't favor restrictions on any inanimate objects just because they might be used in a crime. It's just another way for government employees to set themselves out as deserving of more consideration than we lowly peasants. If you feel the same way, please go vote.

Hat tip to J. Tyler Ballance via contact form.

From Countertop, a long time gun blogger who lives in Northern Virginia:

Folks, I can’t hold Jim Scott’s gun banning ways against him anymore. He’d be a fool to be anything but a gun banner. We have no business complaining about his votes when in a District with diverse views on everything else, nearly 90% of his constitutents who care are against our gun rights. Until the large gun rights crowd in McLean makes their voice heard, his votes fall on their inactive hands.

But, this is the challenge, how do I get all those NRA/VCDL members, plus the republican’s to respond to his survey?

This is a problem we have in many places...we feel that our representative will not be responsive to our concerns so we simply don't bother telling them what those concerns are.

You may never ever be able to change the way they think or vote even if you write them every day and answer every survey they send out. But, when you ignore them, you allow them to live in the luxury of their delusions. They can legitimately rationalize their anti-gun stances by pointing to the fact that their constituents never voice opposition to them. In other words, by failing to engage with them we are actively giving them political cover.

Activism does work, not only when applied to those who already support our cause. Just look at what Illinois gun owners and activists have been accomplishing lately.

I urge you to read Countertop's entire post...and engage with your representatives no matter where they stand on the issues. They need to hear our voice.

I guess it could be called a "resurgence", or the latest iteration of an anti-gun strategy that has been tried in the past. Remember IANSA?

This morning the Washington Times published an editorial written by members of the DC "Think Tank", Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Basically, the editorial trots out many aspects of the "Drug violence in Mexico is all our fault" meme that has been rampant in the media lately.

The escalating violence unleashed by Mexico´s drug cartels as they struggle to control trafficking routes and expand their illegal business left 5,700 dead in 2008, with homicide rates spiraling out of control in cities along the U.S. border.

Illegal trafficking of arms from the U.S. helps fuel the drug violence.

...

The U.S.-Mexican border is a central route for illicit weapons destined for Mexico and elsewhere in Latin America. It is nearly impossible to purchase guns legally in Mexico, and gun stores in U.S. border states sell twice as many weapons as those in any other U.S. region.

In 2005, the year after the U.S. ban on assault weapons expired, Mexican authorities seized more than 10,000 smuggled weapons, of which 90 percent came from the U.S. A recent Mexican government study spoke of as many as 2,000 guns per day crossing the border.

I'd like to see some supporting documentation for the "facts" that they tout in support. They sound like pure BS to me.

At any rate, the new twist to this meme is that they are using it to promote ratification of a treaty known as the " INTER-AMERICAN CONVENTION AGAINST THE ILLICIT MANUFACTURING OF AND TRAFFICKING IN FIREARMS, AMMUNITION, EXPLOSIVES, AND OTHER RELATED MATERIALS" (CIFTA). Don't ask me where the acronym comes from, it doesn't make sense to me either.

The convention text is available here.

This concerns me in two ways. First, although this treaty is fairly innocuous...most of the requirements are already in place in the US...and doesn't address lawful private ownership of firearms and ammunition, one provision is troublesome:

1. "Illicit manufacturing": the manufacture or assembly of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials:

a. from components or parts illicitly trafficked; or

b. without a license from a competent governmental authority of the State Party where the manufacture or assembly takes place; or

c. without marking the firearms that require marking at the time of manufacturing.

...

4. "Ammunition": the complete round or its components, including cartridge cases, primers, propellant powder, bullets, or projectiles that are used in any firearm. [emphasis added]

If I'm reading that correctly, this treaty would classify home reloading as "Illicit Manufacturing"

Which then requires, under Article IV, Legislative Measures:

1. States Parties that have not yet done so shall adopt the necessary legislative or other measures to establish as criminal offenses under their domestic law the illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials. [emphasis added]

So...under this treaty, owning a home reloading press would require a license?

Am I reading this wrong???

The Second problem I have with this is the precedent it sets. That precedent being, if the gun banners can't get what they want through the full legislative process, and their prospects for getting their agenda enacted through judicial fiat seem to be waning...doing it through the treaty process.

They've been trying to mislead the public about guns and their use in the US for decades now. It seems that they are refocusing their efforts on misleading the public about the impact of US gun ownership on other countries.

The trick is that the ratification process for treaties is, in some ways, less stringent than that of passing legislation. Treaties only need to be ratified by the Senate (albeit with a 2/3 majority) and then signed by the President to take on the full effect of law.

Basically, it seems to me that the latest and greatest strategy of the anti-liberty forces is coming into focus. Their new strategy is to blame gun ownership in the US for the high violence rates in Mexico and other countries. They are doing this by the tried and true method of misleading, obfuscating and outright lying to create a false impression. Then they exploit this false impression by using it to dupe the public into accepting restrictions in the form of "international treaties" that would never fly as domestic legislation.

In my humble opinion, we need to be on top of this strategy and fight it just as vigorously as we do the misinformation campaigns that the anti-liberty forces focus on domestic gun ownership issues.

Crossposted on Captain of a Crew of One

From Nebraska gun rights activist Joe at Joe's Crabby Shack.

Absolutely, positively read the whole thing.

My personal favorite:

No more drama. No no no more drama drama.
25,000 carry permits won't cure cancer. A CCW ban in Seward won't mean all life on Earth will stop. When your kids are overly dramatic, you don't listen. Why should state senators be different? Keep it rational. The numbers are almost always on our side in boomstick issues. Let the Paul Helmke's talk about blood in the streets and Wild West shootouts. We just have to ask them to provide the proof that what they fear has happened. They can't. Let them look like the paranoid freak nuggets.

We tend to be very passionate about our issue. To someone who is less passionate (or, as is often the case, uninterested) our passion comes across as...well...to put it bluntly...fanaticism.

When trying to convince someone that our right to keep and bear arms should be expanded rather than restricted, coming off as a spittle spewing, crazed loon is probably not the best tactic.

I've even got one to add to his list:

Don't impugn the character, patriotism or intelligence of someone if you are hoping to gain their support or sway their opinion. Even IMPLYING that support for a specific proposal may be dishonorable, may be unpatriotic, may be obtuse...will only put them on the defensive. It will shut them down and they won't hear another word that you say. Our goal is to sway them to our side...not to make avowed enemies of them.

The only caution I would give is, in his section on e-mailing, he advises not to use form e-mails. I actually agree with that to a point...but if you don't have time to write an individual e-mail to every legislator you wish to contact, a form e-mail is better than nothing.

Personalize if you can, but if you aren't going to personalize...send the form e-mail. Please.

At any rate, very good stuff.

UPDATES BELOW

One balanced and factual:

About 300 people rallied Monday at the Virginia Capitol to support the many pro-gun-rights bills that have been introduced this session.

One...um...not so much:

Three people stood out at the pro-gun rights rally on the holiday celebration of a nonviolent American martyr.

...

After Mountjoy left, the two remaining protesters were held up to ridicule by one of the rally's speakers, Mary Katharine Ham, a regular on "The O'Reilly Factor" on Fox News. "Two of them, that's cute," she said.

To the Richmond Times, the estimated 300+ supporters of natural rights (which they intentionally underestimated) at the rally weren't the story...the three two protesters were the story.

Oh...and the fact that someone mentioned them in a less than flattering way.

No mention of the Brady Campaign press release the day before that was nothing more than a baldfaced attempt to slander our members and impugn our motives.

Because...well...we're just meanies.

I'd be willing to bet that, had nothing at all been said about them, the article would have expounded upon how disrespectful it was that we ignored those brave and courageous protesters.

BTW: Hundreds of armed citizens...shouldn't there have been blood in the streets and shootouts over parking spaces? I mean...how on earth did those brave protesters escape with their lives in light of the dangerous and bloodthirsty nature of their opponents?

Things that make you go "hmmmm".

[Update] More Coverage, mostly pretty fair and balanced:

WHSV Channel 3, Harrisonburg

WDBJ Channel 7, Roanoke

WVIR Channel 29, Charlottesville

[/Update]

I was told that there will be videos of the event posted on the web site so I don't want to steal too much thunder, but I do want to give my general impressions and observations.

Click all pictures to make bigger

First of all, I got there a little late (ran late in general and then had trouble finding a parking spot) so I missed the rush, but the "CHP" entrance worked out well. They did wand me, which was a little confusing. What...they afraid I'm going to try to sneak a gun in or something??? Funny...the wand didn't seem to detect my spare mag on the opposite side from the gun. Hmmm.

Anyway, I because I was late, I didn't get to evaluate the organization of splitting up into groups, but there were still people in the lobby so I didn't just end up wandering the halls on my own.

By my estimation, Lobby Day 2009 was a success.As with last year, everywhere we went in the building we saw a sea of orange stickers and buttons.



We just couldn't get away from all the gun nuts.



They were everywhere.



Down Every hall.



They were inescapable.

You get the idea.

We had some pleasant conversations with legislators. Of course, both of my (anti-gun) legislators were absent today...funny, they weren't around last year either. By design maybe?

I did record the whole day but I had the recorder in my pocket so I'll have to see how it turned out and edit it down from one huge file into manageable chunks. I'll do that in a follow-up post if the audio came out OK.

At 1100, we adjourned to the Bell Tower for the first rally.

As we were leaving the building, it struck me just how many orange stickers there still were roaming the halls and lobbying. Not everyone came down to the rally...not by a long shot.

Even so, we still had a very good turnout. I'd guess between 300 and 400 at the bell tower and possibly as many as 200 more still in the General Assembly building. That's just an educated guess, but I wouldn't think I'm too far off.




We even had some counter-protesters, although, at some point during the proceedings, their number was cut by a third. When I first noticed them, there were three.




But later on, when I looked back at them again, there were only two.

It's clear how much dedicated public support the anti-liberty agenda garners. I guess that's why they had to bus in high school and college kids to scare up the couple of hundred they mustered last year.

Of course, that is not to say that we should take them lightly...they have the backing of deep-pocketed foundations and the power of a complicit media in support of their astroturf campaign.

What we have on our side is, to put it bluntly, the truth. Liberty. Common Sense and rationality. Oh...and an actual grass roots movement of thousands of hard working, dedicated patriots.

I'm not saying that the fight won't be hard...but I like our odds.

At any rate, the rally went great and the speakers were all very eloquent. There was a morning session, a break for lunch and then an afternoon session. During the two sessions, we heard from Attorney General Candidate Senator Ken Cuccinelli, WRVA Richmond radio personality "Doc" Thompson, Mary Katherine Ham, Rev. Ken "Black Man With a Gun" Blanchard, Jeff Knox of the Firearms Coalition, and Larry Pratt of Gun Owners of America.

During lunch, I wandered down the street with a group of three other patriots in search of a friendly (and not too crowded) place to eat.

What we found was worthy of its own mention. It was a small "Mediterranean" place on 7th St. called "Cedars"



Not only was the food very good, the service friendly and prompt (even though we kind of inundated them over a very short period of time), but the staff was very sympathetic to our cause. A couple of diners were open carrying and, not only did the staff welcome us, but...



...one of the waiters even asked for a sticker.

Their menu includes burgers and more "American" style sandwiches as well as middle-eastern fare.

Based upon our experience there, I recommend patronizing them on future visits to the Capital.

That's it for now. As I said before, I don't want to steal the thunder from the videos, but depending on how my audio came out, I may post more details later.

Thanks again to all the patriots and activists that came out and made this lobby day the great success that it was.