Gun Owners of America has informed me that SB 64, introduced by Sen. Lucas, seeks to amend current law regarding persons who engage in paramilitary activity such as marching with firearms, drilling, or training. Currently, such activity is legal unless done "in furtherance of, a civil disorder." SB 64 would change current law to prohibit, “Assembles with one or more persons with the intent of intimidating any person or group of persons by drilling, parading, or marching with any firearm, any explosive or incendiary device, or any components or combination thereof.” Removing the phrase, "in furtherance of, a civil disorder" and replacing it with language such as “intent of intimidating,” causes Second Amendment supporters like myself, grave concern. We believe this subjective language could make us gun owners subject to prosecution if someone simply feels uneasy in the presence of a group of people carrying firearms. Anyone who feels “intimidated” by the “scary look” of firearms, or who feels hostile to other Virginians bearing arms, could request a Commonwealth’s Attorney to prosecute the “offending” group of innocent gun owners. Those who complain could testify in court how they felt “intimidated” by seeing such people carrying firearms, parading or engaging in group target practice. If Senator Lucas’ bill is not amended with the clarifying language “in furtherance of, a civil disorder,” please vote NO on SB 64 because without this clarifying language it would have the potential to entrap law-abiding gun owners who like to gather for gun sports or activities. Please let me know how you vote and if the amendment was added. Thank you.

My fellow gun owners and shooting sports enthusiasts have some major concerns about SB 64, introduced by Senator Lucas. Her bill proposes to amend current Virginia law relating to individuals who take part in activities related to paramilitary training, and gun lessons, firearms drills, etc. Currently, Virginia does not punish such activity as long as the activity is not conducted "in furtherance of a civil disorder." Although the existing law imposes a Class Five felony penalty for violations, it has not been a problem because it only punishes actions “in furtherance of a civil disorder." However, if the current version of Senator Lucas’ SB 64 passes, that “in furtherance of a civil disorder” language will NOT apply to the provisions of the law that she has added to the Code. That is a major problem! Senator Lucas wants language that would make it a crime to take part in these paramilitary activities if third parties allege they feel intimidated. The danger is, easily frightened persons who feel uneasy around guns will regrettably make it easy to prosecute gun owners of a Class Five felony punishable with from one to 10 years in prison! As Gun Owners of America has pointed out, such a change in language creates a dangerous threat to our civil liberties. Senator Lucas and other SB 64 proponents should not object to adding the present language which is defined and found elsewhere in Virginia law to her proposed new section. It would be unjust to pass SB 64 as now worded because it creates a subjective cause for prosecution: “intent of intimidating.” Would one person’s claim of feeling “intimidated” be enough for a Commonwealth Prosecutor to come after legal gun owners in these situations? Must a County Prosecutor become clairvoyant in order to enforce the law? Please either amend SB 64 to keep the present “civil disorder” language or vote against the bill. Please tell me the outcome of SB 64 and how you vote. I will share that information with my friends. Thank you.

I am contacting you because I am very concerned with wording of SB 64 sponsored by Sen. Lucas. The bill is vague and for that reason it will create serious problems. Right now, Virginia law makes it a felony for persons to engage in paramilitary activity involving training or instructing with guns, explosives, if and only if they engage in such activity, "in furtherance of, a civil disorder." As Gun owners of America has pointed out, this law as applied has not created problems, but Senator Lucas’ SB 64 as drafted takes out the provision banning certain activity if it is done "in furtherance of, a civil disorder" and leaves it wide open for interpretation with her new language which prohibits: “Assemblies with one or more persons with the intent of intimidating any person or group of persons by drilling, parading, or marching with any firearm, any explosive or incendiary device, or any components or combination thereof.” What is the standard for intimidation? Who decides—persons who oppose all civilian ownership of firearms? People afraid of smoke and noise at a shooting range? Why was the part about “furtherance of civil disorder” removed? Independence Day firecrackers are explosive devices, and sparklers are incendiary devices. Would a group of Cub Scouts in a Fourth of July parade merit felony prosecution under Senator Lucas’ bill if someone felt threatened by the sights and sounds of those incendiary devices? The vagueness problem can easily be solved by adding the language form the current law to prohibit only the actions conducted “in furtherance of a civil disorder." If Senator Lucas objects, then there is much more to this bill than meets the eye. My family and I ask you to support an amendment to SB 64 to reinstate current legal language to protect gun owners. If Senator Lucas refuses to amend her bill, or the amendment is offered but fails, then please vote NO! Please inform me if SB 64 passes or not, and how you voted. Thank you.