Talk:2020 VCDL Lobby Day

Section on attendees

Section on attendees of the 2020 VCDL Lobby day should be added.--Democratic Backsliding (talk) 02:43, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for updating the title to be more specific. Progressingamerica (talk) 03:02, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

To delete or not?

The rally is scheduled for tomorrow (Jan 20, 2020), so it makes no sense to delete it at this point. Let's wait and see what happens. I'm not convinced the title is very descriptive. Michael E Nolan (talk) 01:09, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Timeline inappropriate

I've seen a lot of similar articles, they don't have timelines. There's no way to construct one that's not cherry-picking events. And seriously, "January 20, 2020, MLK Jr. Day. 8 AM Event expected to commence"? That's not encyclopedic in any way, and we are an encyclopedia, not a newspaper. It's also original ressearch Nor am I sure why MLK Jr. Day is mentioned other than to possibly make a point, and without sources discussing its significance this also is not encyclopedic. We are not WP:BREAKINGNEWS. "It is wise to delay writing an article about a breaking news event until the significance of the event is clearer as early coverage may lack perspective and be subject to factual errors. Writing about breaking news may be recentism, and Wikipedia is not a crystal ball." Doug Weller talk 16:57, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

• I agree.IceFishing (talk) 20:35, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

The Truth About Guns is a blog, not a reliable source.

Doug Weller talk 19:56, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

• yes, and needs to be removed.IceFishing (talk) 20:35, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Neo-nazis planned to attend the rally

This was removed by IceFishing, the source support that but it is behind paywall[1]. There is also the BBC, The FBI has arrested three suspected members of a neo-Nazi hate group who planned to travel to a pro-gun rally in Virginia on Monday.[2], The Guardian The FBI has arrested three suspected members of a neo-Nazi group who built a machine gun and hoped to start a US race war, just days before a planned gun-rights rally in Virginia that was expected to draw thousands of people, officials said on Thursday. WSJ The Federal Bureau of Investigation arrested three men allegedly linked to a violent white-supremacist group who had discussed traveling to a pro-gun rally Monday in Richmond, Va., and preparing for a possible race war, according to a law-enforcement official.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 21:08, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

• The New York Times article to which the material was sourced, and which I read every word of before removing the material, does not state that the arrested individuals were planning to attend this rally, only that they had discussed attending.IceFishing (talk) 21:25, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

  IceFishing, discussed attending is the same as planning to attend. Planning is a discussion. There are also sources like the BBC that say "planned to travel to a pro-gun rally" . This also shows that discussed to attend is the same as planned to attend. Also thats not a reason to remove the whole content since it is sourced and widely reported.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 21:56, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

• No. It is not. IceFishing (talk) 22:02, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

• Yes. It is. The above mentioned sources prove it. Discussion is part of planning. Using "discussing to attend" was a figure of speech, probably Pars pro toto since discussion is part of planning.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 22:13, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

• also, the text of the BBC article does not have the pull quote SharabSalam cites, it is, rather, in the sub headline. Headline writers are notorious for c inadvertently summarizing text in misleading ways. The text of each of these 4 sources New york Times,Wall Street Journal, The Guardian and BBC carefully uses the work "discussed". None of these 4 sources states that these three "planned to attend". I'm just trying to be accurate and work according to what the sources state. IceFishing (talk) 22:17, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

  IceFishing, okay, lets ignore the issue of which word the source use. Can you tell me why did you remove the whole widely reported, significantly related content instead of just changing the word "planned"?--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 22:25, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

• It needs to have a demonstrable relationship to this event. It can certainly be part of other articles, but it cannot be part of this one unless there is a connection between the arrest and this political rally other than the fact that it arrest took place a few days before the rally. such a connection may emerge in the investigation, of course. Or at trial. Or, well, it may emerge. But we need sources that show an actual connection between the rally and the arrests. Something that goes beyond discussion and suspicion to add it to this page.IceFishing (talk) 22:52, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

• IceFishing, New information has come out from the FBI, I think we have a demonstrable relationship to this event. There are a lot of surveillance photos in the linked court document. The Nazis plan was to (among other things) fire on the crowd of peaceful protesters to cause mayhem. I added this information to the main body of the article, if you feel it should be again removed lets discuss. I think this passes the "demonstrable" test. These were hostile actors. Progressingamerica (talk) 00:58, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

• Info about the arrests of these 3 man can usefully be added to The Base (hate group).IceFishing (talk) 23:03, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

SharabSalam I think that considering this content as "significantly" related based simply upon the word "attend" could be a bit of a stretch. USA Today reported that these three neo-nazis "planned to try to incite violence at the rally." If we are going to make an edit that tries to make the claim that somehow this peaceful protest was a nazi-filled hate-fest, there is no relation of significance and that's going into NPOV territory. But if you want to show how the nazis had ill intentions toward the conservatives, then there probably is a "significant" story to tell there. These were peaceful demonstrators out there defending their Constitutional rights - something a nazi would have absolutely no interest in. Nazis don't care about Constitutionalism. They care about totalitarianism.

Intentions matter. That's the link of "their attendance". [3] Progressingamerica (talk) 00:13, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Anti-Fascists of the Seven Hills (ASH) intended to attend -- against gun control

ASH (Anti-Fascists of the Seven Hills), who intended to attend and may well have attended, issued a statement which included this: "From our perspective, these legislative measures [gun control] do not address the causes of violence. Arguably, they address the mechanism. We also see from years of research, observation, and anecdotal experience, that these pieces of legislation open up more doors to repression." This was commonly (mis)reported as "Virginia gun rally: anti-fascist activists will not mount counter-demonstration" (The Guardian) or as "Why This Antifa Group Is Siding With Thousands of Pro-Gun Conservatives In Virginia" (Vice News). As pointed out decades ago in Don B. Kates' Restricting Handguns: The Liberal Skeptics Speak Out gun rights and self defense are not exclusively a conservative cause.

Why three neo-nazis who talked about attending are newsworthy, but anti-fascists who actually planned to attend are not, says a lot about gun politics and medoa bias.

https://www.adl.org/www.adl.org Militia Groups and Other Extremists Plan Gun Protest in Richmond - ADL

20 Jan VCDL Lobby Day has been an uneventful peaceful protest for gun rights in past years. This year's scaremongering is shameful. -- Naaman Brown (talk) 11:51, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

The three neo-nazi content is not included in the article AFAIK.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 11:55, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

On the other hand

"the original point of the demonstrations got lost amid the threat of violence, posed days before the protest bega" - no time to edit tonight, but someone else might wants to use these The olossal Gun Rally In Richmond Was Co-Opted By Extremists and Thousands Of Pro-Gun Activists And Far-Right Extremists Swarm Richmond, Virginia. Doug Weller talk 19:56, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Nazis hostility for "MAGAtards"

Some information is starting to come out of the FBI,[4] it probably would be good to add in the information about how they were planning on disrupting and attacking the event so that we can get a more full picture of this. It has been widely reported, and the Wiki article is missing this glaring item.

Some of what the National Socialists said include:

"Imagine this scenario, right? There’s a running skirmish of MAGAtards, liberty militias, and libertarians, like basically like trying, they’re like shooting their way out of the city essentially, alright. We happen upon this scene, and we find a woodline, get in the woodline, and take cover. I pop the f*****g record button on the thermal, and I drop like, I drop like, I drop like ten nasty girls on video."

"So this, so like, this plan of mine. It was like, this is like an Adderall idea... it really didn’t click until I took an Adderall, and then I was like, “Oh, s***, I gotta plan."

"Derail some f*****g trains, kill some people, and poison some water supplies. You better be f*****g ready to do those things."

"I cannot trust you to keep my murdering secrets."

Much of this I did not insert into the article, but it reflects their disdain for the protesters, even shooting at them from the woodline. Progressingamerica (talk) 00:53, 31 January 2020 (UTC)*Here because you pinged me. For all the reasons discussed above, I continue to think that the info in the indictment should be covered at The Base (hate group), but that it continues to be inappropriate here. IceFishing (talk) 01:11, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

• I think its worth at least mentioning that 3 members of some obscure hate group allegedly planned to attend the event but were arrested by the FBI. Though, since this group was completely irrelevant/inconsequential on the day of the event itself, this should be explained in no more than 1-3 sentences and should not receive any more attention than other, actual, attendees. RopeTricks (talk) 03:52, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

• • Struck through sockpuppet edit. Doug Weller talk 13:34, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Peaceful

It doesn't really make sense why the word "peaceful" is viewed provocatively and keeps being removed, but nonetheless the protest was reported on by major media as peaceful, either during or ending.

Washington Post:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2020/01/20/virginia-gun-rally-updates/

"As they walked through the cold, they remarked on how peaceful the rally had been."

NBC News:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/tense-virginia-rally-gun-rights-supporters-chant-we-will-not-n1118811

"the rally was largely peaceful, with no reported violence"

CNN:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/20/politics/virginia-gun-rights-rally-richmond/index.html

"The crowd, however, was peaceful, with no immediate reports of violence."

The Atlantic:

https://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2020/01/photos-gun-rally-virginia/605230/

"Thousands of gun-rights activists took part in a peaceful rally on Lobby Day, today, in Richmond, Virginia."

ABC News:

https://abcnews.go.com/US/authorities-brace-massive-gun-rights-rally-richmond-virginia/story?id=68328504

"The rally ended peacefully despite threats from armed militias and white supremacist groups."

Politico:

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/20/virginia-gun-rights-rally-101183

"Thousands of gun-rights activists from around the country rallied peacefully at the Virginia Capitol on Monday......."

Reuters:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-guns-rally/thousands-of-armed-u-s-gun-rights-activists-join-peaceful-virginia-rally-idUSKBN1ZJ15B

"More than 22,000 armed gun-rights activists peacefully filled the streets around Virginia’s capitol building on Monday to protest gun-control legislation making its way through the newly Democratic-controlled state legislature."

U.S. News and World Report:

https://www.usnews.com/news/top-news/articles/2020-01-20/militia-leaders-warn-virginia-gun-rally-could-get-violent

"More than 22,000 armed gun-rights activists peacefully filled the streets"

CBS Local 58 Richmond:

https://www.cbs58.com/news/virginia-gun-rights-rally-concludes-peacefully-despite-earlier-fears-of-extremist-violence

"A large gun-rights rally in Virginia's state capital unfolded peacefully Monday....."

Associated Press:

https://apnews.com/2c997c92fa7acd394f7cbb89882d9b5b

"Tens of thousands of gun-rights activists from around the country rallied peacefully at the Virginia Capitol on Monday to protest"

Bloomberg News:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-01-20/virginia-s-capital-braces-for-gun-rights-rally

"Tens of thousands of gun-rights activists from around the country rallied peacefully....."

MSN:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/virginia-pro-gun-rally-despite-anger-threats-of-insurrection-massive-rally-is-carried-out-peacefully-outside-state-capitol/ar-BBZ8RCC

(Headline) Virginia pro-gun rally: Despite anger, threats of insurrection, massive rally is carried out peacefully outside state Capitol

New York Times:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/20/us/virginia-gun-rally.html

"Some gun rights supporters at the rally said they had always planned to carry out a peaceful demonstration, and felt unfairly associated with violence."

The word "peaceful" belongs in the article because it was in fact a peaceful event. Claims of violence before the event occurred were nothing but hype. Progressingamerica (talk) 03:18, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 2 August 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move. This discussion has been relisted three times, with no additional comments after any of the relists. The consensus is no consensus. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 22:26, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

---

2020 VCDL Lobby Day → 2020 Virginia Lobby Day – Virginia Lobby Day is used by many organizations and is not controlled by any one group. It is not a day specifically for gun control or its opponents. There are Lobby Day activities every year in Virginia--including 2020--for organizations as diverse as the NAACP, Virginia Nurses, and environmental groups.

References

– George Bounacos (talk) 19:23, 2 August 2020 (UTC)—Relisting. —usernamekiran (talk) 02:38, 10 August 2020 (UTC)—Relisting. —usernamekiran (talk) 10:59, 18 August 2020 (UTC)—Relisting. —usernamekiran (talk) 03:37, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose This article does not seem to be about Virginia lobby days in 2020 in general (most would not be notable), but rather this specific one. I think there is probably a better name like 2020 Virginia gun rights rally, since this is really more about the rally/protests than the lobby day, but I am not certain what that would be.--Yaksar (let's chat) 20:54, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I know I'm late, but I would have said Oppose, in case this should be nominated for merge again in the future. This event received widespread national and international news, and other protests this large(and many smaller) have their own dedicated Wikipedia page. Progressingamerica (talk) 19:31, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

I would have opposed as well. There were indeed other groups of citizens addressing their lawmakers that day, and each years Lobby Day. It is called Lobby Day because it is a holiday right at the beginning of the new session, where more people can take off work and visit their representatives.

So, if this comes up again in future, i would oppose it. However, i would support adding information about this particular event to the more general lobby day article and link between them. But this page should remain on its own. Fndout (talk) 19:52, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Merge Proposal

Hi, I am considering to transfer the Virginia section from the Second Amendment sanctuary article and merge it into this article, so that the article size of the 'Second Amendment sanctuary' article is reduced. This means that the title will be renamed to Second Amendment Sanctuary in Virginia. Any opinions? zsteve21 (talk) 18:03, 29 September 2021 (BST)

I see you've been warned about this sort of thing, in any case this is not the way to do it and of course this is about a specific day, and retitling and changing the scope would need a move request or an WP:RFC and I doubt you'd succeed. Doug Weller talk 18:47, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

I see. Perhaps instead of merging it, it should go into its own article instead. zsteve21 (talk) 20:42, 29 September 2021 (BST)

The article introduction needs improvement (Jan 2023)

The last sentence of the introduction paragraph, "Fears of violence by neo-Nazis prompted the governor of Virginia to declare a state of emergency ahead of the event." leaves an unbalanced perspective of the event, associating the entire event with the foiled neo-Nazi plans. The introduction should remain unbiased to maintain wikipedia's spirit.

I recommend we remove that entire sentence, and replace it with a sentence that includes how many attendees showed up (which is far more relevant as an introductory piece of information about the event itself than the aforementioned foiled plans).

We have an entire section dedicated to the neo-Nazi's and their plans; we don't need that information in the introduction, because it is not at all representative of what actually occured that day at the event. Fndout (talk) 19:29, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

At the very least, if for some reason anyone objects and that sentence is not removed, then we should include the new sentence about the number of attendees before the neo-Nazi question, and then either update the neo-Nazi sentence or include a final sentence afterwards that explains the event concluded peacefully.

That would also make sure the introduction is unbiased and balanced. Fndout (talk) 19:35, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

i ended up adding to the last sentence of the introduction paragraph to read, "Fears of violence by neo-Nazis prompted the governor of Virginia to declare a state of emergency ahead of the event, although the event concluded peacefully with no reports of violence.". Fndout (talk) 01:41, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

("question" was supposed to be "sentence", sorry about the typo) Fndout (talk) 19:38, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Adding a new section (Jan 2023)

We have a lot of content about the state of emergency and related things surrounding this event,, which is good (but probably needs to be updated since it's been 3 years now pretty much) but we have very little content regarding the intent of the demonstration.

Currently, there is mention of the 2A sanctuary movement in the introduction, which is also good, but that's about it.

I recommend we add a new section dedicated to explain what the demonstrators were actually protesting (e.g. red flag laws, universal backgrounds checks -- given we can find proper sources to cite). This would include a brief explanation of the 2A sanctuary movement and VCDL's direct participation in that, as drawing attention to the 2A sanctuary movement was the intended reason for the rally. (source: https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/20/politics/virginia-gun-rights-rally-richmond/index.html)

--- (The gun rights group -- the Virginia Citizens Defense League -- who organized protests on so-called Lobby Day said their demonstrations would be peaceful and intended to draw attention to "Second Amendment sanctuaries," or what they refer to as localities that vow not to enforce "unconstitutional" gun laws.) --- Fndout (talk) 20:19, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Addition to section, "Demonstration" (Jan 2023)

This section should also include that Stephen Willeford was a speaker at the event, as well.

From one of this articles already-approved sources:

"One of the speakers invited by VCDL included Stephen Willeford, the man who shot and chased the shooter in the Sutherland Springs, Texas, church massacre in 2017. Fndout (talk) 20:22, 8 January 2023 (UTC)