MAN ABOUT TOWN: Reading the Police Reports
By GEORGE SOUTHERN
Falls Church Times Staff
You can learn a lot about a town just by observing the police. That’s what inspired a friend of mine to move to the City of Falls Church some 20 years ago – he noticed that the police cars were Volvos. “I figured, any place where the cops drive Volvos must be pretty classy,” he told me.
Those days are gone, of course, but there’s still lots to observe: Check out our latest video report, for example: City police are cracking down on cyclists running stop signs. Doesn’t that make you feel pretty comfortable about the crime level in our City? Kind of like knowing your children attend a school where the biggest problem is chewing gum in class.
Two years ago this month saw our most outrageous crime in years — a kidnapping, a $500,000 ransom demand, and a hostage held right in the center of town in a bathtub at the Stratford Motor Lodge. I don’t think it was ever reported locally, although the Washington Post picked up on it. Two Chinese engineering students, sophomores at the University of Virginia, grew “bored,” according to court testimony, and decided to kidnap a fellow Chinese immigrant student living in McLean. They knocked him down, blindfolded him, bound him with duct tape, and dumped him in the bathtub at the Stratford, where they had a room.
Two of my children hold UVA diplomas, and I admit to a certain pride about that. UVA has high standards. So how did these numbskulls get accepted? They used their victim’s cell phone to call his host family and demand a ransom. Then they took his credit card to Tyson’s Corner and spent $1,200 on clothes. Meanwhile, Fairfax County Police with the assistance of AT&T traced the cell phone calls to the Stratford. The boys pled guilty and are serving four years of a 20-year sentence, remainder suspended.
Compared to that, your average weekly Crime Report might not seem very exciting. But there are moments:
Attempted Arson: 103 W. Columbia St., (Columbia Baptist Church), September 8, 2009, 3:30 p.m., a bag with a possible arson device was found in an attic space and turned over to the Fire Marshall.
What’s the story behind that? Did someone just happen to be poking around in the church attic and stumble upon a “possible arson device”? This sounds serious, but that’s all we know. Oh, for a staff large enough to investigate all the story leads we receive!
Now, to the point of this whole column: On Oct. 27, Times staff writer George Bromley and I attended a City Council meeting. The chamber was filled with gun nuts packing heat. I say “nuts” because I think anyone who carries a gun into a City Council meeting so qualifies. The Police Chief was there, and he was packing heat too, which I think was a good thing. And before I get 28 comments blasting me for saying “gun nuts,” may I point out that the leader of the faction, Virginia Citizens Defense League President Philip Van Cleave, was well spoken, and wore a suit and tie with no gun. He is not a “nut.” Those who carried weapons into the chamber, maybe loaded, maybe not, are.
Now, fast forward to today: The Crime Report just came out, and it includes the following:
Brandishing a Firearm: 500 blk Roosevelt Blvd., November 7, 10:24 p.m. Responding to reports of a man with a gun, officers arrested a male juvenile carrying a black plastic replica rifle.
Back when I was a juvenile, I remember brandishing a few plastic replica guns myself. My mother never let me own one, but my best friend’s father was a toy salesman, and he had a whole arsenal. We had cap pistols which used real gunpowder, and we fought, and we shot, and we lived, and we died. It was the American way.
And so it still is. A law-abiding citizen can bring his gun to City Council, under the nose of the Chief of Police, and it’s OK. But when a “male juvenile” carries a “black plastic replica rifle,” an arrest is made.
Now, I realize I’m being unfair to the police. I know none of the details. Somebody reported the incident, and Falls Church’s Finest responded. And 10:24 p.m. does seem a late hour for a juvenile to be playing cops and robbers with his friends. But still . . . there’s a delicious irony here – isn’t there?
By George Southern
November 10, 2009
I love reading the crime reports.
It appears that most offenses involve alcohol. Drunk in public. Driving under the influence. Providing alcohol to a minor. Etc.
Next comes car break-ins.
The gun crime you refer to was a plastic gun.
Maybe I’m naive but based on the statistics I’m more worried about the drinkers and the burglars than the people packing heat. I will admit that the Stratford kidnapping was a little scary, but it seems as if it was pretty random that they chose a Falls Church City business for their doomed escapade. Still I’m glad those guys are in jail for a few years. McLean’s Asian UVA population can rest a little easier for awhile.
A few years ago a similar group of two, gun-carrying holsters appeared before the Council stating their case. The only councilman who had the guts to read the riot act to them was David Snyder. He stated in no uncertain terms — legal, constitutional and moral — that they had no right to appear before a public council in a library or a school public bodies etc. bearing arms. And he asked them to leave. They left. I don’t remember if any councilman read “the riot act” to them this time. Mr. Snyder was not present.
I read today’s crime report too. If you look closely, two stolen cars and too many tampering with auto and larceny reports to list individually covering almost half the city in one night seems to be something more worthy of comment. How many were reported? How many were not reported (I know several that were and several that were not based on the list of streets in the crime report)? Were these connected and organized or was this just a bad night? Is this happening in the surrounding neighborhoods in Fairfax and Arlington? What other important information can be provided to your readers?
The increasingly frequent property crimes (including a rash of daylight break-ins at homes in the western part of the City) are the big story. At least a half a dozen cars in a one block radius of my home (including mine) had items stolen from inside or were tampered with on Sunday night. This type of crime has a considerable impact on the quality of life in Falls Church.
As has always been my experience over the years, I found the Police response to be speedy, courteous, professional, and thorough. I’m thankful for the Police response and thankful that the Police Department takes crimes seriously even if they are not “outrageous” or contain “delicious irony”. I assume my report before 6:00 am was early on a long list. If each block noted in the crime report had five or six incidents as was the case where I live, that would be three or four dozen similar crimes in one night in an area of about one square mile. For Falls Church that could be a story that might even reach the level of outrageous.
Mr. Southern, I guess you think anyone exercising their Constitutional rights is a nut. Hmmm. That must make you one too. The only difference between me and you is 1. Why do I say that? Well, you choose to exercise Amendment 1 and I choose to exercise Amendment 2. Also, I refer you to VA code. Open carry of firearms is legal in most (emphasize most) areas of Virginia. Also, Mr. Van Cleave was most likely carrying concealed. You don’t think he would be in a room full of nuts without a gun do you?
GEORGE SOUTHERN RESPONDS: Mr. Keal, you make a good point. I had not considered the possibility that Mr. Van Cleave might have been carrying a concealed weapon. Now, on a related subject, what do you think of the following? The City Council meets in the Courthouse. I thought that didn’t matter, because court was not in session, but the State Code below simply says “Courthouse.” Was it legal to carry weapons into the Courthouse, whether open or concealed? Our Police Chief obviously did not have a problem with it. And is it legal to carry weapons into a school, if school is not in session, or into a place of worship, if no worshiping is occurring?
§ 18.2-283.1. Carrying weapon into courthouse.
It shall be unlawful for any person to possess in or transport into any courthouse in this Commonwealth any (i) gun or other weapon designed or intended to propel a missile or projectile of any kind, (ii) frame, receiver, muffler, silencer, missile, projectile or ammunition designed for use with a dangerous weapon and (iii) any other dangerous weapon, including explosives, stun weapons as defined in § 18.2-308.1, and those weapons specified in subsection A of § 18.2-308. Any such weapon shall be subject to seizure by a law-enforcement officer. A violation of this section is punishable as a Class 1 misdemeanor.
The provisions of this section shall not apply to any police officer, sheriff, law-enforcement agent or official, conservation police officer, conservator of the peace, magistrate, court officer, or judge while in the conduct of such person’s official duties.
Mr. Southern,
Isn’t it wonderful that you can use your 1st Amendment rights to trample on the 2nd Amendment rights of others? You know what is even funnier? Those same people would use their 2nd Amendment rights to defend your 1st.
Oh that wacky U.S. Constitution!
I’m guessing that most of the car break-ins are also alcohol related (or the work of teenagers – or both). I bet if you staked out the convenience stores at about 3 a.m. the people buying beer with loose change are the people breaking into cars.
Mr Southern: It seems someone has changed the rules concerning the FC courthouse and for purposes of a city council meeting the name is changed. You’ll have to ask someone else about that. One thing is for certain and that is VCDL supporters and members attending meetings while carrying a gun check beforehand to ensure that it is legal to do so. As a gun owner and VCDL member I take pride in being a law-abiding citizen. You should also know that law-abiding gun owners either turn away from or disarm themselves before entering a venue where carrying a gun is illegal. Criminals of course ignore the law and do as they please. Most of us also have CHPs which means we have passed a background check, do not have a felony criminal record, and found to be trustworthy by a judge to carry a concealed handgun. Regarding churches I point out that it is not illegal to carry in church with “good and sufficient reason.” The recent rash of shootings by criminals easily justifies the law abiding citizen the right to protect themselves under VA code as they and their loved ones worship or move about in their daily lives. I still think the question stands and I’ll pose it more direct: As a journalist and someone who obviously supports the 1st Amendment why do you speak out against those who choose to legally exercise the 2nd Amendment? As a last note, if we collectively restrict or abolish 2nd Amendment rights, what is to stop the same from happening to other Amendments in the Bill of Rights?
The right to bear arms was not intended to be the privileging of every citizen to carry a gun wherever he or she pleased. If guns were not so easily available, we would not have Malvo and Ft. Hood. But gun dealers are a powerful lobby and frightened citizens think arming themselves will protect them from criminals. Would that it worked that way.
Actually, as a matter of law the Second Amendment was intended to be the privilege of every citizen and is an individual right that has been upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States. It is an extension of the natural right to self defense. Some people do not wish to avail themselves of this right and that is ok, but for the life of me I do not understand why they wish to take that right away from others. I know a lady in the area who has a less-than-stable ex-husband, and short of moving into a police station 24/7 her best recourse is to arm herself; why would you want to deny her that right?
It would be nice if everybody obey laws. Would that it worked that way, but it does not and criminals disobey gun laws just like they disobey other laws. The Ft. Hood massacre is a classic example where the shooter broke the law and took advantage of a gun free zone to shoot innocents who were following the law. Had they been armed, it is almost a certainty that the casualties would have been far fewer.
The truth of the matter is that in the past 20 years as laws have been rewritten to allow law abiding citizens to exercise their Second Amendment rights, the crime rate has steadily decreased. And the truth of the matter is that the cities in the U.S. that restrict gun rights the most have the highest crime rates (e.g. Chicago) while the areas of the country that restrict lawful gun rights the least have the lowest crime rates. Statistics seem to suggest that, indeed, it does work that way.
Sally: As a matter of fact the law in Virginia required that every able bodied man carry a gun for many many decades after the Revolutionary War. The reason our Founders instituted the 2nd Amendment was so that every citizen would be able to defend themselves against a tyrannous government. That threat still exists and most likely always will. Regarding Fort Hood – those were trained combat soldiers. If only one of them had a loaded weapon that day the perpetrator would have been stopped much quicker. He knew that none of them would be armed. We as citizens have the right to protect ourselves not only from tyranny but criminals as well. Also, gun dealers are not the powerful lobby you make them out to be. The NRA is and they have been around a lot longer than you or I. Their primary mission is to make sure we as citizens maintain the right to keep and bear arms as set forth by our Founders.
Sally, what are you talking about in this sentence?
“The right to bear arms was not intended to be the privileging of every citizen to carry a gun wherever he or she pleased.”
In the late 1700s we were expanding west. Almost every household that could afford a gun had one. The revolutionist were the leaders of the country, sure they wanted everyone to have a gun. That is a no brainer. They went so far as to make it a right that everyone could have arms (more than one) and even mentioned that it was necessary.
I wish anti-gun advocates would stop wasting their time talking about how to erase guns and spend their time talking about erasing crime. They might get some where.
@Tony Sparks who said “I wish anti-gun advocates would stop wasting their time talking about how to erase guns and spend their time talking about erasing crime. They might get some where.”
BRAVO!! Indeed, let us enforce the laws we already have. If we put the focus there we might actually get somewhere. The anti gun movement reminds me of a shirker: They spend more time and effort getting out of work than it would take to actually do the work.
Sally, you said (quote)”The right to bear arms was not intended to be the privileging of every citizen to carry a gun wherever he or she pleased. “(end quote)
I think that is EXACTLY what the second ammendment intended. The first ammendment allows you to say what you did. It also allows me to say what I did.
The second ammendment assures us the rights of the first ammendment.
Remember, People shouldn’t be afraid of their government, a government should be afraid of it’s people!
Nothing is more despicable than respect based on fear – a timeless reminder from Albert Camus. Neither citizens nor their governments should live with any fear whatsoever.