A Virginia gun range, along with two gun rights advocacy groups, say that the closure of indoor shooting ranges implemented as a part of the state’s response to the COVID-19 epidemic violates constitutional rights.
Lead plaintiffs SafeSide Lynchburg, Virginia Citizens Defense League, Gun Owners of America Inc., and the Association of Virginia Gun Ranges claim that Virginia’s governor overstepped his authority when he shut down shooting ranges, along with a myriad of other businesses, on March 23, 2020.
Under the Governor’s order, a gun ranges that attempt to stay open could be subject to a $2,500 fine and/or up to a year in jail. SafeSide and the other plaintiffs are seeking an emergency court order halting the portions of Virginia’s COVID-19 response that apply to gun ranges.
Has your gun range been closed during the coronavirus pandemic? Get legal help now.
According to the complaint, SafeSide Lynchburg runs a three-bay indoor shooting range that offers training programs, as well as lower rates for first responders and veterans. The gun range consists of 18 lanes that are 25-yards long as well as four lanes that are 112 yards long.
SafeSide says that, as a result of the Governor’s order requiring it to shut down, it has had to lay off more than half of its staff. The Virginia order reportedly stipulates that gun range locations are considered to be “recreational and entertainment” facilities, like theaters or museums and are subject to a minimum month-long closure.
The gun range lawsuit states that SafeSide, along with other indoor shooting ranges, cannot be considered a “place of indoor public amusement” under the Virginia Constitution.
Claiming that the Governor of Virginia has “no such power” to order the closure of gun ranges, the plaintiffs say that the closures have illegally infringed on the gun rights of Virginians.
Gun range locations are protected, say the plaintiffs, under Virginia’s Constitutional right to keep and bear arms, train unorganized militias, and to allow current and new gun owners to practice.
In addition to violating the state constitution, the complaint alleges that the executive order violates other state laws such as Virginia’s Emergency Services and Disaster Law.
The gun range lawsuit says that one of the plaintiffs, the Virginia Citizens Defense League, sent a letter to the Governor in response to the COVID-19 restriction explaining the problematic aspects of the law, but has not heard anything of substance in response.
In addition to noting the important constitutional rights that protect gun ranges, the advocacy group’s letter also explains that shooting ranges have “sophisticated ventilation and filtration systems…[that] refuse the risk of exposure to lead and other airborne contaminants.” SafeSide’s ventilation system is reportedly one of many gun range locations equipped with such technology.
“Each lane is separated by bulletproof dividers,” states the gun range lawsuit. “The range has a million-dollar-plus state-of-the-art air ventilation/filtration system that is automatically monitored and computer-controlled by a ‘smart’ system provided by Carey’s Small Arms Ventilation, which causes a complete air exchange every 90 seconds, with HEPA filtration which cleans and scrubs 99.97 percent of contaminants in the air continuously. While the range is open, air is continuously channeled downrange, away from the shooters.”
The gun range lawsuit also points out that federal agencies have deemed shooting ranges “Critical Infrastructure.” For example, despite being closed to the public, SafeSide reportedly remains in use by law enforcement.
This is not the first lawsuit to be filed protesting the closure of gun ranges and stores under various state responses to the coronavirus pandemic. The National Rifle Association has filed a lawsuit in California arguing that the state’s “shelter-in-place” order deeming gun stores a non-essential business subject to closure violates the Second Amendment of the Constitution.
Another lawsuit has been filed by gun owners in New Jersey, claiming that the state overstepped constitutional limits by shutting down gun stores and the ability of people to obtain background checks.
An overwhelming number of businesses have been affected by COVID-19 closures, along with workers and their families, in an attempt to address the unprecedented spread of this virus.
While state mandated business closures are an important step in curbing the devastating effects of the coronavirus, there are complex legal issues affecting the rights of everyday citizens.
From businesses failing to protect their workers in the face of the virus, to the marketing of deceptive products, Top Class Actions has a comprehensive coronavirus legal guide to help consumers navigate these unprecedented times.
The plaintiffs are represented by David G. Browne of Spiro & Browne PLC, and William J. Olson, Robert J. Olson, and Herbert W. Titus of William J. Olson PC.
The Gun Range Coronavirus Closure Lawsuit is Lynchburg Range & Training LLC d/b/a SafeSide Lynchburg, et al. v. Northam, et al., Case No. CL20000333-00, in the Circuit Court for the City of Lynchburg, Virginia.
Join a Free Coronavirus Class Action Lawsuit Investigation
If you believe your rights were violated in a way that is directly related to the coronavirus pandemic, you may qualify to join this coronavirus class action lawsuit investigation.
ATTORNEY ADVERTISING
Top Class Actions is a Proud Member of the American Bar Association
LEGAL INFORMATION IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE
Top Class Actions Legal Statement
©2008 – 2025 Top Class Actions® LLC
Various Trademarks held by their respective owners
This website is not intended for viewing or usage by European Union citizens.
One thought on Gun Range Lawsuit Says Coronavirus Closures Violate State Laws
Add me please