Yes, Virginia, State Lawmakers Really Do Want to Seize Your Guns

virginia democrats gun control

Virginia State Sen-elect, Ghazala Hashmi speaks to supporters at a Democratic victory party in Richmond, Va., Tuesday, Nov. 5, 2019. (AP Photo/Steve Helber)

By Larry Keane

Got guns, Virginia? Your state government wants them.

Virginia lawmakers are pre-filing bills that would clamp down on gun rights to the point of dispossessing law-abiding gun owners of their legally purchased modern sporting rifles and other commonly owned semi-automatic rifles, shotguns, and handguns. Everything is on the table for the incoming state legislature, from criminalizing youth hunters to forcing through the entire wish list of gun control measures.

Virginia state Sen. Richard Saslaw, D-Fairfax. (AP Photo/Steve Helber)

Virginia Democrat State Sen. Richard L. Saslaw, who represents portions of Alexandria, Fairfax County and Falls Church, all suburbs of Washington D.C., sponsored S.B. 16, which would prohibit the sale, transfer and possession of so-called “assault firearms” and certain magazines. Violating the measure would be a state felony.

The text of the proposed legislation goes further than the states with the strictest of gun control laws. If passed, Virginia’s lawmakers would instantly turn lawful owners of America’s most popular-selling centerfire rifle into instant felons, unless they dispossess themselves of their legally purchased modern sporting rifle.

There are far more than 16 million modern sporting rifles in private ownership in America. While the exact number of these popular rifles in Virginia isn’t known as state-specific estimates don’t exist, it’s important to note there is no proposed grandfather clause to exempt the likely several hundreds of thousands of rifles already in legal possession or even to register them.

New York and Connecticut passed their draconian gun control laws that prohibited the sale of modern sporting rifles but allowed those already lawfully owned to kept if registered with the state. The attempt to register these rifles was an abysmal failure, however.

As many as one million modern sporting rifles were estimated to be legally owned in The Empire State when they forced through a ban and registration in 2014. Connecticut did the same in 2013, where there was believed to be 350,000 rifles.  At the registration deadline in Connecticut, just 41,347 rifles were registered.

New York refused to answer the question until a Freedom of Information request was filed. State officials finally admitted only 23,847 registrations were filed.

Changing Definitions

The legislation would also change what is considered an “assault firearm.” Under the proposed definition, it would include any firearm that is capable of accepting a detachable magazine and one of the following characteristics:

  • a folding or telescoping stock
  • a pistol grip
  • a thumbhole stock
  • a second handgrip or a protruding grip that can be held by the non-trigger hand
  • a bayonet mount
  • a grenade launcher
  • a flare launcher
  • a silencer
  • a flash suppressor
  • a muzzle brake
  • a muzzle compensator
  • a threaded barrel capable of accepting a silencer, flash suppressor, a muzzle brake or a muzzle compensator, or,
  • any characteristic of like kind, which is left open to the individual to determine if they’re in violation of the proposed law.

Pistols would be subject to the same definition, with the exception of the pistol grip. Also banned would be any firearm capable of holding more than 10 rounds with a fixed magazine, shotguns with revolving cylinders, or any of the listed characteristics, and those shotguns with a fixed magazine capacity of more than seven rounds. The ban also extends to “assault firearms” parts that can be assembled into a rifle.

Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam speaks to supporters at a Democratic victory party in Richmond, Va., Tuesday, Nov. 5, 2019. (AP Photo/Steve Helber)

Magazines

It’s not just the guns they’re after. The proposed legislation would also ban the import, sale, barter or transfer of any firearms magazine that’s designed to hold more than 10 rounds.

That would seem to allow the millions of standard capacity magazines to remain as legally held, it’s just the overwhelming majority of the rifles with which they’re designed to be used wouldn’t be. The language is also important. It reads “designed to hold,” which indicates that after-market parts to limit the capacity wouldn’t work. Only those “designed” for just 10 rounds would remain legal for sale.

Age-Based Gun Ban

If that weren’t bad enough, Sen. Saslaw also introduced S.B. 18 that would institute an age-based gun ban, making it a felony to purchase a firearm unless the buyer is over 21. That would deny adult Virginians their Constitutional right to keep and bear arms, yet they are eligible to vote, serve on juries, marry, serve in uniform and are fully vested in their rights to free speech and exercise of religion.

But it does more. It would also erase the Old Dominion’s hunting and recreational target shooting heritage by making it a felony to allow anyone under 18 to be in possession of a firearm by themselves. This would make criminals of those parents who allow their teens to hunt by themselves on their own property unless they were under the immediate supervision of a parent or guardian or adult over 21 with parental permission.

Virginia’s gun rights battle is real. The intention to disarm law-abiding Virginians is serious. The National Shooting Sports Foundation is focused and determined to defeat this gun control agenda and protect the ability of Virginians to exercise their Second Amendment rights.

 

 

 

comments

  1. avatar Defens says:

    Hey, my Ruger Gunsite Scout Rifle is now an assault weapon! Yippee!

    1. avatar Red says:

      Mini shells in a shotgun, is yours now an ‘assault weapon’? Also why 8 rounds; isn’t 10 the magic number for leftist?

      1. avatar Kahlil says:

        If I am not mistaken the wording is full size shell as gun was designed for. It might not have made it in the summary here but that is what I read last week, so mini shells don’t create an assault weapon. Guess I am gonna spend some time over the holidays getting some extra magazines for what I do have, just to be on the safe side. My mini-14 is exempt as i understand it since there is no threaded barrel or flash suppressor installed. I haven’t seen what this means for items like the tac14 and shockwave, since they skirt all the refs here.

      2. avatar Hush says:

        They are not going to stop at any number >0(zero)!!!

  2. avatar Ranger Rick says:

    Virginia is about to instantly become “safer”……

    1. avatar SAFEupstateFML says:

      Well damn I think we may have a new competitor for most infringing gun law state. Wouldn’t wish half of that on anyone.

      1. avatar HP says:

        If this stuff passes, Virginians can move to our free state, New York.

        Yikes

        1. avatar SAFEupstateFML says:

          And the CA/SAFE compliant parts and firearms will need further neutering to be sold in Virginia.

        2. avatar Kelly R. says:

          No, no; remember? Maryland is “The Free State” That’s their official motto.

    2. avatar California Richard says:

      Virginia is about to become Califor….. oh, wait…. worse than California. Virginia will be the new meme for statutory gun laws. I imagine California politicians won’t stand for that and ask Oregon to hold it’s beer while it tries to out-do Va. Good thing I didn’t leave California for the gun owner’s utopia of Virginia. /sarc/

      1. avatar Marcus says:

        Good thing CA lead the way with its bans so now we have a full blown market for featureless and ghost gun options.

        1. avatar SAFEupstateFML says:

          Ugly as sin but some of the newer Thurston designs are actually comfortable.

    3. avatar Thixotropic says:

      And Bloomberg is running for President.

      1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

        There’s news about Bloomie in the new polls –

        “A cluster of four candidates stand at 3%, including the latest entrant to the race, former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg.”

        https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/27/politics/cnn-poll-joe-biden-pete-buttigieg/index.html

        3 percent. Don’t sweat it…

  3. avatar ESMDHokie77 says:

    Click the link to sb16, it says new assault weapon definition is still semi auto only. But yes it still sucks.

  4. avatar Sam I Am says:

    ICYMI….

    Unconstitutional laws can be passed and implemented far quicker than they can be challenged and overturned. The new “Anaconda Plan”.

    1. avatar California Richard says:

      People can also resist those laws as soon as they are enacted. Where did all the bump stocks go? Boating accident anybody?

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “People can also resist those laws as soon as they are enacted. Where did all the bump stocks go? ”

        Hiding something is a sorta weak form of resistance. The laws are being designed such that public use (or even private use in a DGU) becomes criminal. Except for squirreling away guns and ammo waiting for the “uprising” is one thing, but strangling normal use is also a goal of the anti-gunners. If you can’t lawfully use the guns that become contraband, the goal is met.

        1. avatar Kyle says:

          Its regional. In CA, enforcement is HIGHLY selective.

          SF? and you best stick to the law.
          Rural Ca? You can burrow the magloader from the sheriff to reload your 100 round drum mag.

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Rural Ca? You can burrow the magloader from the sheriff to reload your 100 round drum mag.”

          So far. When semi-auto firearms are essentially outlawed, and you use one in self-defense….LE isn’t going to “look the other way”.

      2. avatar Baldwin says:

        Already resisting…20 2A sanctuary counties in just 3 weeks…and counting!

        1. avatar Baldwin says:

          Got another one…21 and counting!!!

        2. avatar HP says:

          It’s a nice gesture, at the very least. After the SAFE Act passed here in NY, almost every single county outside of NYC passed resolutions condemning the law. It didn’t matter.

          Good luck down there, stay strong.

    2. avatar I Haz A Question says:

      That’s been California’s policy for the past twenty years. They get challenged and knocked down one by one, but it requires time, money, effort, and perseverance. In the time it takes to remove one unconstitutional law, the Leftist Dems pass five more.

      1. avatar SAFEupstateFML says:

        Only good side is it creates laws so egregious that courts actually have to take notice.

        1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

          Bingo.

          That kind of blatant overreach just *might* get us the ‘Golden Ticket’ of strict scrutiny… 🙂

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “That kind of blatant overreach just *might* get us the ‘Golden Ticket’ of strict scrutiny…”

          IIUC, the SC ruling will address only the NY case. Even if SC demands strict scrutiny be applied to this case, that ruling affects no other case. If SC should declare that all 2A disputes must use strict scrutiny, that does not re-open every prior case, nor does it signify that all gun control laws must forthwith be subjected to judicial review using strict scrutiny. All of which means, every gun control law/regulation must be challenged individually, all the way to the SC, and the SC must be willing to hear every 2A case. presented.

        3. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

          “IIUC, the SC ruling will address only the NY case.”

          Heller only addressed a DC handgun possession ban.

          MacDonald ruled “This means all of you”. (National)

          The minimum the NY Pistol decision will most likely address is that carry outside the home is expressly constitutional. The follow-up decision in a few years will likely address the nuts-and-bolts of outside the home carry, unless Thomas insures we won’t have to walk that road again.

          Thomas is up there in years. He may be tired of putting up with 2A infringement. and plans to rule accordingly. (We can hope…)

        4. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “MacDonald ruled “This means all of you”. (National)”

          Yet, not a single prior conviction was reviewed or overturned immediately after the ruling. Each case that might be related will require individual adjudication against McDonald….presuming anything in McDonald is clearly retroactive.

          Even going forward, the NYC outcome we want will likely be treated as Heller and McDonald have been: noted for its breach, not its adherence.

          Keep expectations under control.

      2. avatar Garrison Hall says:

        Ultimately there will have to be reckoning where the Supreme Court either supports the unambiguous, quite literal meaning of the 2nd Amendment or it renders it, along with the rest of the Bill of Rights, irrelevant to modern legal needs and interpretations. More and more the legal hair-splitting going on must ultimately lead to something as far reaching and foundation shaking as Roe v Wade or the Civil Rights Act.

        Gun control laws all ignore the part of the 2nd that says that the purpose of an armed citizenry is a protection against governmental tyranny. Gun-control politics is intentionally ignorant of history in this respect. Revolutionary militias, for instance, were inherently local and volunteer based. The militia that showed up at Bundy Ranch was a perfect example of the kinds of militias that the founders had in mind when they wrote the 2nd Amendment. More specifically, an interesting constitutional question is how can a militia that is an arm of the state ever be used to oppose governmental tyranny when that tyranny comes from the state? The obvious answer is that the founders understood very well that those localized village militias could reliably oppose tyranny because they were not regulated by the state.

        The Supreme Court is going to have to decide whether the 2nd Amendment actually means what it says or whether it needs to be reinterpreted to conform to evolving contemporary political values which are a clear departure from the kind of America our founders risked their lives to establish.

      3. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

        “Yet, not a single prior conviction was reviewed or overturned immediately after the ruling.”

        After Heller, NYC, San Fran and others were forced to start issuing permits for guns in homes. That was a win.

        This should break the logjam on carry permits. And as you said earlier, local governments will respond with blizzards of new gun laws.

        The game plan that needs to be to followed is the playbook used in litigating civil rights, because gun rights are civil rights…

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “This should break the logjam on carry permits.”

          There is a case awaiting hearing in the 9th that asserts that only long guns are protected by the Second Amendment, and only open carry (loaded or unloaded). Now, using speculation upon speculation,….if the courts agree with that, carry permits are vulnerable, as is concealed carry of handguns. Then we get to see what happens to states with “constitutional carry”.

    3. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

      “Unconstitutional laws can be passed and implemented far quicker than they can be challenged and overturned. The new “Anaconda Plan”.”

      That’s *exactly* what they are doing, and our side at the SCOTUS can see that as well.

      How ‘NY Pistol’ is ruled will give us a good idea how they may address that legal tactic, I hope. Games like that just may help us get the votes for strict scrutiny…

  5. avatar BatPenguin says:

    Virginia Gun Owners you will need to organize. I know Illinois is no bastgion of Gun Rights, but even with supermajorities in both chambers of the Illinois General Assemblies and a governor we kept the Democrats from passing more gun laws. We have IGOLD, Illinois Gun Owners Lobby Day. McDonald in McDonald vs City of Chicago came about because he attended an IGOLD. McDonald vs City of Chicago has been one of the more important gun rights cases here lately. Don’t just rollover, organize and never let up the pressure.

  6. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

    Petty tyrants are want to do what petty tyrants do,until they are reminded of their place and tree watering as Mr. Jefferson put it for just this type of circumstances. Keep Your Powder Dry !

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Green Mtn. Boy,

      Why should we afford any respect to these politicians? Because they only want a fraction of our firearms at this time?

      This is no different than a man who demands that a woman allow him to “only” f0ndle her chest. And that should be okay because he did not demand full-on rape? Obviously, any violation of that woman’s body is a violation and demanding to f0ndle her chest is still violating her. And, on top of that, why would we trust that the man will actually stop at only f0ndling her chest and not escalate to full-on rape?

      Likewise, politicians who demand any of our firearms are violating us. The violation may not be quite as egregious as demanding all of our firearms — it is nevertheless a significant violation. Perhaps more important: those politicians have demonstrated that they are willing to violate us. Therefore, we should have every expectation that they will continue to violate us until WE put a stop to it — just as a woman should have every expectation that a man who begins a rape will not stop until someone besides the rapist puts a stop to it.

  7. avatar Big Bill says:

    Shotguns with revolving cylinders?
    It makes me wonder just how she was frightened as a child.

    1. avatar Reason says:

      “Shotguns with revolving cylinders?
      It makes me wonder just how she was frightened as a child.”

      Probably a horrible toilet flushing incident.

      1. avatar SAFEupstateFML says:

        Someone forgot the thing that folds up?

        1. avatar Hush says:

          First one on the list:
          “a folding or telescoping stock”

        2. avatar SAFEupstateFML says:

          Apply to toilet for joke.

    2. avatar Jabberwockey says:

      Street Sweeper shotguns and it’s later derivatives used a rotating cylinder to line up its individual chambers with the barrel.

      1. avatar Hannibal and the Elephants says:

        An according to Ian of Forgotten Weapons, the Street Sweeper sucks worse than its name.

        1. avatar Bre says:

          And it is already banned as a destructive device so the cylinder shotgun thing is rediculous. The only other two I know of that are not muzzle loading or one-off designs are essentially unobtainable.

        2. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

          .410 shotgun shells fit in the rotating cylinder of a Taurus “Judge”…

        3. avatar JR Pollock says:

          They’re probably going after items like these. 26 round capacity, 21″ barrel, semi-auto.

          https://rothperformance.com/product/rci-xm2xi-integrated-xrail-benelli-m2/#install-roth-oversize-safety-button

        4. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “They’re probably going after items like these. 26 round capacity, 21″ barrel, semi-auto.”

          I worry about my .9mm full semi-auto plastic fantastic. I know they will start at my house.

  8. avatar Red says:

    Has old Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam ever said whether he was the one in the robes or the black face?

    Amazing how the democratics gave him a pass, almost like he was in a ‘secret’ organization.

    1. avatar Baldwin says:

      Bloomberg’s money was well spent…for the Commicrats .

  9. avatar Ark says:

    Every single gun owner in VA should be occupying the state capitol building, right now, every day, until these bills are buried.

  10. avatar Baldwin says:

    SB16 will also outlaw your stash of “assault weapon” components…barrels, muzzle devices, pistol grips, vertical fore grips, +10 round magazines, barrel shrouds.

    “”Assault firearm” includes any part or combination of parts designed or intended to convert, modify, or otherwise alter a firearm into an assault firearm…”

    1. avatar Anymouse says:

      I don’t know of any part designed or intended to make an “assault weapon.” I don’t think you could find a manufacturer or designer to testify as such.

  11. avatar Anne Nonymous says:

    Also look up SB64, which bans “paramilitary activity”, which includes training people to shoot and open carry protesting, which it calls “intimidation”.

    1. avatar Baldwin says:

      Suppressing 1A and 2A at the same time! Stepping on the snake!

    2. avatar GS650G says:

      Next up.they will ban ideas contrary to their ideas.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “Next up.they will ban ideas contrary to their ideas.”

        They already have. It’s called “hate speech”.

    3. avatar In for a Penny, In for a pound says:

      Anne-conservatives in Montana passed an intimidation law, and it is only used against Whites. I can open carry anywhere I want to except if a Jewish person, who the law was meant to be used by, is afraid of a large White man with a gun on his hip.

  12. avatar Rubiconcrossed says:

    The question is not “If” all this will be passed but “when”. Its iron clad guaranteed the power mad lower courts will declare all of this completely Constitutional. Now the corrupt Supreme Court will be on the hot seat as to whether they refuse to hear the case or not. I am not holding my breath. Kavanough already has revealed his true power mad colors by declaring the machine gun ban by Reagan was a good idea. If Kavanough hates machine guns he sure a hell does not like assault rifles any better.

    The only question remains is how severe will the penalties be if people do not bow down and crawl on their bellies to the centers that are going to confiscate and melt down all the thousands of weapons Australian style. Which brings up another scenario. The corrupt power mad Courts could let this drag on for years and by the time they decide the weapons will all be melted down anyway. A few dramatic arrested, a few mass killings with the News Media cheering on the men in black and the majorty of people will throw in the towel not willing to become another french fried “David Koresh-ed” and all he did was not get his church “BATF Approved” Yes every gun owner in Virginia is already feeling the noose tightening around their necks.

    1. avatar Void says:

      Your concern seems to belong under a bridge.

      1. avatar Aaron says:

        Long and deep baby!

        1. avatar SAFEupstateFML says:

          Veiled reference to a troll?

    2. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

      “Now the corrupt Supreme Court will be on the hot seat as to whether they refuse to hear the case or not. I am not holding my breath.”

      Have you heard the big news? SCOTUS is hearing the oral arguments in a carry outside of the home case, ‘NY Pistol’ in less than one week!!!

      1. avatar Rubiconcrossed says:

        It has already been explained on this forum about the difference between the present case under review by the court and cases that involve a ban or restriction on firearms ownership. They are two completely different animals.

    3. avatar Cloud says:

      Actually you’re wrong. Kavanaugh told Feinstein to stuff her “assault weapons” ban.

  13. avatar TexTed says:

    Just waiting for some dumbass to tell me again that there is zero difference between the Republicans and the Democrats…

    1. avatar In for a Penny, In for a pound says:

      They are two sides of the same coin, only the republicans are like Lenny in “Of Mice and Men”.. Both parties are threats to Liberty, exactly as the Founders warned about the Republic decaying into a two party democracy. The liberals will pass the laws and the conservative cops will enforce it. Conservatives will call for Citizens to be crucified when the Citizens start to drop the gun confiscators, in the confiscators homes, as the 2nd Amendment allows.

      Republicans prefer wealth over Liberty and will sell out WE Citizens like they have in the past. Gun free zones are bipartisan, because it was easier for republicans to restrict all Citizen’s rights instead of admitting all cultures are not equal.

  14. The newly conservative scotus will surely have something to do with stopping this treason. Something tells me we’ll soon see a ruling that will destroy unconstitutional gun control as we now know it.

    1. avatar SAFEupstateFML says:

      Party begins next week and will be hoping for a positive step or two.

  15. avatar GS650G says:

    Sadly MD is better.

  16. avatar Wiregrass says:

    So it’s not limited to semiautomatics anymore. My CZ 452 bolt action. 22lr would be an “assault firearm” if I were to fit it with a thumbhole stock. Maybe the Fudds will wake up now.

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “So it’s not limited to semiautomatics anymore. My CZ 452 bolt action. 22lr would be an “assault firearm” if I were to fit it with a thumbhole stock. Maybe the Fudds will wake up now.”

      Nobody needs no stinkin’ thumbhole rifle stock to hunt them some bahr. An’ nary a real hunter would use .22 fer real huntin’.

      1. avatar Baldwin says:

        Bill applies to semi-auto, not bolt guns.

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Bill applies to semi-auto, not bolt guns.”

          Zackly. It’s why I doan worry none ’bout muh Second Amendment rights. Jes’ like snowboarders on a ski slope, semi-auto guns should be banned fer huntin’. Them weapons o’ war jes tear up the countryside, an’ destroy the game meat. If’n ya’ caint getcher dinner with one shot, ya’ need tuh stay home ’til ya’ kin shoot right.

        2. avatar SAFEupstateFML says:

          Sam to that last point ‘shooting on public land that’s illegal, or just wait your turn to join our club where you can shoot one round every 10 seconds.’ Some are better on the second part but be damned if we don’t discourage new shooters through cost of entry or available space.

        3. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Sam to that last point ‘shooting on public land that’s illegal, or just wait your turn to join our club where you can shoot one round every 10 seconds.”

          Sounds invitin’, but I woodn’t join no club that would have me.

        4. avatar SAFEupstateFML says:

          Fudd life for a lot of the area but there are gems here and there

    2. avatar Ross says:

      They won’t, once a fudd always a fudd. It will come down to those who have a true understanding of the intent and purpose of the Second Amendment to fight for their rights.

      1. avatar Baldwin says:

        So true!

  17. avatar WARFAB says:

    Can’t help but wonder if SCOTUS sees the stuff like this on the horizon and considers it when looking at cases currently on the docket. Next week will probably be full of news reports showing antis melting down.

    1. avatar JR Pollock says:

      Clarence Thomas is champing at the bit to restore the 2A to it’s rightful place rather than as he said, “a disfavored right”. So is Gorsuch, and Alito is a strong 2A supporter, as evidenced by his opinion in Caetano v MA.

      Get your RGB voodoo dolls out and start sticking pins in them. If she croaks before the decision is reached, it’s game over for the antis.

  18. avatar Knobbytire says:

    On one hand, while they are proposing a HUGE variety of things, I doubt (hope) that they won’t be able to pass much of this.

    On the other hand, the fact that they are spewing so many things indicates to me that they have no real strategy to make coherent laws. It’s a “let’s try this” mentality. I half expect them to pass a law that gun owners must wear purple tutus on Thursdays – just because, with no reason and no expectation of an reduction in crime.

    Not only are lawmakers flailing, but they will cause law enforcement in Virginia to flail, as well. That will yield a higher crime rate just for the simple fact that no one on their side really thought these things through.

  19. avatar Johnny Bullets says:

    Someone is voting for those people,

    1. avatar Ragnar says:

      What do you mean by “those” people? :-p

      Oh wait, you mean “Assault Lawmakers” filing “Assault Laws” to “Assault” your civil rights?

  20. avatar Hannibal says:

    (capable of accepting) “a second handgrip…”

    so, pretty much any gun that has a rail on it.

    1. avatar JP Ruiz says:

      “Capable of accepting a detachable magazine of more than 10 rounds”, applies to ALL Firearms of ALL actions which means 75% of the Firearms in the Country would be outlawed in Virginia by the bill.

      BTW, the 4th Circuit Court is a Leftist Pile of Dogshit like the 9th Circuit………We know whom they’ll be siding with.

      1. avatar Southern Cross says:

        It’s a feature, not a bug.

      2. avatar Hannibal says:

        I don’t see that quote in the law. There is a prohibition on a fixed magazine of more than 10 rounds and of magazines more than 10 rounds but no prohibition on the capability of accepting a detachable magazine of more than 10 rounds because, of course, there is no functional difference between the capability of accepting a 10 versus 30 round mag. They’re modeling this legislation off of statutes I unfortunately know quite well.

        So you can have a pistol with a detachable magazine but not a magazine more than 10. Same thing with a rifle BUT the moment you have any other evil feature (like the one I mentioned) PLUS the detachable magazine, you’re screwed. Therefore you can either have the standard features of an AR with a fixed mag or a ‘neutered’ AR with a detachable mag.

    1. avatar Baldwin says:

      Don’t tread on me!

    2. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “Sic semper tyrannis”

      To quote that famous bard of rock ‘n roll…”That’ll be the day..”

  21. avatar JP Ruiz says:

    The proposed Virginia AWB looks like a clone, carbon-copy, and plagiarized document of that Assault Weapons Ban State Congressional Amendment Ballot Proposal in Florida.

    These Stalinist Scumbags are coordinating across the country. Virginia was just option 1B to Florida being 1A, as it looks like that Florida Assault Weapons Ban State Constitutional Amendment isn’t going anywhere.

    1. avatar SAFEupstateFML says:

      Not doubting you but haven’t heard of this before. Do you have a link handy?

        1. avatar SAFEupstateFML says:

          Damn they really did coordinate efforts for the gun control crowd. Out of curiosity how “bipartisan” is that Something Florida group?

      1. avatar JP Ruiz says:

        It isn’t “bi-partisan” at all. It’s gotten BANKROLLED by Wallstreet and Silicon Valley Billionaire Democrat Donors, aka, the usual suspects (Bloomberg, Soros, Steyer, Zuckerberg, Corzine).

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “It isn’t “bi-partisan” at all.”

          When you control the language, you control the definition of words and phrases. Long ago, “bi-partisan” generally conveyed the condition where there were about equal numbers of both parties supporting legislation, or regulations. Watching closely today, and you cannot ignore that “bi-partisan” only means at least one person from the opposition joined the majority.

  22. avatar GunnyGene says:

    I asked my Crystal Ball if this would become law.

    It flashed in all the colors of the rainbow for a few minutes then went dark. A few minutes later a deep voice came out of it and said: “I’m done. Y’all morons are on your own.” And then it disintegrated into a pile of spent brass. Maybe there’s a message there, ya think?

    1. avatar VaqueroJustice says:

      Maerlyn’s Rainbow was never considered to be very reliable.

    2. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

      “I asked my Crystal Ball if this would become law.

      It flashed in all the colors of the rainbow for a few minutes then went dark.”

      All colors of the rainbow?

      Congrats, your ‘Crystal Ball’ is, er, *was* LBGTQ-whatever compatible… 😉

  23. avatar M1Lou says:

    This is one of the most egregious anti-gun laws I’ve ever seen. It is a blatant violation of the constitution, and ignores that Heller even existed. Why do the dems ignore Heller? Because they don’t like the ruling and think it was “wrong”. Yet, if they actually understood the writing and philosophy of the founders and were intellectually honest, they would restrain themselves. Madison was really clear on the second amendment and it’s explained in the Federalist papers. The dems just refuse to read and understand the Federalist papers as it’s does not help their quest for ultimate power. It’s also why they continue to ignore the constitution and twist words that are very clearly written. Shall not be infringed is not hard to understand.

    I have two silencers in jail still, and I am waiting for one to ship from SilencerCo so I can start the next nine month wait here in VA. What happens if they are not out of jail by the date? I am only a temporary resident of the state and will leave some time in 2021 so maybe my FFL will hold on the them (if possible) and transfer them to my next state. Of course that’s more money and time wasted due to petty tyrants throwing a fit.

    Unfortunately I know whatever state I am eventually sent to (most likely the south) is only a few years away from turning blue and getting unconstitutional laws like this shoved down our throats. I’ll do what I can to help fight here until I leave. Virginia was on my short list for retirement locations, now, not so much.

    What is also scary is I am not even sure I can get all of my AR and “assault weapon” components out of my house as they are small and like to hide in random boxes. Most of my current home defense weapons (actually most of my collection) will become illegal to own in the state if this passes. I bought two shotguns two weeks ago to eventually replace my home defense rifle with. If I am rounds limited, I’m going make sure they count with #00.

    To those of you saying just ignore the law, don’t comply. That sounds great! Who is going to come to my aid when the SWAT team is at the door ready to shoot my dog, my family, and then me? That’s what I thought.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      We need to ignore the requirement to REGISTER our guns. There is no conceivable benefit to registration, none. The ONLY effort it can assist is confiscation. If they have to invade and destroy the homes of EVERY person, not just specifically the gun owners, it cannot be done.

    2. avatar Aaron says:

      Call me, I will be there.

  24. avatar Adam says:

    Shame, of all the circuit courts, the 4th doesn’t look like one which Trump will be flipping any time soon. Looks like VA will have to live with this insanity for the foreseeable future.

  25. avatar Timothy Toroian says:

    Why do stupid people keep asking for a demonstration of the utility of the Second? They also need a demonstration of Article 1, section 9, clause 3 regarding no ex post facto laws and section 1 of the 14th Amendment. Also, the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence does not specify whether or not the long list of abuses and usurpations refers to the length of time or the length of the list.

  26. avatar MLee says:

    Let’s all hope RBG croaks over and Trump can put another justice on the bench.

  27. avatar BJ says:

    VA? Welcome to CA!!

    1. avatar SoCalJack says:

      VA politicians lookin’ to one up CA politicians or what?

  28. avatar Kyle says:

    They better start cranking out prisons fast.

    Compliance with those laws will be mostly non-existent

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “Compliance with those laws will be mostly non-existent…”

      Compliance, as in not using publicly? Isn’t that exactly the intent of the law? Oh….you will use your firearm in places people cannot see you? How do you plan to get there? Transporting an illegal firearm is not risk-free. Low risk, but not risk free. Then there is carrying for self-defense. Concealed is concealed? Great. But if you use your illegal firearm in self-defense, you are outed as someone intentionally violating the law against your non-compliant firearm. Think gun sanctuaries won’t charge you with using an illegal firearm? The intent of gun sanctuaries is that they will not come looking for your violations, but use that illegal gun in self-defense, and they will be without any wiggle room because the gun use will become public knowledge.

      Keep looking for the jack-booted thugs to assault your home to take your guns.

      1. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

        “Keep looking for the jack-booted thugs to assault your home to take your guns.”

        Um. No. What you Jethro’s are forgetting is that the next president which will be either Warren or Bloomberg will not be using “jack-booted thugs”. It will be the local police along with the U.S. military and backed up by U.N. troops who will be assigned to confiscate each and every gun and accessory across the entire nation. You think Warren or Bloomberg is going to follow a piece of paper that was written over a hundred years ago? That’s typical Hillbilly thinking. We, the social democratic party, are going to rewrite the laws in OUR favor. And you country hicks who can’t even use proper grammar on a forum page won’t be able to do a thing about it. We are the media. We are the education system. We are People of Color, ANTIFA, LBGTQ’s, immigrants, and the indigenous tribes of this country who you have bullied and intimidated for all these years and we will take back our county in 2020! Get rid of your weapons of violence or start packing. You Hillbillies think you can hide your guns? What a laugh. Our well paid informants will dig up every last one of your Polymer 80’s and you will be left with nothing. You got nothing. No guns, No power. Nothing. After that we will take away all your items of aggression. Trucks, knives, baseball bats. And then for the final twist of irony we will take your families and reeducate them. You will bow to the socialist norm. Sleep tight Jethro’s your time is coming.

        1. avatar Baldwin says:

          @Vlad
          “We are…”etc., etc. No, you’re not. You’re not going to do anything at all. Because it takes balls. And, judging by your posts, you can’t even count your own nuts and come up with the same number twice in a row! You are not a threat to anyone except yourself. Come 2121, Trump will still be your president! Now go away, you’re bothering the adults.

        2. “Um. No. What you Jethro’s are forgetting is that the next president which will be either Warren or Bloomberg will not be using “jack-booted thugs”. It will be the local police along with the U.S. military and backed up by U.N. troops who will be assigned to confiscate each and every gun and accessory across the entire nation. You think Warren or Bloomberg is going to follow a piece of paper that was written over a hundred years ago?”

          And you have obviously imbibed the demonRat kool-aid. You treasonous freaks are so blind that you don’t see what’s happening right in front of your eyes. The demonRat party has committed suicide with this impeachment scam. Warren or BloomingIdiotberg don’t stand a snowball’s chance in hell of winning. And all of your pet traitor groups are going to be thrashed soundly. You traitor’s have awakened the sleeping giant. And we are going to fight back and absolutely CRUSH you freaks of nature.

        3. avatar adverse6 says:

          Vote for it and you shall get it.

        4. avatar HP says:

          Has to be satire

        5. avatar Sgt. Flamm says:

          Not bad trolling except for poor spelling, grammar, sentence structure, and logic.

        6. avatar balais says:

          LOL don’t feed the troll.

          Even though anti-gunners love genocide

  29. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    To Larry Keane
    Sir please explain as an NRA insider how the NRA failed in spending less money defending it’s own backyard with pro gun advertising? Compared to the antI civil rights groups who spent several hundred thousand dollars more than the NRA???

  30. avatar strych9 says:

    “any characteristic of like kind, which is left open to the individual to determine if they’re in violation of the proposed law.”

    WTAF does that mean?

    1. avatar Prndll says:

      It means you get to determine wether or not your within the the bounds of the law. As such, it renders the whole thing pointless, meaningless, and without teeth.

      Ya know…kinda like you get to determine wether you are male or female at any given moment.

      1. avatar strych9 says:

        Um, no.

  31. The gun owners should ban together and have war if they try to take our guns. My gun are locked and loaded. Bring on the war. I am a hunter and I have never shot anyone

    1. avatar adverse6 says:

      “Gun nuts” trying to overthrow a legally elected government? At least you might go out in a blaze of glory.

      1. “Gun nuts” trying to overthrow a legally elected government?

        Really traitor? Then what do you suppose this gentleman meant? —

        “If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair.”

        –Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers: No. 28, For the Independent Journal.

        Just what do you think the words “shall not be infringed” mean, traitor?

        1. avatar adverse6 says:

          Voters are not victims, they are participants. “gun nuts” is a common term among them. Pretty sure more than a few firearm owners voted too.

  32. avatar Cloud Radar says:

    Fucking unbelievable. That is all.

  33. avatar I'Z JUST WONDERING says:

    If one or two hundred thousand “assault weapons” owners showed up armed at the state capital and was arrested , wouldn’t the cost of imprisoning them bankrupt the state????

    1. avatar strych9 says:

      Let’s find out.

      The most recent numbers I can easily find:

      State Revenue (2016) was $49.2 billion.
      Debt (2015) $28,231,613,000 ($28.2 Billion).

      In 2017 VA spent $21,299/prisoner per year for a total of $824,010,613. That works out to about 1.8% of their 2016 revenues.

      Assuming these numbers are pretty close to current numbers, 100,000 arrests and incarcerations like this would cost about $2,129,900,000 more and 200K would cost about $4,259,800,000 more resulting in “corrections” expenditures increases of $2,953,910,613 and $5,083,810,613 respectively.

      Those would represent ~6% and ~10.3% of state revenue, again respectively, both up from ~1.8%.

      So it would massively increase the state’s expenditures on “corrections” but it’s doubtful it would bankrupt the state. Explaining this kind of increase, between 333% and 572% for corrections would be difficult to explain to the voters.

  34. avatar Cruzo1981 says:

    Do not comply…

  35. avatar Henry Bowman says:

    The official state motto of Virginia is “Sic Semper Tyranis” – “Thus always to tyrants”

    Take a look at your Virginia state flag. It shows you what to do.

    You know where these people live. Where they sleep.

    Get busy.

    1. avatar Someone says:

      Do you mean the voters?

  36. avatar MIO says:

    Gun trainers and militias (as deemed by them) are now going to be illegal too
    SENATE BILL NO. 64

  37. avatar adverse6 says:

    These people were not appointed, they were elected. Apparently, the voters will get what they voted for. Their state, their choice.

  38. avatar wmarshal says:

    Is it time to consider something similar to the 1964 Civil Rights Act, but for firearms? Can’t do it with the current Congress, but the next time there’s an opportunity?

  39. avatar Gordon in MO says:

    Virginia is the pattern for the future.

    Bloomberg funded the communist takeover of Virginia.
    So, for ever major election in the future at least one “ripe” state will be targeted for takeover. Pour endless funds into “progressive” campaigns and tip the balance.

    Soros is funding a nation wide effort to elect communists into all major city prosecuting attorney positions and is being quite successful.

    Texas and Florida are not far down the list.

    Be Prepared !

  40. avatar Wally1 says:

    You guys should live in Washington state, which has the most restrictive gun laws anywhere in the US. It does nothing to reduce crime. In the central and eastside of the state, these unconstitutional laws are not enforced and almost non existent. The WA Governor and Attorney General (both flaming liberals) are patting themselves on the back, but they are obviously delusional, as no L.E. is enforcing anything. It’s almost looked upon as a joke.

    1. avatar M1Lou says:

      It’s a multi pronged generational fight. In 1-2 generations they will have indoctrinated enough snitches to turn in friends and family. The later generations of LEOs, having no respect for individual rights, will enforce the laws on them good and hard. Eventually it will be so onerous to own any guns that people will stop. Uncle Bob’s scary assault weapon collection will eventually end up at the police station and destroyed. Uncle bobs relatives will feel smug in their moral superiority that Uncle Bob is now in jail, and the city is safer without all of his guns in his possession. The antis are playing a long game, and we are still fighting the laws they passed from decades ago.

  41. avatar Sneed says:

    Are we sure that’s actually a picture of Virginia’s governor? He isn’t in blackface or murdering a baby, so its hard to tell.

  42. avatar Who me says:

    Has any state of late allowed SBR’s then went “full retard” banning full semi-auto rifles? Or like the active duty person (Thanks for your service, been there done that) posted, he has paid for silencers that are in federal time out.
    My question is what happened in those states, Feds said OK here is your Form 1 or 4 FINALLY thanks for the $200. Now VA owners are looking at not only dealing with losing their currently legal firearms but also their legally owned Class III firearms. Seems like it’s opening a whole big can of worms, VA going to tell ATF to revoke the stamps?

    I would suggest anyone going to visit Richmond next Jan 2020, drive the speed limit, have your buddy beside you in the left lane, don’t want to break the law on the way to express your views on proposed laws. Grant you Joe Public might not be happy about being held up, but you’re not breaking the law. A couple of dozen semi that lose their air brakes in Hampton Roads area could screw up traffic for 12 or so hours at a time.

    VA citizens should be on the lookout for a NY midnight rush to bring the bills to vote, pass, send to senate, pass and signed into law next morning in front of friendly news before any type of real public debate or protest.

  43. avatar chumley says:

    Please just stop with the “modern sporting arms” euphemism. It sounds so completely phony. Its along the same lines as the communists calling abortions “women’s health” and gun bans as “common sense gun legislation”. They try to change the language to fool stupid people, and now were doing it too. We have to be better than they are. These are semi auto rifles.

    1. avatar Sam Hill says:

      What, wait, what, a rifle is part car, no wonder they want to ban it. The I was driven to shoot the asshole defense going to be acknowledged for sure.
      Oh, I get it now. You mean the correct nomenclature is semi-automatic rifles, as in partially manual rifles. Which could be used in a sporting event, and I don’t mean shooting the referee. Thusly might I suppose could mean it is actually a semi automatic sporting rifle or as we would acronym it sasr.

      1. avatar Sam Hill says:

        Or better yet, saopmsr then we could bastardize it more by calling it soapmaster,

      2. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “I suppose could mean it is actually a semi automatic sporting rifle…”

        Can we please get it right. We love to bash anti-gunners who can’t remember or find the proper nomenclature, then we do the same thing: “semi-automatic…”

        When it comes to rifles, the correct term is “full semi-automatic”. It is a military term, delivered to the public by a retired army general. Let’s all come along, people.

  44. avatar Mike H says:

    Virginia voters knew exactly what was at stake in the last off year elections and yet most still stayed home. Yes, this legislation is a horrible shame, but if you’re a republican who didn’t vote, well, zipit. You already opted not to speak when it mattered.

  45. avatar MGD says:

    I agree with one of the features; Bayonet mounts and they must go.
    We have gangs here attaching bayonets to their weapons and goring each other to death. Apparently, it has become a problem in Va. too.
    They’re not going to stop here. The Va. Tech shooter killed 32 using multiple 10 round magazines as did the Columbine shooters. I’ve had people who know nothing about firearms tell me that with 10 round magazines, you can rush the shooter between mag changes. My response is always two things: 1.) You first and 2.) why didn’t anyone rush the Va. Tech shooter and the Columbine shooters during mag changes? I leave the part out about experienced shooters being able to reload before you can get anywhere near them. I believe Jerry Miculek has a video about that.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email