Tazewell County Virginia passes 2A sanctuary status unanimously, and also passes order of militia

Virginians who genuinely support the 2nd Amendment would welcome any aid from any entity to thwart the criminal machinations of our dismal Bloomberg - Northam administration.

On 20 January 2020, people from around the country are gathering in Richmond VA to protest the coronation of Bloomberg's hoplophobic, carpet bagger puppet.

What do you think the chances are that Trump would federalize the VANG and on what do you base your opinion?

Remember, if Bloomberg & his minions succeed in eviscerating the 2nd Amendment in VA, you're likely to be next.

Thanks,

 

~ Too late. California is already there in a sense. Impossible to get CCW. Try defending yourself in your own home and likely the DA will charge you.
Best wishes ...

 

I live in one of the rural, "sanctuary" counties, have my own target range and already have a CCW. Virginia has a very long history of being extremely pro 2nd Amendment so I don't expect to see any dramatic changes overnight.

I also think that our incoming Bloomberg - Northam administration didn't expect the enormous amount of nationwide opposition that their extremist propositions have inspired since, as I said, busloads of 2nd Amendment supporters are coming to Richmond on 20 January 2020 from around the state and country.

As I see it, the only hope for Virginians who support the 2nd Amendment is to stall anti gun legislation until the next election rolls around which is far from an ideal situation.
Best wishes to you too...

 

Virginia Governor Northam Increases Corrections Budget In Anticipation Of Jailing Gun Owners

https://dailycaller.com/2019/12/24/...budget-in-anticipation-of-jailing-gun-owners/

 

Here's more:

 

Walter E. Williams Warns Virginia About Gov. Ralph Northam’s Gun Registry Plan
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...ginians-gov-ralph-northams-gun-registry-plan/

 

This is a natural extension of these proposed gun laws. It does not matter what party is in power—Virginia’s Constitution requires the adoption of a balanced budget. The passage of any new criminal law obviously increases the operating costs of government (i.e. by increasing the number of persons going through the court system and being incarcerated). Every new bill is reviewed by budget magicians who know how to assign a cost to the bill. Then, if you want a new criminal law you have to front-load the ability to pay for the estimated increase in cost for this bill by 1. Cutting costs somewhere else, 2. Raising taxes, or 3. Having a better economy that increases your tax revenue forecast enough to cover it (or some combination of all three).

So fighting for a bill you want is also a fight to have your bill included in the budget pie—and sometimes bills die because funding priorities change.

Virginia budgets in a two-year cycle on the even years, so we will have a new two-year budget passed by this upcoming legislative session.

Any costs that you see associated with these bills are estimates for a two-year cycle.

The real costs could end up higher or lower, and the odd year legislative sessions involve making corrections to the budget in the middle of the 2 year cycle as needed.

This is not an increase yet. It is the Governor's proposal. In Virginia the Governor first proposes a budget, and then the legislature either adopts it or passes its own version of the budget that may or may not take into account of all of his priorities. The bill referenced in the article (HB 30), is a bill proposed by a legislator that would fund every proposal made by the Governor—including the new gun laws that you have seen proposed. It can be taken as a sign that the Governor and his party intend to fight for the bills that are now pending.

The new legislative session begins January 8, 2020.

 

On the topic of new laws, I have not seen a proposed bill for a “red flag” law yet, but a new bill has been submitted for this upcoming session which could present its own constitutional issue. The bill would require proof of competence to handle a firearm before you can buy one from an FFL dealer.

The proposed bill reads this way (Italics are the new language being inserted into existing legislation by the bill--if passed):

A. Any person purchasing from a dealer a firearm as herein defined shall demonstrate competence with a firearm as provided by subsection B of § 18.2-308.02

B. 1. No dealer shall sell, rent, trade or transfer from his inventory any such firearm to any other person who is a resident of Virginia until he has … (iii) been furnished with proof that the prospective purchaser has demonstrated competence with a firearm as provided by subsection B of § 18.2-308.02.

Notably, there is another bill pending mandating universal background checks which would require all secondary transfers (with very few inter-family exceptions) to go through an FFL. However, this bill does not appear to cover these at the moment because it says “purchasing from a dealer” and “No dealer shall…from his inventory.”

But such a bill (along with the proposed UBC bill) is a small amendment away from covering every transfer of every firearm (including, if they want to make it so, inter-family transfers). After all, the claimed justification for this law would have to be making sure a gun owner is competent—and—assuming this is the claimed justification (for randomly hassling new gun owners cannot be a justification), then the same concern over competence would exist whether you are buying the gun from a dealer or from a friend (or having it given to you by your father).

In any event the precondition to purchase requirements are taken directly from Virginia’s concealed carry requirements, which are listed here below. If the bill passed as existing, then these would be the requirements for any firearm before you could purchase one from a FFL dealer:

B. The court shall require proof that the applicant has demonstrated competence with a handgun and the applicant may demonstrate such competence by one of the following, but no applicant shall be required to submit to any additional demonstration of competence, nor shall any proof of demonstrated competence expire:

1. Completing any hunter education or hunter safety course approved by the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries or a similar agency of another state;

2. Completing any National Rifle Association firearms safety or training course;

3. Completing any firearms safety or training course or class available to the general public offered by a law-enforcement agency, institution of higher education, or private or public institution or organization or firearms training school utilizing instructors certified by the National Rifle Association or the Department of Criminal Justice Services;

4. Completing any law-enforcement firearms safety or training course or class offered for security guards, investigators, special deputies, or any division or subdivision of law enforcement or security enforcement;

5. Presenting evidence of equivalent experience with a firearm through participation in organized shooting competition or current military service or proof of an honorable discharge from any branch of the armed services;

6. Obtaining or previously having held a license to carry a firearm in the Commonwealth or a locality thereof, unless such license has been revoked for cause;

7. Completing any firearms training or safety course or class, including an electronic, video, or online course, conducted by a state-certified or National Rifle Association-certified firearms instructor;

8. Completing any governmental police agency firearms training course and qualifying to carry a firearm in the course of normal police duties; or

9. Completing any other firearms training which the court deems adequate.


I also note there is another bill pending that would remove the online course from this list.


The question is this…If passed, would this bill (particularly if amended to require all transfers) allow the government to place a precondition on your freedom to exercise a fundamental right? If so, then could this bill be constitutional?


I would argue it would not be constitutional, but I welcome your thoughts.

 

One could ask the city of Chicago how constitution its post-McDonald firearm-related restrictions turned out to be, when the courts held it could not require citizens of the city to travel outside of the city to legally exercise their constitutional rights within the city, exclusively within the confines of their own home.

 

@GovernorVA’s proposed budget establishes a new combined “sex offenders and firearms” investigations unit, in addition to new positions to enforce the assault weapons ban. Gun owners, that’s what @GovernorVA thinks of you.
https://twitter.com/thisorthat17/status/1213167395113754624?ref_src=twsrc^tfw

 

Interesting exchange here...

 

Looks like only 3 bills made it out of committee. Universal background, 1 gun purchase a month, and local authority (which gives local municipalities the ability to ban the carrying of firearms in public or at public events). The assault weapons ban was scrapped.

 

SB16—the “assault firearm” ban--was stricken in the committee hearing on Monday at the request of the bill’s patron. But it is not necessarily dead. Legislators have until this Friday to introduce bills for this session. That means any legislator could refile the exact same bill—or file a modified version. SB16 called for a ban on all defined “assault firearms” without exception. When backlash started over that proposal the Governor stated he would accept a modified ban that would grandfather currently owned “assault firearms”—so long as they were registered.

It is always possible a new bill will drop tomorrow or Friday with this language included.

In addition, on Monday the same committee—the newly renamed Senate “Judiciary” committee (former Senate “Courts”)—also approved on a straight party line vote the Senate version of the “red flag” protective order gun confiscation bill (SB240). They made some technical amendments to it and the full Senate floor made more technical amendments to it—but the bill allows the following:

A judge or magistrate may order gun confiscation at an ex parte hearing. It does require that law enforcement tell the Court they have investigated the matter before asking for the confiscation (but it does not specify what the minimum level of investigation must be). It also requires that either law enforcement or the prosecutor must be the one to request the order—so your neighbor can’t just run to the court behind your back and get an order by himself (but he can complain to the police, and if believed they could go ask for the order based upon what he says…).

If the order is granted, then the gun owner’s first knowledge of the confiscation order would be when the police show up with the order and a search warrant to search for the guns. The gun owner would have his firearms taken and then, within 14 days, would be entitled to come to Court and demand their return—a hearing in which the Court can either return the guns or extend the confiscation for 6 months, with unlimited 6 month extension requests available to continue the confiscation indefinitely if the Court still believes the guns should remain confiscated. If the Court orders confiscation of your guns, then you can ask that another person 21 years of age or older be allowed to hold the firearms rather than the government holding them, but that person cannot live with you and that person must agree not to let you have access to those firearms while the order is in effect. Both the 14 day and the 6 month order act as a complete deprivation of the RKBA as it will be a crime to possess any firearm while subject to the order.

That is how the current bill reads, and right now it is before the full Senate for passage where, if passed, it gets referred to a house committee to start the process in the House.

There is no filibuster in the Virginia Senate, and a simple majority is the threshold for passage. If the Senate (40 members) had a tie vote, then the politician seen in the vide clip above (Democratic Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax) would cast the deciding vote.

The next day that either the Virginia House or Senate can likely take up different gun bills in committee is Monday 1/20—the VCDL lobby day. They don’t have to do so that day, but they could.

Regarding that day, the Governor has declared a state of emergency and banned all firearms and other weapons possession on the grounds of the capitol:

https://www.richmond.com/news/virginia/northam-declares-state-of-emergency-imposes-temporary-gun-ban-for/article_22db22fd-ad59-5a5c-ad78-0b1917ba8c4e.html

 

When Virginia Senate bill SB16 was proposed to broadly define and then ban all "assault firearms," the bill had no "grandfather" clause to allow possession of currently owned firearms. The Governor reacted to the outcry against the bill by suggesting he could compromise with allowing currently owned "assault firearms" to be kept--so long as they were registered.

Last Monday's "striking" of SB16 has not ended the push to ban "assault firearms."

There remains a House bill (HB961), which is substantially similar to SB16 except it would allow you to keep currently owned “assault firearms” if you register them--while also severely restricting what you can do with them after you register them. Below is the legislative summary of the bill which I have compared to the actual language. The summary is accurate:

House bill 961

Prohibiting sale, transport, etc., of assault firearms, certain firearm magazines, silencers, and trigger activators; penalties. Expands the definition of "assault firearm" and prohibits any person from importing, selling, transferring, manufacturing, purchasing, possessing, or transporting an assault firearm. A violation is a Class 6 felony. The bill prohibits a dealer from selling, renting, trading, or transferring from his inventory an assault firearm to any person. The bill also prohibits a person from carrying a shotgun with a magazine that will hold more than seven rounds of the longest ammunition for which it is chambered in a public place; under existing law, this prohibition applies only in certain localities. The bill makes it a Class 6 felony to import, sell, transfer, manufacture, purchase, possess, or transport large-capacity firearm magazines, silencers, and trigger activators, all defined in the bill. Any person who legally owns an assault firearm, large-capacity firearm magazine, silencer, or trigger activator on July 1, 2020, may retain possession until January 1, 2021. During that time, such person shall (i) render the assault firearm, large-capacity firearm magazine, silencer, or trigger activator inoperable; (ii) remove the assault firearm, large-capacity firearm magazine, silencer, or trigger activator from the Commonwealth; (iii) transfer the assault firearm, large-capacity firearm magazine, silencer, or trigger activator to a person outside the Commonwealth who is not prohibited from possessing it; or (iv) surrender the assault firearm, large-capacity firearm magazine, silencer, or trigger activator to a state or local law-enforcement agency.

The bill further states that any person who legally owns an assault firearm on July 1, 2020, may retain possession of such assault firearm after January 1, 2021, if such person has obtained a permit from the Department of State Police to possess an assault firearm in accordance with procedures established in the bill. A person issued such permit may possess an assault firearm only under the following conditions: (a) while in his home or on his property or while on the property of another who has provided prior permission, provided that the person has the landowner's written permission on his person while on such property; (b) while at a shooting range, shooting gallery, or other area designated for the purpose of target shooting or the target range of a public or private club or organization whose members have organized for the purpose of practicing shooting targets or competing in target shooting matches; (c) while engaged in lawful hunting; or (d) while surrendering the assault firearm to a state or local law-enforcement agency. A person issued such permit may also transport an assault firearm between any of those locations, provided that such assault firearm is unloaded and secured within a closed container while being transported. The bill also provides that failure to display the permit and a photo identification upon demand by a law-enforcement officer shall be punishable by a $25 civil penalty, which shall be paid into the state treasury. The bill also requires the Department of State Police to enter the name and description of a person issued a permit in the Virginia Criminal Information Network (VCIN) so that the permit's existence and current status will be made known to the law-enforcement personnel accessing VCIN for investigative purposes.


The firearms which will be affected are defined broadly as follows:

"Assault firearm" means:

1. A semi-automatic center-fire rifle that expels single or multiple projectiles by action of an explosion of a combustible material with a fixed magazine capacity in excess of 10 rounds;

2. A semi-automatic center-fire rifle that expels single or multiple projectiles by action of an explosion of a combustible material that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine and has one of the following characteristics: (i) a folding or telescoping stock; (ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the rifle; (iii) a thumbhole stock; (iv) a second handgrip or a protruding grip that can be held by the non-trigger hand; (v) a bayonet mount; (vi) a grenade launcher; (vii) a flare launcher; (viii) a silencer; (ix) a flash suppressor; (x) a muzzle brake; (xi) a muzzle compensator; (xii) a threaded barrel capable of accepting (a) a silencer, (b) a flash suppressor, (c) a muzzle brake, or (d) a muzzle compensator; or (xiii) any characteristic of like kind as enumerated in clauses (i) through (xii);

3. A semi-automatic center-fire pistol that expels single or multiple projectiles by action of an explosion of a combustible material with a fixed magazine capacity in excess of 10 rounds;

4. A semi-automatic center-fire pistol that expels single or multiple projectiles by action of an explosion of a combustible material that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine and has one of the following characteristics: (i) a folding or telescoping stock; (ii) a thumbhole stock; (iii) a second handgrip or a protruding grip that can be held by the non-trigger hand; (iv) the capacity to accept a magazine that attaches to the pistol outside of the pistol grip; (v) a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the pistol with the non-trigger hand without being burned; (vi) a manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when the pistol is unloaded; (vii) a threaded barrel capable of accepting (a) a silencer, (b) a flash suppressor, (c) a barrel extender, or (d) a forward handgrip; or (viii) any characteristic of like kind as enumerated in clauses (i) through (vii);

5. A shotgun with a revolving cylinder that expels single or multiple projectiles by action of an explosion of a combustible material; or

6. A semi-automatic shotgun that expels single or multiple projectiles by action of an explosion of a combustible material that has one of the following characteristics: (i) a folding or telescoping stock, (ii) a thumbhole stock, (iii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the shotgun, (iv) the ability to accept a detachable magazine, (v) a fixed magazine capacity in excess of seven rounds, or (vi) any characteristic of like kind as enumerated in clauses (i) through (v).

"Assault firearm" includes any part or combination of parts designed or intended to convert, modify, or otherwise alter a firearm into an assault firearm, or any combination of parts that may be readily assembled into an assault firearm. "Assault firearm" does not include (i) a firearm that has been rendered permanently inoperable, (ii) an antique firearm as defined in § 18.2-308.2:2, or (iii) a curio or relic as defined in § 18.2-308.2:2.

Here is a link to the bill:


https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?ses=201&typ=bil&val=hb961

 

I travel from NC to Ohio and to WV several times a year. I have to drive through VA each time. What does this mean for me? Do I need to apply for a permit, as a non resident, just to transport through the state, where I am not stopping?

 

Trump tweeted today...

Your 2nd Amendment is under very serious attack in the Great Commonwealth of Virginia. That’s what happens when you vote for Democrats, they will take your guns away. Republicans will win Virginia in 2020. Thank you Dems!
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1218297464941314049?ref_src=twsrc^tfw

 

Pistol grips, flash suppressors, hearing protection, don't make guns more deadly. They do make them, to the weak and spineless, more scary. Just ban Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sylvester Stallone and then the guns would be so threatening to the ignorant masses among us.

 

Virginia just ended CCW reciprocity agreements with 25 states.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fo...s-handgun-permit-agreement-with-25-states.amp

 

I mean, ya... But from Mr. 'Take the guns and worry about due process later' I can't really take that seriously.

 

I was very disappointed about the bump stock thing. Still-its better to have him than any democrat.

 

The bump stock is a toy and doesn't make a gun into a machine gun any more than a shoe string turns a gun into a machine gun. The ATF has no authority to ban them any more than they would have to ban shoe strings with loops on the end - but they did that, too.

 

Now VA dems are punishing the local Sheriffs.

 

Any police, national guard of regular military commanders who would enforce any gun confiscation should immediately resign as they cannot fulfil their oath of office as a matter of fact that is true for absolutely any government employee.
Being pro gun confiscation is not compatible with public service.

 

Agreed!