Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger is reportedly “fuming” this week after the state failed to get a single justice on the Supreme Court to support her after she violated the state constitution in her attempted gerrymandering of the state. However, Spanberger may have just guaranteed another trip to the Supreme Court when she said the quiet part out loud about the new state gun ban.
After the Democrats took power recently, they went on a frenzy of tax and liberal legislative measures. The sharp move to the far left is out of sync with a purple state that remains roughly evenly divided. While Spanberger (who ran on being a moderate) has pushed forward many of these measures, she sought to moderate one bill banning so-called “assault firearms.”
Spanberger released a statement that:
“I am signing this bill into law because firearms designed to inflict maximum casualties do not belong on our streets. We are taking this step to protect families and support the law enforcement officers who work every day to keep our communities safe. While the General Assembly chose not to adopt my amendment that specifically carves out certain firearms frequently used for hunting, I will work with the patrons to clarify this language.” (emphasis added)
The governor’s acknowledgment that the law covers common hunting models will likely be cited in Second Amendment challenges. If the law is not amended, she could prove the main witness against her own signed legislation.
Even with such an amendment, the bill is problematic. I have previously written about my skepticism over bans on AR-15s and other so-called “assault weapons,” though some courts have upheld such bans.
We have a Second Amendment protection of gun ownership, with over 490 million guns in private hands, as of 2022. In 2008, the Supreme Court handed down a landmark ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller, recognizing the Second Amendment as encompassing an individual right to bear arms. The Supreme Court further strengthened the right in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen.
The AR-15 is the most popular gun in America and the number of these guns in private hands is continuing to rise rapidly, with one AR-15 purchased in every five new firearms sales. There are an estimated 32 million currently in private hands in the United States, according to the National Shooting Sports Foundation.
These AR-15s clearly are not being purchased for armored deer. Many are purchased for personal and home protection; it is also popular for target shooting and hunting. Many gun owners like the AR-15 because it is modular; depending on the model, you can swap out barrels, bolts and high-capacity magazines, or add a variety of accessories. While it does more damage than a typical handgun, it is not the most powerful gun sold in terms of caliber; many guns have equal or greater caliber.
Again, lower courts are divided on both the bans on semiautomatic weapons and the magazine bans. Eventually, the Supreme Court will have to resolve the question. If the Virginia law remains unchanged, Spanberger may find that her signing statement will feature greatly in the appeal.
Bravo. Scamberger is a loon.
PS: AOC’s Level of Idiocy Has No Bounds and is Frightfully Discomforting to Watch.
https://torrancestephensphd.substack.com/p/aocs-level-of-idiocy-has-no-bounds
Lets see how this plays out if it goes to the USSC. If the VA bill gets slapped down, once again, leftist gun control grabbers will only strengthen precedent for the 2ndA.
As the good professor notes, long guns are rarely used in criminal acts. Your local Chicago gang banger prefers a Glock handgun with a Glock switch. IIRC the ATF recently seized like a thousand Glock switches coming from China.
Was there any demands for gun control coming from leftist Democrats when Charlie Kirk was assassinated or the attempt on President Trump’s life?
Sallysallysally,
A militia is composed of everyday people who come together to repel invaders or throw off an oppressive government. In order for the militia to function properly, to be “well-regulated”, the people must be armed. The 2A could easily become a flashpoint if the lefties get their way. You as a lefty should hope that never happens.
That the 2A protects an individual right to have guns is a right wing lie. 2A is about state militias.
You are incorrect! Settled law by SCOTUS.
I’m dumber for having read this comment. ‘Well regulated’ at the time of the drafting meant ‘well supplied’ and of course, the Amendment is about individual citizens’ rights.
Citizens militia Sally…
The 2nd Amendment is about protecting our freedom from tyranny and tyranny by these progressive tyrants is on full display.
While they open our borders, flood us with unvetted criminals and fail to enforce our laws, do you seriously believe anyone gives two chits what they are trying to do?
You are incorrect, First you do not understand the concept of militia as understood at the founding,
And 2nd the militia clause is gramatically irrelevant.
The 2nd amendment could say “blue whales being necescary for the health of the oceans, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”
The first clause does NOT constrain the 2nd, it merely provides ONE of potentially thousands of justifications for the following right.
If the first amendment said – “free expression being necsescary for elelections; ……”
That would not change the first amend,ent one iota
But equally important possibly MORE is the 14th amendment.
The ONE right we KNOW that the drafters of the 14th amendment intended to convey to INDIVIDUALS – specifically freed black slaves was the right to firearms for their personal defense against southern whites.
The only lies told here are by the left.
I would further note that the Pennsylvania Rifle was the “AR-15 of its time – it was the state of the art weapon – instrumental in winning the revolution – the British had nothing equal – it was accurate to 300yd at a time when most rifles were at best accurate to 100yds and it fired a ball that would kill or seriously disable you it you were hit.
The Pennsylvania rifle was such a good weapon that they were in production through the 19th century.
Again it was the AR-15 of its time.
I would further note that neither then nor NOW is the private ownership of Cannons barred.
My community has one of the largest collection of privately owned revolutionary and civil war cannons and they are used every fourth of july
Not only can you own one – but you are free to make your own.
And they have no serial number
Like most leftists, you embarrass yourself by your ignorance of U.S. History. Do yourself a favor and read up on the topic at hand before posting.
Sorry, trolls. We don’t serve Spanbergers here:
“A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”
The first part of the Amendment explains why we have the 2nd. Liberals have claimed for decades that the first part is not an explanation but rather a condition for bearing arms. That is a lie. Read it, Anonymous. The Supreme Court has held multiple times and for decades that the first part is not a condition for bearing arms, and that reading makes perfect sense when I read it.
Maybe if liberals spent more time teaching English and less on drag-queen story time, they’d understand that.
The ordering of the Amendment matters, too. It’s second only to freedom of speech and religion, and all three provide the foundation for protecting all the other Amendments. That explains the priority.
Diogenes,
“Maybe if liberals spent more time teaching English and less on drag-queen story time, they’d understand that.”
It would be funny if it were not so true.
Uneducated people, like Sally, just blindly believes the gun grabbing leftist talking point and ignores all the other rulings by the SC concerning the 2ndA.
If Democrats are so sure certain weapons are unnecessary for self-defense, why don’t they agree to limit the weapons carried every day by their personal security details? If some “assault” weapons are truly “weapons of war” that “have no place on the streets of America,” why not remove them from the hands of their own Praetorian Guard? Oh, right. Because it’s not true, and they value their own lives much higher than everyone else. They deserve to be protected with the most effective weapons available, but not you and me.