Is Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger (D) a mole for the National Rifle Association (NRA)? After the recent scandal involving the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), it is worth asking, given a curious turn of events in Virginia. Gun sales have surged after Spanberger and the Democrats passed sweeping gun bans. Spanberger also issued a public statement that could help tank the legislation in court — resulting in the striking down of the law (or parts of the law) after spurring record gun sales.
After July 1st, it will be a misdemeanor to buy, sell, transfer, or make an “assault firearm.”
With a July 1 deadline looming, background checks and sales are surging in Virginia. Stores are reporting that they cannot keep weapons on the shelves as Virginians flood stores to beat the deadline.
State Sen. Saddam Salim, D-Dunn Loring, a Spanberger ally who introduced the bill, further fueled the panic by declaring that the legislation will “gradually” take these guns because these firearms “do not belong on our streets.”
Gun rights groups have long challenged the claims of Democratic leaders on these guns.
As I have previously written, these calls often appear entirely disconnected from the actual crime or the constitutional protections afforded gun owners, including President Biden demanding a ban on assault weapons after a shooting with a handgun. Biden and others often collectively call these guns “assault weapons,” a standard reference to such popular models as the AR-15.
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. 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 by caliber; many guns have equal or greater calibers.
That is why laws banning or curtailing the sale of the AR-15 would likely run into constitutional barriers.
The challenges to the Virginia law were greatly assisted by Spanberger herself, who admitted that the law would ban commonly used hunting guns. If the law is not amended, she could prove the main witness against her own signed legislation.
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.
So, media reports indicate that, since January, the number of background checks has skyrocketed with 75,376 background checks in May alone, more than double the amount in May 2025.
The peak was reached in March when 79,846 background checks were done compared to only 47,069 last year.
After adding tens of thousands of assault weapons to her state, Spanberger’s comments may then help greatly in striking down all or parts of the law.
If this trend continues, Abigail Spanberger may prove to be the greatest pro-gun influencer since Charlton Heston.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the New York Times best-selling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”
Men that claim to be constitutional “Originalists” might want to tell their wives, that their 20th Century rights weren’t part of that interpretation. Women had no rights in the “Originalist” view.
Correct.
And as OLLY has pointed out in the past, we used our Constitutional process and then passed the 19thA.
The same with the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The deeper problem here is not HB 217 by itself. The deeper problem is the governing instinct on the Left to keep chipping away at core, pre‑political rights and to treat each new restriction as the “reasonable” baseline for the next debate.
In Virginia you now have a whole package of bills that treat the right to keep and bear arms as something to be managed and minimized, not as a natural right the Constitution presupposes and protects.
Heller and Bruen both recognize that the Second Amendment secures an individual right rooted in a pre‑constitutional understanding of self‑defense, yet the legislative momentum in states like this runs almost entirely in the opposite direction.
That pattern is exactly what you would expect to see if the political class no longer believes in natural rights at all, but only in permissions they can revise when it suits the current majority.
OLLY,
Well said.
Their version of “reasonable” is highly questionable and as you pointed out, their “reasonable” got tossed by the SC twice. And if this goes to the SC, get tossed again.
Reminder: America’s “constitutional rule of law” system is designed to protect both Republicans and Democrats. The U.S. Constitution protects 2nd Amendment gun rights, women’s voting rights (about 50% of the entire population) and women’s Pro-Choice rights.
This constitutional rule of law system protects all of us!
The reality is in the 21st Century, so-callee “Conservatives” have been extremely liberal on constitutional due process. Conservatives have severely weakened the constitutional rule of law system that protects 2nd Amendment gun rights.
George W. Bush (liberal on constitutional due process) violated Ronald Reagan’s torture treaty (also a federal crime). Bush violated constitutional rights with impunity after 9/11. More than 90% of Americans Bush blacklisted had no criminal evidence and had no criminal records.
This weakened today’s gun rights. If any president can illegally suspend constitutional rights based on irrational fear, gun kill far more Americans than terrorism. Bush opened the door to take away your gun rights.
Trump violates the constitutional due process far worse than Bush did, further weakening 2nd Amendment rights. If any president can ignore and violate constitutional due process – you no longer have gun rights!
The solution: Republican voters need to call their members of Congress and simply ask them to start being loyal to their oath of office.
Due to Trump’s toxic behavior the pendulum will swing towards the progressives/women. Women and progressives have never embraced gun ownership and it looks as if they never will. So when they become the majority and force the issue will a civil war break out? Lets hope not but if so it’ll be Trump’s fault.
How would women/progressives become the majority? Their birthrate is 1.6. Conservatives is 2.4. The replacement rate is 2.1. Progressive women are more likely to NOT reproduce and that is even questionable about marriage. Progressives are non-breeding themselves out of existence.
Seeing has how the SC has ruled laws like these un-Constitutional in the past how would they force an issue leading to a civil war to break out? And how is that Trumps fault?
Conservatives are born? How does one neck be conservative before being born?
Upstatefarmer that’s a crazy claim.
I did not say people are born conservative.
I said conservatives are reproducing at 2.4. Brought up in a conservative household there is a possibility of the offspring being conservative. Could also be liberal or illiberal.
If progressives are not reproducing at least the replacement rate, there are no offspring to be anything.
https://www.starkrealities.net/p/conservatives-higher-birthrates-than-progressives
@Anonymous
That isn’t what Upstate said and you know it. Your infantile attempts to manipulate language and conversation are kinda sad. Learn that at university?
Current adult people are reproducing at different rates due to batsh*t leftist ideology casting children as at best, horrendous burdens, at worst, disposable garbage they flush down the toilet like a tampon.
It may indeed not be accurate, though, as, thanks to Kamala’s stupendous job as border czar, there are whole lotta people her that have aligned with the modern left who culturally do not have these qualms. That these are people that are ideologically opposed to the left themselves as well (hence if they are ever a majority, leftist supporters would be subjugated, too, and by all appearances, quite happily until it sunk in precisely what they had done and were supporting) does not seem to register in their tiny, entitled minds.
James,
Well said and quite right.
Pointing out facts is an anathema to the annonys. So, they have to resort to low-IQ attempts to deflect from what was actually said.