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), some may wonder 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. These citizens are going to make large payments for these guns and have a heightened interest in the political issue.
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.”
Trump angrily stormed out of a Meet the Press interview in Wisconsin when Kristen Welker cornered him on key issues. He stomped on his microphone as he left.
His comment later was, “I just did an interview in the most beautiful barn I’ve ever seen. But it was raining. And it was with NBC fake news. And because it was raining, I got a little bit angry at them. I was not happy with them. But we had a good time.”
So many questions here.
Was it raining inside the barn?
Does he think NBC controls the weather?
Is he afraid of the rain?
Is he afraid his makeup will run in the rain?
Why didn’t he order a nuclear strike to disperse the storm?
ANON is off the meds again!! Seek help!
Get some help you blathering TDS deranged imbecile. You’re ridiculous at this point, you’re starting to sound like Joe Biden.
Thank you for a true comment!!
A typical barn has a thin, corrugated metal roof. The sound of rain hitting that can be deafening. However, the moisture here was simply Trump sweating from the lies he was asked to defend.
Lie much or are you just a commie — just the same thing….
Comradette Spamburger clearly cannot read and assimilate the Constitution.
Is the Supreme Court willing and able to?
The singular American failure is the judicial branch, with emphasis on the Supreme Court.
There should have been no question by any person in the United States during the past 250 years.
Why in the world has there been?
______________________________________
2nd Amendment
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.
There hasn’t been a well regulated militia in the US in 200 years, if ever. The US has a standing military so there is no individual need for guns for the security of the free state.
Read the constitution and actual federal law.
Without a reason for it, why maintain it?
Do you still slaughter a lamb at the altar of the temple the way God commands you from the ancient Bible or do you see that there is no reason for it and have never done so?
Insanity is doing the same thing over and over long past the time there is need for it. Perhaps that is the problem. The gun humpers have a form of OCD.
“The US has a standing military so there is no individual need for guns for the security of the free state.”
That standing military that answers only to politicians and bureaucrats IS the exact, demonstrable justification, and need for unlimited firearms in the hands of ordinary citizens. The Founders were at least as afraid of a domineering domestic government that would abuse individual Liberty as they were of a foreign invasion. Any honest assessment of where we stand today would show that their fear has become our reality.
…your parents must be citizens for you to be a citizen — SAYS ALL OTHER COUNTRIES ON EARTH!!
Funny how weapons that “do not belong on our streets” apparently belong on our streets when they’re used by the Capitol Police that protects the Governor’s mansion and Virginia legislators, and Governor Spanberger’s own state police security team. They’re all over the streets. Not one Virginia Democrat proposes taking them out of the hands of their protectors, just from private citizens.
AR-15s
The communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs, AINOs) intend and plan to deny and confiscate the very arms the People may need to use “…to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security,” per the Declaration of Independence, 1776.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
AI Overview
The Second Amendment was written by veterans of the Revolutionary War to ensure the populace had the capacity to oppose tyranny and repel invasions…and did not write the amendment to protect hunting rights [or self defense].
Opposing Oppression and Invasion – The primary purpose of the Amendment was political and military. Having just overthrown British rule, the Founding generation was deeply suspicious of centralized standing armies, viewing them as standard tools of political oppression.
Hunting vs. Constitutional Intent – Hunting was a common daily activity for survival in the 1700s, but it played virtually no role in the constitutional debates. The right to bear arms was fundamentally about civic duty and military readiness.
In case tyranny happens, the US Military will make a first strike on water processing facilities, food distribution centers, and fuel distribution centers, as well as electricity production facilities. In a clean-up move they can hit highway bridges to stop vehicles from moving easily, adding dozens of hours to days in making detours for currently short trips.
The general population will have only a few weeks before succumbing to mass starvation.
Such a strike would be accomplished in a week.
The only use for guns then is for citizens to turn on each other for declining stocks of food and fuel and water. Currency will be worthless, banking will fail, and gold will have no value inside the country. Farms will be soon overrun, but without the ability to get fuel and replacement supplies, they will soon fail. Same thing with fishing; no fuel to haul the nets.
“But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”
– Declaration of Independence, 1776
Denaturalize and deport every person in America who does not fervently believe in the immutably absolute exclusive right to freedom, liberty, free enterprise, and free markets; to private property; to keep and bear arms; to privacy; to due process; to peaceable assembly; to the freedoms of religion, speech, and press; to severely limited and restricted government; and to the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Aww, did the poor leftist moron get smacked down so now he has to blather on incoherently about farmers, and then reply to his own stupid comments? vvv
Farmers are doing so well under Trump that Republicans have to continue to do multi-billion dollar bailouts to send them our money so they will continue to vote for the Republicans who keep screwing them over.
When the government bails you out, it’s called Socialism.
Think about that, and next time vote for a Democrat who believes in not f***ing over the farmers to begin with.
But farmers…the true US welfare queens…will still vote for this orange POS.
If you are a farmer who ate today, then thank a tax payer.
China is not buying their crops, so they get bailed out with money borrowed from China.
Maybe the farmers who voted for him can use his constant stream of bullsh!t as fertilizer?
MORON ANON REPLIES TO HIMSELF!! WHAT A DF
K,
It is amazing to think the annony morons dont think we can see through them.
They truly are lower-IQ.
Farm subsidies keep food prices low. The US PRODUCES ALL of its food, high quality, and inspected. Inspectors eat what they inspect. It’s called self reliance.
Farm subsidies are paid with taxes, taxes keep the cost of living high. What say we cut both the subsidies and the taxes and keep the prices the same?
“The goal of Socialism is Communism.”
– Vladimir Ilyich Lenin
Ohhhh! Poor, poor annony moron! James and I beat you down and now suddenly you have to bring up the bailouts as if that is going to hurt me?
HAHAHAHAHA!
No.
Actually, this has been a long, on going thing that has nothing to do with who is in the WH.
There has been a drought going on, late winters, early flooding, late frosts that are hurting farmers. Has more to do with the weather than politics. Especially out in the west.
For those farmers who do use commercial fertilizer, world market prices impact them. Everything from the Ukraine/Russian war, to the current conflict with Iran.
And for that reason, that is why some of us farmers, to include myself, use our own livestock production, manure, to make our own fertilizer. Are my yields as high as those using commercial fertilizer?
No.
But my profit per bushel are larger than theirs by no small amount.
Also, I am not a mono culture farmer but a poly culture farmer. Just like my stock portfolio, it is all about diversification.
If you ate yesterday, today or tomorrow, thank a farmer. Your kids will be too. If you have them, as progressives are less likely to reproduce. 😉 No more progressives reproducing, no progressives at all.
Fake Farmer
Ohhhh, please !!!!
Why do you persist with this fantasy that you are a farmer ????
You are here all day, every day reading everything and commenting furiously. You obviously read everything, because more often than not, your comment is simply “well said”, or “great comment”. You are nothing more than a pathetic sycophant trying to ingratiate yourself with your fellow MAGA cultists.
There is no possible way that you can be a farmer, and still spend all your time here.
Your comments about not using commercial fertilizer and using manure from your livestock are absurd. Are you seriously suggesting that all farmers should abandon the use of commercial fertilizer in favor of manure. What about farmers who do not have livestock? In that case the country would starve in a matter of months, and there would be no exports. You are an idiot living in a fantasy world. You seem to be seriously suggesting that farmers should return to some level of subsistence farming. You are out of your mind.
And as for you ridiculous statement about diversification with regard to your stock portfolio, you should take note of what Charlie Munger had to say. Munger was Warren Buffett’s partner at Berkshire Hathaway.
Charlie Munger famously argued that wide asset diversification is “protection against ignorance” and a strategy meant strictly for “know-nothing investors”. He referred to diversification as “diworsification”.
He famously said, “any idiot can diversify a portfolio.” He said diversification is only sensible if you don’t have the time, skill, or practical intelligence to make well-informed decisions. He believed that no one should own more than 6 stocks, and he himself concentrated his wealth in only 3 stocks.
A while ago you bragged that your portfolio was up $10,000 for the year. This indicates two things. You have a minimal amount invested and your returns are shockingly poor.
I have never owned more than 5 stocks, and currently I own only 3 stocks. My year to date return is 96%, and my 1 year return currently stands at 170%. I have just over $6 million invested in 3 stocks.
And a while ago you also said that you are invested in precious metals. Precious metals are not an investment, they are a commodity. You should take note of Warren Buffett’s comments about gold. He said gold an unproductive asset that produces nothing and relies purely on investor fear for its value. He views buying it as speculation—hoping someone else will pay more for it later. It is basically using the “greater fool” strategy where your only hope of a return is if a greater fool pays you a higher price. Precious metals have no intrinsic utility and produce no cash flow. They just sit there. When you buy stock in a good company you buy a share of a productive asset that produces physical goods to sell at a profit, thus producing cash flow and paying dividends, and increasing value.
Charlie Munger, summarized this sentiment by stating it is “peculiar to buy an asset which will only really go up if the world really goes to hell.”
You are essentially betting that the economy will fail.
So much for making America great again.
You are betting against America, both in terms of your so called “investments”, and your absurd comments about farmers.
Just pondering:
When Carmela ran for Potus in 2000 she got no votes and dropped out.
She was then picked as VP due to her skin color and gender
When dementia-Joe had to drop out due to his dementia . . .
She was crowned queen without a single vote
And – she has zero political talent. She lost badly in 2024. Pretty much sums up the Democrat party of today.
Old Man, Trump’s Popular Vote lead over Harris was only half as big as Hillary’s Popular Vote lead over Trump. Trump didn’t even clear 50%. So explain how Harris’ Popular Vote loss of 1% was such a crushing defeat. Is it because Trump is mentally unstable and Harris should have won for that reason alone?
Trump won the popular vote, the electoral college vote, and all seven swing states. Suck on that, leftist moron!
Estovir, where are swing states listed in the Constitution?
And how does a Popular Vote of just 1% become a ‘landslide’ victory? Trump didn’t even clear 50% and current polls put him in the 30s.
Look, moron, everyone who knows anything knows that the swing states are: Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, Nevada, Arizona, Georgia, and North Carolina. You’re such an ignoramus if you didn’t know that.
https://www.politico.com/2024-election/results/swing-states/
And “landslide” is your word, not mine.
And I’m not Estovir, moron.
With the lamestream meadia hyping Carmeall 24/7 and demonizing Trump, Carmela had to be especially bad not to win, just like with Hillary in 2016 – probably the only Demon-rat that could have lost to Trump that year, and yet the Demon-rat party thought she was their last best hope.
WINNING!
He won by a sliver of margin in all those areas.
Suck on the high fuel prices, the high food prices, the high prices for pretty much everything. Trump did that.
And – she has zero political talent.
Leftist moron: Oh yeah? Then how did she become a US senator?
Answer: Due to her other “talents.”
She did nail the ultra-hostile far-left-wing questioning on The View.
After dementia Joe’s four years left the country a wreck in every possible way, those chirping hens on The View asked what she would have done differently.
Her answer: There is not a thing that comes to mind.
Carmela is for they/them. Trump is for you.
We have known the polls were both fixed and wrong in the 2016 election. Polling was even changed the polls were so wrong. It’s been ten years we have known that. Try to keep up.
The polls were not wrong in 2016. Trump won within the margin of error all the polls had on the outcome. A sliver.
You just can’t stand that he won, popular vote and all swing states. You have to compare it to Hillary’s vote in 2016. I bet if we go through history it could be shown a dozen other scenarios. When old made Biden was in office, even older, did you make such disparaging remarks ? I’d bet not. Give credit where credit is due.
The credit is due to the billionaires who have been poisoning the media for decades in order to get their puppet into the White House. The Heritage Foundation and Rupert Murdoch have been manipulating gullible Republicans into thinking Trump represents them and conservatism while working to establish an oligarchical control of the government.
WINNING!
If anybody questions your graciousness, I will direct them to your extension of political between zero and talent.
Just pondering:
Secession was not prohibited because secession was not prohibited.
The Civil War was wholly unconstitutional, and all of its effects and consequences must be abrogated, revoked, and rescinded, including the “Reconstruction Amendments” by Karl Marx.
The Naturalization Act of 1802, in full force and effect on January 1, 1863, did not allow freed slaves to be admitted to become citizens.
JFK used military force to overturn the choice of free people and force them to integrate, denying the people the ability to make a free choice.
The Federal Reserve Act, Social Security, Medicare, and the entire communist American welfare state are unconstitutional due to their violations of Article 1, Section 8, et al.
Etc., etc., etc.
Here is the Left’s pathetic attempt to rationalize Virginia’s usurpations:
Virginia is not “banning everything.”
Tyrants never start by banning everything. They usurp individual rights piecemeal.
Mussolini rose to power in 1922. His authoritarian regime then spent three years gradually eroding individual rights. By 1925, Italy was living under a totalitarian dictatorship.
Sam says:
“Tyrants never start by banning everything..
…………………………………..
Here Sam aspires to give prophetic warnings based on his supposed knowledge of history. As though any restrictions on the AR 15 might lead us to a totalitarian state where beer-bellied MAGA types could be marginalized.
Sam, tell us about Trump’s bans on science and how that might lead to totalitarian state where beer-bellied MAGA types dictate what science ‘really says’.
Beer bellied MAGA types? Is that the new caricature now being used on left-wing garbage web sites?
MAGA means make America great again. Of course you use it as an epithet because you hate America and making America great is your worst nightmare.
WINNING!
Estovir, ‘America’ is so great we have no allies except Putin. That’s the MAGA effect.
Trump has deprived Putin of his gobal allies one-by-one. That’s Trump’s genius, leftist moron.
israel is our greatest ally
When your allies turn to parasites you just have to slap them around to reality. $39 TRILLION
Actually, the guy with the beer belly, he also had a Nazi tattoo on his chest for some 17 years and knew what it meant and bragged about it, he is a misogynist, has a long history of disrespecting women, and hangs out on very questionable social media dating sites with links to child porn all the while married.
And he is running for senator of Maine as a Democrat.
And one of the Democrats own strategists has compared him to Stalin and said he might be a little f–ked up.
How marvelous!
Trump ran as a Republican. The only difference is we haven’t seen if Trump has any tattoos. Probably not as that would risk having an additional identifier when he sexually assaults someone. His tiny mushroom, however, is there regardless.
“And he is running for senator of Maine as a Democrat.”
I cannot think of anyone who more accurately represents the ideals of today’s Democratic Party than that ludicrous ah013.
“. . . beer-bellied MAGA types . . .”
That’s below the belt.
Some are martini-bellied.
The comment about “armored deer,” while tongue in cheek, promotes a false narrative that AR-15s are somehow more powerful than other rifles. They are not. They are less powerful than almost any other hunting or self defense rifles. The cartridge, the .223 or 5.56 NATO cartridge, so small that in many states it is too SMALL to hunt with. When it was introduced back in the Vietnam Era, it was much smaller than the 7.62 (.30 caliber) round it replaced. The Army opted for it because it was smaller and lighter which allowed soldiers to carry more rounds for the same weight.
And the M-16 kept jamming with that 5.56 ammo. The Army didn’t warn us, train us, or provide a field extraction tool. That’s hell in the middle of a firefight. There you are; and there is the enemy with a functional AK-47. That boo-coo Number Ten, GI!
“it was much smaller than the 7.62 (.30 caliber) round it replaced”
Just a slight clarification. While our Western 7.62 x 51 (as opposed to Russian 7.62 x 54) ammo is nominally 30 cal class, it is for most practical purposes equivalent to .308 Winchester.
Professor Turley writes, “The AR-15 is the most popular gun in America… it is not the most powerful gun by caliber; many guns have equal or greater calibers.”
So why do Democrats really want to abolish these firearms? My theories:
(1) Some “muddle-of-the-road” voters feel they are scary (an easy constituency for Democrats);
(2) Getting rid of AR-15s would cause some people to lose interest in firearms, weaking gun-rights support;
(3) Democrats hate white people with guns; Democrat felons with guns, not so much.
None of the above has anything to do with actual homicide statistics. It’s political. It’s emotional. It’s Democrats.
I would remind my fellow Second-Amendment supporters that Democrats don’t have to ban guns. Just making ammo too expensive (infinitely so is the goal) will reduce guns to collectors’ items. Then Democrats can collect them by force. That won’t prevent felons from getting guns and ammo on the black market. The cartels will make sure of that. Just imagine how effective Democrats will be at stopping that–about as effective as controlling the border.
Keep a wary eye on ammunition restrictions. That’s their backdoor.
Why do democrats want to get rid of guns ?
Because they are incapable of more than first order thinking.
Studies of early home sapiens found that atleast 25% died from being injured in violence.
it is likely significant more – because all we have left is bones and any injuries that drew blood had a good chance of being fatal before antiseptics and antibiotics.
Long Long before firearms humans killed each other – in very large numbers.
Guns do not kill people – People do.
Henry Nowak was stabbed to death on the streets of the UK while the police deludedly handcuffed him – because his attacker was Sihk – and Obviously it is White Boys that are violent – not deranged foreigners with knives.
Why do Democrats want to ban guns ? Because they never listened to the words of “Bad Bad Leroy Brown” – or “You don’t mess around with Jim”
Because they honestly beleive that getting rid of guns reduces crimes and violence – again ignorant that man was MORE violent before firearms than after.
Or that nowhere ever has banning guns reduced crime, Violence or violent death.
There is credible data to support the opposite.
Criminals do not risk crime when they KNOW the “victim” is armed.
But 2nd and third order thinking is outside the scope of left wing nut thought.
It’s easy to see the reason wealthy white people escaped the US.
John Say,
“ Nowhere ever has banning guns reduced crime, violence, or violent death.”
Are you sure?
Australia: Following the 1996 Port Arthur massacre, strict firearm restrictions and a massive buyback program led to a rapid, sustained decline in both firearm homicides and suicides.
United Kingdom: After the 1996 Dunblane massacre, the UK heavily restricted handguns. It now maintains one of the lowest firearm homicide rates in the developed world.
“ Democrats want to “get rid of” or completely ban all guns.”
This is a classic straw man argument. Mainstream policy proposals do not advocate for the total elimination of firearms. Instead, they focus on targeted regulations—such as universal background checks, red flag laws, and restrictions on high-capacity semi-automatic weapons—to balance public safety with legal gun ownership.
“ Long Long before firearms humans killed each other – in very large numbers.”
Well duh! It involved armies of soldiers wielding swords, bows and arrows. One gun can do the work of several soldiers. It’s about the lethality and efficiency of the tool. Firearms allow a single individual to inflict mass casualties in seconds—a feat logistically impossible with prehistoric clubs or spears.
True “second- and third-order thinking” requires looking at real-world data and nuanced policy, rather than relying on internet myths, catchy slogans, and prehistoric comparisons.
Gun homicides were already rapidly declining in Western countries before Port Arthur and continued to do so afterwards, including in the USA, which didn’t participate in massive gun restrictions. Correlation is not causation in this case.
Better medical care saves people who would have died from gunshot wounds; there can be the same number or more who are shot and still see a decrease in deaths.
Near me a guy with a grievance against the city council knew the cop he went up to was armed. Shot the cop in the head with a revolver and added the semiautomatic sidearm to his armament before going and killing several people on the council with that new gun. One who escaped threw chairs as a successful defense against being shot.
This bobo has more firsthand experiences than is possible. He’s delusional.
If civil war began would that be the ultimate beginning of armed invasion at the southern border?
Heck, the cartels would setup recruiting offices–for a fee. China and Russia would chip in dark money and weapons.
Yes, the long view is the US is finished. Survival of the fittest means those that are fittest breed more. At 1.5 billion each, China and India are the future. The US will first be consumed by Latin American Roman catholic at 1 billion and 1 billion for Islam.
The tea leaves…
I assume the US fulfilled God’s purpose in its creation.
Adios
Get the bugs out!
I left out 1.5 Hindus. Notice the migration?
😂 They couldn’t fix their nations but they can fix yours. Will India ever have a sewage system other than the Ganges?
The guns look menacing and military, and not designed to hunt game and certainly not worthwhile for self defense. They are a first-strike weapon in civilian hands. Same people buy pit bull dogs for much the same reason – to show off and intimidate and pretend they can win in the apocalypse.
The real support for AR-15s is gun makers. They are profitable and increased sales means more going into criminal hands, which means more concern among law abiding people, who then buy guns that are stolen and sold to criminals. It’s a self-sustaining loop.
I disagree with every sentence. A whole lot of speculation construed as facts. I could just as easily claim that people buy guns to protect themselves from Democrats.
“I could just as easily claim that people buy guns to protect themselves from Democrats.”
I certainly do. I have other reasons as well, but that one is currently at the top of my list.
“Keep a wary eye on ammunition restrictions. That’s their backdoor.”
That is very important and one of the reasons for ammunition prices to climb. Of course, there are other possibly more important supply issues and material cost increases, but when it is perceived that prices are relatively low, we will probably have another buying spree, again forcing the price of ammunition up, and the shortage loop will continue. In the meantime, I think the number of bullets held by individuals will increase.
I bet you’re right.
Spent cartridge casings would be nearly impossible to regulate, and either a legal free market or black market for primer and propellant material would be very difficult to stamp out. Buy a decent quality reloading press before those facts dawn on the imbeciles pushing this agenda, because those could be controlled. I am not currently reloading because I don’t have the time, and don’t want the flammable materials lingering around my house for extended periods, but I am prepared to do so on short notice.
Short term this Virginia statute is not about the 2d Amendment. It’s about stirring up the base for the midterms. If Republicans can hold and grow seats in Congress, there is an appetite to legislate the gun carry rights in 34 of the States to nationwide carry rights. Presently, the 1st Amendment goes from Woonsocket, Road Island to Oxnard, California., and from Key Largo, Florida to Point Barrow, Alaska. And everywhere in between. The Left doesn’t want the 2d Amendment doing that. That’s the real 2d Amendment issue.
There is little doubt that Gun Laws fire up the far left base.
But they also far up – not just the far right, but probably half the country.
You lose elections – it you get 1/3 of your supporters riled up, knocking on doors, and voting,
if your efforts to do so assure that 1/3 of the entire electorate is riled up,. knocking on doors, and voting against you.
Every time I read how the democrats try chipping away at gun ownership in some way, I think how those executed in Iran would have liked owning an AR than and now?
A.I. (string: Number of Gun Owners that identify as Democrats Number of Gun Owners that identify as Republicans )
Approximately 45% of Republican voters personally own a firearm, compared to about 20% of Democrats. In terms of raw numbers, this translates to millions of voters in both groups, as an estimated 30% to 34% of all U.S. adults personally own a gun.Data highlights the partisan breakdown of gun ownership:Republicans: Up to 54% of Republicans and Republican-leaning voters live in a household with a gun, and roughly 42% to 45% personally own one. Republican men are the most likely subgroup to own firearms (60%), followed by Republican women (33%).Democrats: Approximately 19% to 23% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters live in a household with a gun, and roughly 13% to 20% personally own one. Within the party, 29% of Democratic men and 12% of Democratic women report personal ownership.
Key facts about Americans and guns (Good Read)
Guns are deeply ingrained in American society and the nation’s political debates.
The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees the right to bear arms, and about a third of U.S. adults say they personally own a gun. At the same time, in response to concerns such as rising gun death rates and mass shootings, the U.S. surgeon general has taken the unprecedented step of declaring gun violence a public health crisis.
Here are some key findings about Americans’ views of gun ownership, gun policy and other subjects, drawn from Pew Research Center surveys.
By: Katherine Schaeffer – Pew Rearch ~ July 24, 2024
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/07/24/key-facts-about-americans-and-guns/
A.I. Ref:
Gun Ownership by Political Party: A 2026 Analysis
By: Cassandra McBride ~ Mar 2, 2026
https://ammo.com/research/gun-ownership-by-political-party
The funny thing about all this is it has nothing to do with being “reasonable.” Quite the opposite really. The fact is, Democrats do not like the AR15. That is why they put all these so-called “reasonable” restrictions that are written to specifically single out the AR15. NY tried to do it and then some industrious guy built a AR15 that got around all the restrictions and could be sold in NY. Now, the AR15 is a fugly rifle in the first place and the workaround did it no help with a stock that looked like a piece of plumbing. But it worked.
Take the Ruger Mini-14. Shoots the same 5.56 round as the/most AR15. Can shoot just as fast. Can hold as many rounds in the magazine. But it is not black and scary looking! Back in the day, it was just as popular if not more. The 1980s TV show The A-Team helped in marketing. But eventually the AR15 overtook the Mini-14.
This has nothing to do with “reasonable” restrictions. It has every thing to do with gun control.
UF – while to a small extent it has to do with gun control – it also has to do with APPEARING to do something – as opposed to actually doing something.
None of the guns that americans can legally buy are an Actual Assault Weapon.
No one in their right mind would choose them to charge and entrenched enemy.
You compared the mini-14 and the AR-15 – while that is not really possible – AR-15 is now so broad that weapons indistinguishable from hunting rifles through weapons that LOOK like something Rambo would have – one under each arm are AR-15’s
And that is the point – it is ALL ABOUT APEARANCES.
The old Federal Assault Weapon Band was completely ineffective – because it did not ban anything based on capability – but because it looked bad ass.
I do not know the VA law – but as there is no such think as an “assault rifle” that ordinary people can buy, inevitably that means they have focused on attributes that are trivial to work around.
Every single legally purchaseable weapon can only Fire ONE bullet for each pull of the Trigger.
Anything else is considered a machine gun and is illegal.
AR-15’s, Glocks, Revolvers – all fire a single bullet per trigger pull.
What distinguishes them from each other ? Length of the barrel – which just means accuracy and range. and other “appearance” attributes.
Contra the left – AR-15’s did not feature in mass shootings until the LEFT fixated on them.
JFK was killed by an italian carbine.
Columbine involved a Carbine, a Shotgun and lots of handguns.
VA Tech – handguns.
And on and on – AR-15’s did not become popular with Mass shooters until the Media and Left made an issue out of them.
They are a poor choice for any type of offensive shooting in a school or other building.
Right JS, the American people don’t have a chance against the US military as Joe Biden pointed out. A war between 2 states is determined by State population size and its proximity to a north or south border.
Much ado about nothing because SCOTUS will strike it.
“Actual Assault Weapon (TM)” is not what was used to kill a great number of people in Las Vegas. It was a non-assault AR-15 with a bump stock, which fires automatically with a single motion of the finger to use that single motion of the finger to repeatedly pull the trigger. AR-15s are popular, period. It has nothing to offer with the Left or “the Media,” whatever that is.
It does have a lot to do with gun nuts telling everyone who will listen that using a gun solves problems. Feel unsafe? Get a gun. See someone you don’t recognize in the neighborhood? Get a gun. Disagree with someone? Get a gun. It’s on a hundred times a week on broadcast TV – cop character sees a bad guy – uses a gun to solve that problem. Bad guy has a problem with another bad guy? Uses a gun to solve that problem. A large number of conservatives seem to feel that guns solve problems. They are almost always wrong and, as a result, drag another large bunch into also being wrong.
“But it is not black and scary looking!” is the reason people buy AR-15 style rifles. They aren’t buying a good weapon, they are buying a scary looking weapon. They are the type of people with poor judgement who should not have access to a gun.
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.
If you do not like the constitution as it is – you can change it.
And we did.
You would have opposed every amendment.
Soldiers didn’t have time to take care of women in labor during a war. Think it through…
In 1788, turnout was 11.6% by design, and voter restrictions by state legislatures were generally Male, European, and 21 with 50 lbs. Sterling or 50 acres.
In Greece, when democracy was created in 508 B.C., ~15% of the people were allowed to vote, certainly not women, slaves, the poor, etc.
There is NO organization that is operated according to the wishes of the workers.
Never was democracy intended to be the “dictatorship of the majority,” the “dictatorship of the poor,” or the “dictatorship of the proletariat.”
We all know what the poor want, which is “free stuff” and “free status.”
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.
Why is there BANG after your names, upstate and olly?
Absolutely.
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.
@Anonymous
Other than noticing the fact that your facts are skewed, I’d say it’s news to me that we even have a democratic party in 2026. We do have a globalist socialist party, also known as ‘the left’, that is wholly incompatible with even the notion of a representative Constitutional Republic or Bill of Rights; I missed the part where we ceased referring to the flagrant dismissal of our founding documents and subsequent laws as ‘treason’, which is punishable by those sane, said documents and laws.
And that is why the left has blatantly stayed it wants to change our Constitution and pack our courts. 🤷🏽♂️
*same, *stated
Anonymous Your dissertation lacks any infoirmation to even judge it.
What “Torture Treaty ?”
While I have lots of problems with what lots of presidents did and would generally agree that Bush was a poor president and that poser 9/11 under Bush both democrats and republicans fell all overthemselves to violate our rights.
You still make broad but vague claims that are not testable.
As the supreme court CORRECTLY noted in the Trump case – Presidents are not bound to US and other law when their actions are excercises of the executive power of the United States.
Obama Assassinated US Citizens in foreign countries because they were also terrorists.
He reserved to do so in the US.
He was not and is not answerable in a criminal court for that.
I would note that Even inside the US – while you are IN THE ACT – law enforcement is not obligated to get a warrant or read you your rights – if you point a firearm at someone their will shoot you dead.
I absolutely support limited govenrment powers and infinite individual rights.
But neither I nor much of the country is going to bat an eye at law enforcement killing someone without a warrant while they are in the act of killing another.
Nor are many going to bat an eye if you waterboard a terrorist to prevent another 9/11
Regardless, your vague an unspecified claims are NOT AN ARGUMENT.
I can not think of anything that Trump has done that violates the constitution or anyone’s rights – perhaps you can provide a CLEAR example so we can judge your remarks.
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
“ Their birthrate is 1.6. Conservatives is 2.4.”
That’s all you said. It implies conservatives have more babies and implying they will be conservative. It’s still a crazy claim.
You didn’t, but I did.
@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.
James, you’re crazy. It’s not a leftist issue. It’s entirely economic. It’s too expensive to have and raise kids in this economy. With the way things are going now it’s even worse.
That every boy and every gal
That’s born into the world alive
Is either a little Liberal
Or else a little Conservative!
-Gilbert & Sullivan, in Iolanthe (1882)
ATS – while there is some small likelyhood that a child is more likely to grow up conservative from a conservative home and progressive from a progressive home.
The opposite happens – in both cases frequently – kids challenging their parents is common.
But a much more important force is the normal progress of life.
Get a job and hold it – you become more conservative.
Get a married – you become more conservative.
Get a home – you become more conservative.
have children – you become more conservative.
This is all NATURAL – it is baked in.
The more you have to lose the more concerned you become about radical change.
A kid growing up in a conservative home tried to put a bullet through Trump’s head.
I believe a kid who grew up in a conservative home did put a bullet into Charlie Kirk.
Why are conservative families failing?
Fate, destiny. Every hair on your head is numbered.
I am surprised that progressives can manage a 1.6 birth rate.
They do not get married – they place little value on children.
Further as people
get a job
get a spouse
get a home
have children
They inherently become more conservative.
The left rants about traditional roles.
And absolutely those roles should be choices not forced.
And everyone will not chose them.
But the traditional roles exist in EVERY society – and they do so – because nature made us that way. Not all perfect clones.
Every woman is not programmed to nurture
Every man is not programmed to protect.
But on the whole that is what most of us do.
“How would women/progressives become the majority?”
By showing up to vote, unlike the majority of slackers who don’t. Up to 80% fail to vote in most elections.
“Women . . . have never embraced gun ownership and it looks as if they never will.”
Good lord. The exact opposite has been well-documented for years.
“Women are now the fastest-growing demographic of new gun owners in the U.S. Since 2019, nearly half of all new firearm buyers have been women, primarily purchasing handguns for personal protection.”
“Due to Trump’s toxic behavior the pendulum will swing towards the progressives/women.”
Trump’s approval rating is about double congressional republicans and 3 times that of congressional democrats.
What does “Toxic” mean – aside from “I do not like that ?”
While lower courts have ruled Trump’s actions unlawful – ALL of these have lost on appeal.
Sometime 9-0 in the supreme court.
Regardless While our individual choices of politicians often hinges on personal conduct.
Republicans are betting that the people of Maine prefer Susan Collins over a lying philanderer who frequents dating sights used by Teens, and sported a Nazi Tattoo for over a decade.
The are also betting that the people of TX prefer Ken Paxton over someone who thinks there are 6 sexes, and is a vegan. Being Vegan in TX is worse than being a pedophile.
So far Platner is not getting clobbered as bad as Talarico – Platner MOSTLY is more “authentic”.
Which is sort of the standard today.
Regardless the TX and ME races hinge on the personal, not issues of governance.
And that is often the case when one candidate or another tanks.
But for the most part we make decisions regarding our representatives based on issues, not personality.
Trump’s approval is higher than congressional republicans and higher than congressional democrats, because more people approve of what he is doing.
Not a majority, but surprisingly near a majority.
Nor are slightly negative presidential approvals unusual.
Obama’s was very high when he took office – but was between 40-48% most of his term.
Little different from Trump.
There are no trends today indicating the country is becoming more progresssive.
There are cleat trends away from progressives.
Read Trump’s Agenda 47 – the Blue print for his presidency.
More than half the terms have 70-90% public approval.
Nearly all have a majority approving.
That is not true of Democrats platforms – if you ever see one.
Though that too is a difference – Trump’s platform is a promise to the country, and one that Trump is striving to keep.
Democrat platforms are purely to energize the base and whether they get delivered on is purely a function of the politics of the moment.
Regardless – we are on the downhill side of Woke.
DEI is disappearing – mostly on its own, but even in left wing institutions -0 like colleges – BY force from government because outside of academia DEI is unpopular and actually toxic – it is inherently racist.
“If you’re not a liberal when you’re 25, you have no heart. If you’re not a conservative by the time you’re 35, you have no brain.”
Churchill may not have said that – but it is true – though it is taking longer today.
This is not the least surprising – Young adults – barely out of childhood, who have little in the way of jobs, responsibilities, commitments – nothing to lose, are more than willing to try to force the failed left wing ideology on everyone. Get a job, a spouse, a house, kids and left wing garbage is far less appealing.
In 2024 – Married Women voted for Trump.
“Women and progressives have never embraced gun ownership”
Correct – the traditional role of a male is a protector.
Thge husband guards the castle – with a gun.
The wife nurtures the children – but today 25% of all women own a gun.
Not a majority – but alot.
Progressives are unlikely to embrace any form of sanity – why shoudl the majority care what the lunatic left embrace or do not.
Regardless if you do not wish to own a gun – do not get when – YOU CHOOSE.
What you may not do is take that or any choice away from others – because you would not choose something your self.
“and it looks as if they never will.”
The trend is away from progressivsim – and particularly Woke.
“So when they become the majority and force the issue will a civil war break out?”
There is no indication that progressives are going to become a majority.
Roy Teixiera – the architect of the Democrats permanent majority as the nation becomes majority minority has been Throwing up red flags since 2016.
This country is still headed to become majority minority – but it is also headed towards a Republican permanent majority. Why ? Because MOST minority groups are a poor fit for progressivism.
Hispanics are significantly more conservative on the whole that democrats.
Democrats have held dominance in a number of minorities over a FEW specific political issues – which have either become moot – or they have ceded to republicans
Trumps approval is between 42-48 – Why ? Because he promised blue skys and there have been some clouds and rain.
Democrats numbers are in the teens – why ? Because Democrats openly tell voters they care more about Fringe Woke issues, than ordinary people – particularly working class people.
While Trump’s transformation of the Republican party into a party with the values of ordinary people was both absolutely necessary and successful. The Democrats transformation into the party of the fringe Woke was not.
If you wish to restrict an individual right – particularly one specifically called out in the constitution, then you must amend the constitution.
A right is something that you can not take away from people because a majority are OK with that.
SCOTUS has not said that the right to possess firearms can not be restricted.
It has said it can not be restricted BY LAW.
We restrict rights by changing the constitution.
And that is supposed to be hard.
A majority of us can not take away ANY right from even ONE individual.
Taking away a right requires a very difficult to get supermajority.
The majority of females in congress, government are democrats. They were put there by dems to weaken the government ultimately and there aren’t any good candidates anymore. Junk government resulted.