Virginia adopts assault weapons ban
Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger signed a package of legislation on June 16 aimed at preventing gun violence, including a ban on assault weapons.
Surrounded by law enforcement officers, lawmakers, students, healthcare workers, and families impacted by gun violence, Spanberger said the commonsense gun legislation “will keep our families, communities, and law enforcement safe.”
The legislation bans the purchase, sale, manufacture, import, and transfer of assault weapons and ammunition-feeding devices that hold more than 15 rounds. A violation is a Class 1 misdemeanor. The law takes effect July 1; it does not apply to anyone who purchased and took possession of an assault weapon before that date.
The chief patrons of the legislation are Sen. Saddam Salim and Del. Dan Helmer, both of whom represent Northern Virginia.
Related story: State leaders announce a compromise on a retail weed market
According to the governor’s office, assault weapons and large-capacity magazines are disproportionately used in mass shootings and the killing of law enforcement officers.
At the bill signing, Peter Read of Annandale, whose daughter Mary Read was killed in the 2007 mass shooting at Virginia Tech, said, “This legislation will save lives, reduce injuries, and prevent other families from joining this club that no one wants to belong to.”
“As the daily toll of gun violence passes mostly unremarked and unremembered, the family and friends of the victims must somehow find the strength to go on in the aftermath,” Read said.
“When someone is killed by a firearm, a life story is cut short,” said Dr. Jesse Burgess, a trauma surgeon at Sentara Norfolk General Hospital. “Today is about more than just signing bills. It is about preventing empty seats at dinner tables. It is about giving children a chance to grow up. It is about sparing families from the devastating news that changes their lives forever.”
The assault weapon ban is already facing pushback. The National Rifle Association and the Second Amendment Foundation are challenging the law in court.
In addition, several conservative commonwealth’s attorneys said they won’t enforce the new law on constitutional grounds, including Ryan Mehaffey of Spotsylvania County, WUSA9 reports.
Among the other 14 laws signed by Spanberger are measures to:
- crack down on untraceable ghost guns;
- require the safe storage of firearms;
- expand “red flag” laws;
- close the “boyfriend loophole” to make sure convicted domestic abusers can’t exploit a legal technicality to keep their firearms; and
- hold the firearm industry accountable when negligent business practices contribute to gun violence.
What’s next this ? This is BS you might as well just throw the constitution in the trash it’s not worth the ink that the paper it’s wrote on. The governor doesn’t have sense to pour piss out of a boot.it not the guns it’s the person behind it. Y’all are more about selling weed than you are about taking our rights away.
Obviously it is sad and tragic when someone is killed by any violence. Including drunk driving, but punishing the law abiding citizens isn’t the way. If people in Northern Virginia don’t want these guns then let them be banned there. Leave the rest of us alone. You don’t represent all of Va just your district.
Why would anyone living in an almost civilized country like ours need an ass ault weapon? What would they do with it?
… more lame, tired arguments.
One can still buy guns in VA after this law goes into effect. Only the insane need an assault weapon or the ability to shoot more than 15 rounds without reloading.
Too bad the law does not have a sunset provision on currently owned assault weapons. Melt them all down then see how many mass shootings happen. Mass shootings were virtually unknown before the federal law banning assault weapons was repealed. Check it out.
Official name: Federal Assault Weapons Ban
* Enacted as part of: Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act
* Signed by: Bill Clinton
* Expiration date: September 13, 2004
* Reason it ended: The law contained a sunset clause and expired automatically; no repeal vote was required.
This law will have no effect on individuals that choose to kill. This law will only encourage them. A individual that wants to kill will find the way to do so. All this law does is put honest living Virginia residents in arms way.
A more rational approach would be to require general gun safety and responsibility through a certification or license – similar to a hunting license or a driver’s license. This would allow for criminal and mental checks. It would identify who is qualified and responsible to possess firearms to government officials and reassure the public. With that in place you should remove all restrictions on citizens who may choose to exercise their constitutional right to own firearms, such as firearm types and concealed carry, because you then can and should hold the individual fully responsible for what happens. Both sides of the current “gun debate” are wrong. We have licenses to drive cars, don’t we have a right to travel? Use the same approach for firearms, once licensed it doesn’t matter if you have a big or small, fast or slow car. You can buy the car and use it. Moreover the law is just dealing with cosmetic issues, classic ignorance by individuals and legislators part. Learn how firearms operational systems work.
The undecideds/independents have entered the chat.
You conflate rights with privileges.
Why don’t you sit this one out?
Can’t handle a cognitive argument I see, I realize that scares a lot of people. I raise this because my idea is rational and the left and right have lost their credibility and rational capacity is where I am coming from. For the record I have tons of firearm experience and ownership. I support the 2nd amendment rights of individuals. I realize that the term “assault rifle” is a complete misnomer on operating systems and is used to scare ignorant people. However, rights without responsibility are worthless and to many people in our society are grossly misinformed and lacking on responsibility (that is true for both left and right). On my right, this is a problem for many that support absolute gun rights. This is in part why I left both the NRA and GOA.
What a blathering series of contradictions. “Shall not be infringed” doesn’t require mental gymnastics, Judas.
I cannot tell you how many “assault weapons” I purchased in the last year in anticipation of this constitutional violation, but it’s a lot.
Based on firearms sales numbers, lots of others did the same thing.
I’ve seen so many people in my local gun store who are buying firearms now – who never would have were it not for Spanberger and her handlers.
The VA state Supreme Court will likely overturn this before the Supreme Court does.
The net result will be that Spanberger, Salim, and Helmer dramatically increase the number of 1)“assault weapons” in Virginia, and 2) the number of people who own “assault weapons.”
It’s about time!
I’m an old person who grew up in NYC where guns were not permitted. I never wanted anything to do with guns. After the Reagan assassination attempt, I became even more strongly in favor of gun control and contributed to the Brady campaign and other gun control groups.
Then, I noticed disconcerting acts taking place. My parents’ home in a “safe neighborhood” of NYC was broken into twice, because the criminals had no fear of being harmed by the occupants because law-abiding citizens in safe neighborhoods of NYC didn’t have guns in their home.
Then I noticed the vast majority of mass shootings, including the Virginia Tech shooting, were taking place in “gun-free” zones by mentally unwell persons.
Then, I experienced severe mental illness in my immediate family, and saw first-hand how the mental health system in the USA allows the criminally-inclined mentally ill to continue to coexist with law abiding citizens, with no restrictions on their ability to buy guns.
So now, while I understand the impulse to restrict access to guns, especially large capacity guns, I have less faith that it will “save lives.” The reason why is that the vast majority of Americans value their freedom and liberty, including the rights of others, and as others have noted, those who want to harm and murder others for whatever reason will find a way if they are not stopped ahead of committing the act.
It is a fact that the vast majority of mass shooters behaved in ways that clearly communicated they were capable and seriously considering such an act, but because no one alerted the proper authorities, they were able to commit their heinous act.
So yes, praise to Spanberger for “taking action”, but I think this is about as helpful as putting up more “gun-free” zone signs on every schoolhouse door and window.
Thank you for sharing that great point.
I’ve noticed that Americans tend to forget to look at global examples. The recent history of other Western nations offers a warning about what happens after gun confiscation.
In the UK, the murder rate spiked after handguns were banned in 1997, and Australia’s violent crime drops were already happening before their 1996 gun laws took effect. Removing guns did not eliminate violence. In fact, knife crime has largely replaced gun crime.
In England and Wales, sharp objects like knives are now used in nearly half of all homicides, while Australia has seen stabbings rise to account for almost half of its murders in recent years.
Beyond crime stats, the real danger lies in how these laws pave the way for government tyranny. When the state no longer fears any resistance from its citizens, personal freedoms quickly erode. We saw this when Australia used military to enforce pandemic lockdowns and quarantine camps, and we see it in the UK, where the government now heavily monitors online speech and bans citizens from carrying simple pocket knives.
Gun control is never just about stopping crime—it is about expanding the power of the state over a defenseless public.
“Constitution, no kings” read the sign on bridge over beltway. Remember?
Must’ve missed the one saying but queens and princesses are okay.