Posted on 04/13/2020 6:13:46 AM PDT by Kaslin
Governor Northam signed five new gun control laws for Virginia on Good Friday.
Virginia’s new gun control laws are:
1) Required background checks on all firearm sales in Virginia, with criminal charges for both sellers and purchasers who violate this law.
2) The establishment of an “Extreme Risk Protective Order” that gives police and prosecutors the power to seize firearms based on the preponderance of evidence of a substantial risk of injury - a determination made by a judge during a one-party hearing conducted outside the presence of the gun owner.
3) Reinstatement of Virginia’s one-handgun-a-month rule.
4) Increased penalty for recklessly leaving firearms in the presence of children.
5) Requirement for gun owners to report their lost or stolen firearms to law enforcement within 48 hours.
Virginia gun owners peacefully rallied in Richmond back in January in an attempt to stop the liberal government’s gun control initiatives. The demonstration resulted in slight success: the proposed “assault” weapon laws were not signed into law this year. Northam, nonetheless, promises to do so next year, you know, saving the best for last. This year’s gun control laws are but an appetizer.
Democrats across Virginia celebrated throwing daggers at the Second Amendment, each justifying his stab at a constitutional right as a "safety" measure, each convinced they are "saving lives." (In Virginia, Democrats define "life" as a choice that is made after a baby is born and comforted, and judged for his or her worth by the mother and her doctor.) Northam, who redefined the concept of life as we know it, audaciously bragged in a press release that the new laws will "save lives in the Commonwealth of Virginia." Senate Majority Leader Dick Saslaw stated, “Virginia will be safer thanks to universal background checks, extreme risk protection orders, and restoring a one-handgun-a-month policy.” Secretary of Public Safety and Homeland Security Brian Moran agreed, and said, “these common sense measures will undoubtedly save lives.”
Critical of these "saviors," I turned to Virginia’s greatest firearms advocate in the legislature, Delegate Nick Freitas, for his immediate reaction to the degradation of Second Amendment rights in Virginia and the five new appetizer gun control measures. I amicably refer to my favorite Virginia legislator as Freedom Freitas. You will see why.
MM: Do you believe the new gun control laws will make law-abiding Virginians safer, or will these new laws place your constituents into greater danger?
NF: “I don't think there is any question that it will make law abiding citizens more vulnerable while at the same time making criminals safer. Almost no attention by the press was given to the fact that in the same year, Democrats were trying to criminalize law abiding gun owners in the name of ‘public safety’ they voted to provide early release options for people convicted of 1st degree murder and rape.”
MM: Do you believe Governor Northam when he says that he cares about the safety of Virginians, or is that position directly contradicted by other legislation that he has supported?
NF: “This Governor wants to be judged based off of his intentions rather than his actions. This is the same Governor that said if a child was born alive as a result of a botched abortion, that the child would be ‘made comfortable’ while a conversation ensued about whether or not the child should be saved. Does he care about the safety of Virginians? Maybe, but his policies won't achieve greater safety and that is the substantive point. We don't legislate ‘intentions’ or ‘feelings,’ we write laws, and when those laws hurt people, the stated intentions of the legislator doesn't mean a whole lot to the person victimized by the law.”
My take on Freitas' polished words: these "saviors" are delusional liars who do not care about "safety" at all. Instead, they care about leftist platform issues du jour and appeasing the likes of George Soros.
The conversation continued:
MM: Would you say that the legislature has enacted reasonable penalties for the new gun control offenses?
NF: “I don’t think it's ever appropriate to criminalize people for exercising a constitutionally protected right. It is ridiculous that Democrats in the House wanted the ownership of a pistol magazine that held more than 12 rounds to be punished by up to a year in jail — and keep in mind that is a year in jail for each violation. So five magazines equals up to five years in jail. At the same time they carried several bills that made it easier for violent offenders to receive early release. Democrats are notoriously soft on violent crime but draconian when it comes to punishing law abiding gun owners.”
MM: With the new laws, will more otherwise law-abiding citizens find themselves facing criminal charges?
NF: "It is a very real possibility. I brought this point up and Democrat Mark Levine's reply was 'No Law abiding citizen needs to be worried,’ which is a cute way of saying that the Democrats now have the power to arbitrarily turn you into a criminal so the term ‘law abiding’ doesn't apply to you. I think that is interesting coming from the Democrat party that used the same argument when they were arresting civil rights leaders at the height of Jim Crow. Apparently they still have a lot to learn about the fact that making something a ‘law’ does not make it just.”
MM: Are you aware of any Second Amendment advocacy groups that plan to file suit? What legal basis will they be arguing?
NF: “I know that Gun Owners of America, Virginia Citizens Defense League, National Association of Gun Rights, the NRA and others have all looked into it. The question will be one of standing. One Handgun a month has already been successfully challenged, and there are going to be more challenges against so called ‘Red Flag laws’ which deny people due process of law and have already resulted in the deaths of citizens.”
MM: Why do you personally fight for Second Amendment rights?
NF: “The reason why I fight so hard for Second amendment rights is because this is ultimately a civil rights issue. You have an inherent right to be able to defend yourself. There have been too many times in world history and even in our own, where government officials arbitrarily disarming citizens or denying them the ability to defend themselves and their families has led to discrimination, oppression and victimization. A firearm allows a physically weaker person to be able to defend themselves from a stronger attacker. And every statistic tracked demonstrates that firearms are used between 500,000 and 1.5 million times a year in this country by a person defending themselves. Those people deserve to have their stories shared and certainly deserve the right to be able to protect themselves.”
I agree with Freedom Freitas 100 percent. Nick Freitas is the definitive voice of freedom in Virginia.
Freitas will be discussing the new gun control laws and much more on his podcast, which is set to premiere on Monday, April 13. He is currently running for Virginia’s 7th Congressional District, the primary Northam has postponed to June 23. If he wins the November election, Freedom Freitas will represent the liberty interests of all Americans. I can only hope that Virginia voters in the 7th Congressional District are wise enough to value their freedoms.
As for gun owners in Virginia, the new gun control laws take effect on July 1; godspeed to you all.
Seems to me that #5 would be implemented by a lot of gun owners.
#2 will never survive first contact with the Supreme Court.
I thought they were recalling Governor Northam.
I guess the Governor feels that the Lexington and Concord crisis needs to be re-examined, and any violators subject to prosecution. I wonder if he read about it for the first time recently, and it made him nervous.
You Va’s Voted this clown into office so live with it.
“Preponderance of the evidence” simply means, “more likely than not.” That can mean just ever so slightly likely than not - and that often is applied by a judge when others would say that the circumstances are LESS likely than not.
I think there are supposedly 11 other states that already have mandatory reporting by private citizens for lost or stolen guns.
Seems to me that’s basically registration when combined with expanded background checks for private person to person gun sales/exchanges, at least for new guns purchased from a ffl holder. Is that right? Anyone know?
Freegards
Go away. I’m so sick of comments like yours. We have been fighting like hell. Your state is next.
Go away. I’m so sick of comments like yours. We have been fighting like hell. Your state is next.
5) Requirement for gun owners to report their lost or stolen firearms to law enforcement within 48 hours.
= = =
So I have to inventory any guns every two days?
What if I am on vacation?
Or if I am self quarantined in the house?
I do note that many folks have reported here on FR about their boating accidents. And we know that law enforcement monitors this site. So #5 is fulfilled in those cases.
“You Va’s Voted this clown into office so live with it.”
...yep. That’s how it worked. 100% of us in VA voted for Northam. I’ve lived in Richmond for 20 years. Volunteered for Reagan, George Allen, Bob McDonnell and others. This state has the finest Patriots you’ll ever know. So cut the broad strokes BS.
#2 is wrong for the substantial risk order. The standard is not preponderance, it is clear and convincing.
“If the court finds by clear and convincing evidence that the person poses a substantial risk of personal injury to himself or to other individuals in the near future by such person’s possession or acquisition of a firearm, the court shall issue a substantial risk order.”
Doesn’t make it Constitutional, but C&C > than Preponderance.
#2 - Gee nothing like violating a citizen’s Procedural due process rights.
Is the mandatory reporting requirement for lost/stolen guns only enforceable for those guns originally purchased from a ffl holder after the expanded background check law comes into effect? I don’t see how it could be enforceable with guns purchased before the expanded background check law, but I’m no expert for sure.
Freegards
**You Va’s Voted this clown into office so live with it.**
And rest assured that once this law is in force, the WILL BE BACK FOR MORE.
Is the mandatory reporting requirement for lost/stolen guns only enforceable for those guns originally purchased from a ffl holder after the expanded background check law comes into effect? I don’t see how it could be enforceable with guns purchased before the expanded background check law, but I’m no expert for sure.
= = =
It’s just a way to make us criminals.
So some gun is used in a crime, or turns up somewhere.
Tracing, interviews with family or friends or enemies, investigative work, etc., points it back to you.
If so, guess what. You did not report it. Now you are a criminal, and no guns for you.
Well, I think they use the serial number of the gun to find the ffl holder where it was originally sold/transferred from. Then they contact the ffl holder and get them to look up the name of that buyer from their records. But before expanded background checks you could have walked out the door and sold it to a stranger 5 minutes later, or tell them that you did anyhow. Like I said I’m definitely no expert on this.
So I’m thinking it can’t be enforceable for guns originally sold/transferred before expanded background checks. Because they don’t know if you actually still have those guns or not.
Freegards
The odd thing about this signing, is that it was done knowing that protestors would be silenced due to the "social distancing" in place.
What a despicable pos you have as governor
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.