BREAKING: Virginia Senate Committee Votes to Postpone ‘Assault Weapon’ Ban Bill Consideration Until 2021 Session – The Truth About Guns

BREAKING: Virginia Senate Committee to Postpone ‘Assault Weapon’ Ban Bill Consideration Until 2021 Session

by Dan Zimmerman |

TTAG contributor and Patriot Picket founder Jeff Hulbert is in Richmond this morning and in the room with the Senate Judiciary Committee. The reason for all the attention is the committee taking up the Senate version of HB 961, the much-reviled “assault weapons” sales ban bill that would also ban “high capacity” magazines and end the sales of suppressors in the state.

Courtesy Jeff Hulbert

But as Jeff reports, a Republican motion to put off consideration of the bill until the 2021 session just passed, meaning there be no ban bill this legislative session. That result was met with rollicking cheers from the overwhelmingly pro-gun crowd in the room.

That outcome won’t make Governor Coonman happy at all.

As WTOP reports:

Senators voted to shelve the bill for the year and ask the state crime commission to study the issue, an outcome that drew cheers from a committee room packed with gun advocates.

Four moderate Democrats joined Republicans in Monday’s committee vote, rejecting legislation that would have prohibited the sale of certain semiautomatic firearms, including popular AR-15 style rifles, and banned the possession of magazines that hold more than 12 rounds.

The bill was a top priority for Northam, a Democrat who has campaigned heavily for a broad package of gun-control measures.

Not to mention Michael Blooomberg and his Moms Demand Action red-shirted sock puppets.

From the AP:

Northam has been able to get much of his gun-control agenda passed this year, but struggled with the proposed assault weapon ban. Earlier proposals to ban possession of AR-15-style rifles or to require owners to register them with state police have been scrapped. The governor had hoped a watered-down would win over enough Democratic moderates for passage.

Oops.

As far as I can tell, Ohio has become solid red (conservative) when it comes to politics and voting. I would be utterly shocked if Democrats tried (and had any serious expectation of succeeding) this nonsense in Ohio.

Now, with respect to Wisconsin and Michigan, I can definitely see Democrats trying this garbage. Whether or not it passes is anyone’s guess. As we all know, both Wisconsin and Michigan vacillate back-and-forth between Democrat and Republican governors, although their legislatures seem to remain in Republican hands, albeit with slim majorities at times and some pretty spineless Republican legislators (a.k.a. RINOs).

I think the fate of Michigan and Wisconsin firearm laws for the next four will boil down to whether or not Trump wins re-election in 2020. If he wins, some Republican state legislators will win their elections (riding on Trump’s “coattails”) and unseat incumbent Democrats. Will that be enough for Republicans to propose bills which restore our rights? Probably. Will that be enough for Republicans and a few vulnerable Democrats to override certain vetoes on those bills from Democrat Governors? I doubt it. I hope that I am wrong.

Impotency goes both ways: a Democrat Governor and Republican legislature in Michigan and Wisconsin means that neither side accomplishes much if anything.

That’s fine with me. I will take the Status Quo.

avatar uncommon_sense says:

The status quo is somewhat okay in Wisconsin. It is utterly terrible in Michigan.

I tried listing the seven most egregious violations of our right to keep and bear arms in Michigan that does not exist in Wisconsin. However, TTaG (WordPress) keeps swallowing my comment so I am unable to list them. I will try one more time, breaking up the comment and list into two additional comments.

avatar uncommon_sense says:

The following legal requirements apply in Michigan and do NOT apply in Wisconsin:
(1) Mandatory registration, licensing, and universal background checks for all handgun acquisitions — even private acquisitions and member to member transfers. And that handgun licensing means a separate license for every single handgun.
(2) One of the most expensive concealed carry licenses in the United States (about $120 every five years).
(3) The second longest list of state mandated “pistol-free zones” (10 different sites/facilities) in the United States, second only to Illinois. Michigan prohibits concealed carry in schools and on school property, college/university dorms and classrooms, daycare centers, places of worship, bars, hospitals, sports venues, large entertainment venues, and casinos.

… list continues in next comment …

… continuation of list …

(4) Only transport of long guns allowed is unloaded in chamber and magazine and in the trunk or a case that is not readily accessible to the vehicle occupants. (This might actually apply in Wisconsin as well.)
(5) No private property liability for unenforced privately mandated “pistol free zones”.

avatar uncommon_sense says:

… and I cannot complete the list because WordPress keeps swallowing anything and everything that I type, no matter how short.

avatar uncommon_sense says:

Legal requirement to notify law enforcement (within 24 hours I believe) of stolen firearms.

avatar uncommon_sense says:

And I give up trying to type the last bogus legal requirement since WordPress will not let me post a single sentence even though that sentence cannot possibly have any words in it which any filters would ever determine to be objectionable.

avatar uncommon_sense says:

That’s why we are in chaos now. 1 issue voters not seeing the big picture.

That’s why we will all continue to be fleeced, no matter who is in power.

avatar Tyrannosaurus Sex says:

Never underestimate the stupidity of people. Many POTG will roll out the “mission accomplished” banner and go back to their lives, and continue to never, ever vote.

When an even worse version passes in a year right under their noses they’ll splutter in outrage.

It’s not really so much stupidity as that they have lives to live, jobs to work, to raise etc. Their attention is divided while the other side is focused on stripping away individual rights in a way that means they never stop trying.

Every time they catch us paying attention to something else they take another bite at the apple.

Just as it’s always been. It’s not like the Alcmaeonids just went away when Cleisthenes did his thing. Freedom requires enormous effort to protect and eternal vigilance. From time to time we will stumble on both fronts.

avatar Void says:

I was in utter disbelief when Virginia’s Governor openly advocated to murder newborn babies in a public interview. I actually replayed that interview a total of three times to make sure I was accurately hearing and understanding what he said.

I was beyond utter disbelief when the press failed to shout it from the rooftops and the populace did not move to immediately remove Virginia’s Governor from office.

Larry in TX,

While it is deeply troubling that a Governor would advocate redefining murder (especially unilaterally redefining murder), it is much more troubling that a Governor would openly advocate for murdering newborn babies.

That is EXACTLY what Virginia Governor Ralph Northam did — advocated murdering newborn babies.

The gun-haters certainly don’t think so.

And if they plan to write it so narrowly, then why is SCOTUS “holding” EIGHT gun-control cases?

If NYSRPA won’t affect them, why not go ahead and dispose of them (accept or reject) now?

You make an interesting (and compelling in my opinion) point.

Wouldn’t it be a hoot if the United States Supreme Court issues a proper ruling on New York State Rifle & Pistol Association versus New York City — and then turns around, bundles all eight cases, and issues a proper ruling for them building upon their freshly inked ruling on New York State Rifle & Pistol Association?!?!?!?

I have a suspicion that certain members of the court have been increasingly alarmed, as Scalia was, in recent years about the general direction of the federal court system vis a vis individual liberties.

I also suspect that they see the two most recent justices as a chance, not a guarantee, but a chance to rectify some of that in ways that won’t be undone with a quickness.

Much as people complain about certain recent rulings, it’s interesting to view those rulings in the light of some of the things Scalia wrote outside of official opinions and to read those items with an eye towards history around 1940. If one does this it’s not hard to come to the conclusion that part of the court has been biding it’s time and waiting for a “carpe diem” moment that they could actually use effectively.

avatar Serpent_Vision says:

Because, like the NRA, they can’t drum up support by selling complacency. There’s no way to tell how serious a threat they think the decision will be based merely on the over-hyped fears they pitch to the people they want to send them money.

avatar Geoff “I’m getting too old for this shit” PR says:

“And if they plan to write it so narrowly, then why is SCOTUS “holding” EIGHT gun-control cases?”

Got a link on those 8 cases, please? I’m aware of one being held back, but not of the other 7…

avatar Geoff “I’m getting too old for this shit” PR says:

“If one does this it’s not hard to come to the conclusion that part of the court has been biding it’s time and waiting for a “carpe diem” moment that they could actually use effectively.”

Timing is politically *critical*, here.

When the ‘NY Pistol’ decision is finally announced, it could provide *massive* motivation for one party in particular in November to ‘storm the polls’ in anger against *us*. A massive gun rights win could cost us dearly, as in, RBG’s seat…

avatar TFred says:

“Got a link on those 8 cases, please? I’m aware of one being held back, but not of the other 7…”
As a matter of fact… not links but case numbers, easily Googled. There are some duplicates, as these issues are not isolated infringements.

Mance v Barr (18-663) whether the federal government can prohibit interstate handgun sales
Pena v Horan (18-843) whether possession of a gun can be limited to “safe” guns
Rogers v Grewal (18-824) whether the government can require a “special need” in order to allow carry outside the house
Gould v Lipson (18-1272) whether the government can require a “special need” in order to allow carry outside the house
Ciolek v New Jersey (19-114) whether the government can require a “justifiable need” in order to grant a carry permit
Cheeseman v Polillo (19-27) whether licenses can require a “justifiable need” for possessing a gun
Worman v Healey (19-404) whether “assault weapons” and “large capacity feeding devices” can be banned
Malpasso v Pallozzi (19-423) whether licenses can require a “good and substantial reason” for possessing a gun

“Wouldn’t it be a hoot if the United States Supreme Court issues a proper ruling on New York State Rifle & Pistol Association versus New York City — and then turns around, bundles all eight cases, and issues a proper ruling for them building upon their freshly inked ruling on New York State Rifle & Pistol Association?!?!?!?”

Indeed, a hoot! I’m hoping and praying that Clarence Thomas is the author of the opinion.

I suspect the far more likely outcome (even if the ruling is very good) would be for the court to remand them all back to their respective lower courts with instructions to reconsider in light of the new ruling.

But anything could happen! A per curiam ruling on each of the eight would be awesome, although I would be VERY surprised.

avatar strych9 says:

“…it could provide *massive* motivation for one party in particular in November to ‘storm the polls’ in anger against *us*.”

Statistics on gun control beliefs suggest this is unlikely. Serious gun control support runs deep but it is not wide. The same is true of serious gun rights support.

The vast, vast majority of people consider guns to be, at best, a secondary issue. For most it’s much farther down the line. You can see that in the polls of “top issues”. Gun control on either side isn’t in the top 5, usually not even in the top 10 issues.

This is what I said about HPA three years ago. If Joe Sixpack and Sally Soccermom have economic security they won’t oppose HPA. OTOH, if you put HPA front and center up front those people will feel you’re putting a small, niche special interest ahead of broader issues and while they mostly won’t oppose HPA on philosophical grounds, they will vehemently oppose your chosen order of operations.

avatar Rickster says:

Postponed ?….. Wait…… Hold it…… But…… But….. Gunsarebadmmmmmkay !

Mr. Bloomberg, Mr. Soros and all the other usual-suspect typical Democrats now want to know what they paid for.

House of Delegates
55 Democratic
45 Republican

Doesn’t take much in the Senate there, just a couple of moderate Democrats joining with Republicans can stop an anti-gun bill.

Hope this postponement until the 2021 session is just a sneaky step to killing the bill next time around.

Virginia does not reelect Senators and Delegates until 2021. Barring resignations, we are stuck with this crew for next year’s General Assembly session as well.

Not to say the November 2020 election is meaningless. A Trump win in Virginia – and dare I hope, some Republican gains in Virginia’s national representatives – could go a long way toward changing the climate and attitude, even among those already in office.

Eternal vigilance is the cost of liberty.

Good citizens of Virginia it’s up to you now!

I would say that the peaceful display of 25,000 or more open carry gun owners does have an effect on creating legislation. They didn’t count the ones who couldn’t get into the city. There was probably over 100,000 outside the city trying to get in.

Simply having 25,000 open carriers does educate elected officials about the thoughts of the voting public.

It also educates the voting public.

Many rank-and-file gun control supporters are under the impression that gun owners are all just a bunch of street thugs and gangbangers.

The press can try to frame the issue the way they want to. But we all have camera phones. And WE CAN tell OUR OWN story. And send it out to millions of voters.
(Smile)

Organized open carry conducted in a peaceful and polite manor is a positive PR bonanza.

IN other words, they decided to post pone loosing a CIVIL WAR.

WE Ohio Militia will back up Virginians…

We’ll flood the state with thousands of militia from 11 states.

We will NOT compromise the 2nd Amendment away…

We will NOT disarm.

This content was originally here.