Legislative Update for February 25

We are fast approching the end of the 2024 Session of the General Assembly.  On Thursday, several gun control bills passed the second house for consideration and are headed to Governor Youngkin.  Only one of the bills have taken the next step prior to arriving at the Governor.  Each bill has to be "Enrolled" then the text of the bill has to be printed as it passed both houses, so now is the time to contact the Governor and urge him to veto these bills.  You can contact Governor Youngkin at glenn.youngkin@governor.virginia.gov .  The bills that are now headed to Governor Youngkin are:

SB 273: This bill would impose a mandatory five-day waiting period for all firearm purchases in Virginia.

SB 100: This bill would end the ability of individuals to build a firearm for personal use without government interference, something that has been done for centuries. The "scary" term “ghost gun” is an invention of gun ban advocates to restrict the rights of law-abiding citizens. Criminals are prohibited from owning a firearm regardless of how the firearm is made. This means that whether that possessed firearm was made in a factory, or using a kit, it does not change the fact that possession of that firearm is a criminal act.

SB 368: This bill would created mandatory storage requirements for firearms and ammunition.

SB 491: This bill would subject firearm manufacturers and dealers to frivolous lawsuits by creating a civil cause of action for violations. The legislation requires industry members to establish and implement controls based on vague and unenumerated standards of conduct. A suit against a manufacturer or dealer could be brought by the Attorney General or a local county or city attorney for a perceived violation of these "standards of conduct".

HB 498: This bill would requires local school boards to develop and implement a policy for distribution by the local district to inform parents about firearm safety and storage laws in the commonwealth. This mandate could be used as a gun ban propaganda tool funded by tax payer dollars.

SB 99: This bill would prohibit the carrying of certain semi-automatic center-fire rifles and shotguns on any public street, road, alley, sidewalk, or public right-of-way or in any public park or any other place of whatever nature that is open to the public, with certain exceptions. Under current law, the current prohibition on carrying certain shotguns and semi-automatic center-fire rifles and pistols applies to a narrower range of firearms, only in certain localities, and only when such firearms are loaded.

Please contact Governor Youngkin and politely urge him to veto the above bills. It is best to send an email yourself rather than use a pre-written email system. Emails in your own words will have a greater impact on the Governor and will be viewed as being sent by the sender rather than by an automated service.

Fact Checking Senator Feinstein on the Assault Weapons Ban

On the 20th Anniversary of the passage of the Clinton Gun Ban, California Senator Diane Feinstein issued a press release stating that the ban was a success and should be reinstated.  But ProPublica has called out Senator Feinstein on her claims:

But gun violence experts say the exact opposite. "There is no compelling evidence that it saved lives," Duke University public policy experts Philip Cook and Kristin Goss wrote in their book "The Gun Debate: What Everyone Needs to Know." 

A definitive study of the 1994 law – which prohibited the manufacture and sale of semiautomatic guns with "military-style features" such pistol grips or bayonet mounts as well as magazines holding more than ten bullets – found no evidence that it had reduced overall gun crime or made shootings less lethal. "We cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation's recent drop in gun violence," the Department of Justice-funded study concluded in 2004. "Should it be renewed, the ban's effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement."

ProPublica notes that the original study Feinstein sighted as proof the ban worked was based on a flawed assumption - that criminals who still owned so-called "high capacity" magazines would not use them in crime.  You see, the law only banned the manufacture of new magazines, it didn't confiscate those already owned.  The 2004 study found that the use of "high capacity" magazines in crimes either remained steady or slightly increased.  Additionally a Department of Justice memorandum that the NRA obtained in early 2013 noted that the only way a ban on so-called assault weapons or "high capacity" magazines would be successful would be if those owned by the public were confiscated, which is exactly what Feinstein wants.

Terry McAuliffe Changes Subject When Asked About Support for Gun Ban

Yesterday, Kerry Picket of Breitbart News spoke with Cam Edwards on NRANews.com about her exchange with Democratic Candidate Terry McAuliffe on the subject of  so-called "assault weapons".  "Fast Terry" wanted no part of talking about the subject and instead tried to instead talk about how he is a gun owner, he takes his sons hunting, and that everyone should have to go through background checks before purchasing a firearm, even though just a little over six months ago he expressed support for gun bans.

We need to hold McAuliffe's feet to the fire.  Tell every pro-Second Amendment supporter you know that Terry McAuliffe cannot be trusted when it comes to our rights.  In December when he thought gun control was popular, he was for banning sporting rifles and gun rationing.  Now, he wants to pretend he supports the Second Amendment.  Don't let him get away with it.

CNBC's Report on Popularity of AR-15

VSSA received promotional emails from CNBC prior to the airing of last night's premier of "America's Gun - Rise of the AR-15."  We did not promote the program as it's not our job to advertise for CNBC and since we sell ad space on the Blog and the VSSA web site, they were free to buy a banner and have it in the rotation. We have come to expect that most firearm related reports done by the "Big 3" networks is anything but unbiased and figured this would be the same.  Google the name of the program and you will find that was the basic feeling of many in the firearm rights community frequenting message boards and blogs, before the program aired.

Mid-afternoon yesterday, NBC Universal sent out another email addressing the negative perception pre-airing of the program:

We have previously reached out to you regarding the CNBC documentary about the AR-15. Some of the feedback we have seen amongst AR-15 owners and gun enthusiasts is suggesting that we will be choosing a side or going to take a negative look at the AR-15.  

Portraying the AR-15 negatively is not the objective of the documentary and we can reassure all owners and enthusiasts that we aren't choosing a side. Our team wanted to understand the AR-15's immense popularity on both sides of the debate and go beyond the clichés. Please feel free to share this information with your network in addition to this additional clip from the special.

If the program had been completely like the below, it might have been a little easier to believe it was not their objective to give a negative impression of the rifles because this clip goes right to what they said was the point of the program, to understand the popularity of the AR-15:

But then there is also this in the program:



The mainstream media's version of "unbiased" is to reinforce what is generally in the public domain (i.e. the second video) rather than present the other side of the story so the public has a complete picture.  When you have a doctor describing wounds as "battlefield type wounds," that kind of reinforces the sterotype that the AR-15 is a "battlefield weapon" as Obama and Biden inaccurately describe them.

I guess I should be thankful that the segment with the dentist and real estate agent presented the side that the "typical" AR-15 owners are professioanls and not "anti-government tea-party types" but frankly that message gets lost when you then have a segment with the shooting victim and the doctors who treated her.  What do you think was their underlying message? The victim, Farrah Soudani, for her part did not blame the guns, but said it is, stupid people who kill people. She called for "mandatory psychological evaluations" before anyone can purchase a fiream, "especially one with the AR-15's characteristics."

If you did not see last night's airing and are interested in seeing the program for yourself, it will re-air on CNBC on Sunday at 9:00 PM.

Senate Judiciary Delays Consideration of Gun Control Bills

The Washington Post reports that the Senate Judiciary Committee has delayed consideration of gun control legislation for one week to give them an opportunity to hear from more witnesses. From the Post:

"In light of the delay, Committee Chairman Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) said the panel would reconvene March 7 to begin considering the four bills, a process that will go “as late as necessary.” He said he hopes the full Senate can begin debating whichever bills are approved by the committee before the end of March."

American Public's Mixed Message on Gun Control

Buried at the end of this Roll Call article on the tightrope that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is walking on the issue of gun control, is this tidbit from a poll by a Las Vegas CBS affiliate:

A state poll conducted last week for the Las Vegas CBS affiliate found that a majority of respondents favor a prohibition on assault weapons but also that Americans should be allowed to own the firearms of their choosing — a contradictory result that underscores the trouble with the issue. However, large majorities of respondents favor registration and background check requirements.

Is Mark Warner Following Joe Manchin in Walking Back Commits on Gun Bans

Shortly after the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, Virginia U.S. Senator Mark Warner followed West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin in suggesting he may be open to banning semi-automatic modern sporting rifles (commonly inaccurately called "assault weapons").  This letter forwarded by a VSSA member makes you wonder if he is also now trying to walk back those comments like Senator Manchin since Warner makes no mention of gun bans in the response.

From: "Sen. Mark Warner's Office"
Date: Jan 11, 2013 4:51:50 PM
Subject: Responding to your message
To: ______________

Dear Mr. __________,

 

Thank you for contacting me to share your thoughts on the tragic events in Newtown, Connecticut and your views on gun control.

 

On December 14, 2012, 20 innocent children and six adults lost their lives in one of the worst, most tragic shootings to ever occur in the United States. As a parent of three daughters, this was the ultimate nightmare. Like the Virginia Tech and Columbine shootings, this tragedy unfolded in what was once regarded as a safe haven free of crime and violence: a school.

 

I am a strong supporter of the Second Amendment constitutional right of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms. I own firearms and I have an "A" rating from the National Rifle Association. However, I also recognize that, like with many of our constitutional rights, our Second Amendment rights are not without limits. It is unfortunate that a tragedy of this magnitude is what is needed to prompt action, but we need to have a serious discussion on how to best avoid these kinds of mass shootings in the future. The status quo is not acceptable.

 

I believe our discussion should cover many issues. We can start by improving the existing criminal background check system. Currently, the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) is woefully incomplete, with many states failing to submit available records on persons who may be disqualified from purchasing or possessing firearms. With a more complete background check system, we can keep firearms out of the hands of those who have been deemed unfit to possess them.

 

In addition, we can take common sense measures such as passing the CAMPUS Safety Act (S. 3682), which I introduced last year. That bill would establish a national center for campus public safety within the Department of Justice to serve as a resource center and assist schools and universities in developing campus safety plans and threat assessment tools. We also need to look at changes to our mental health system so we can provide help to those with dangerous mental illnesses before it is too late. There will not be a single solution, but all of these issues and others need to be part of the conversation and I urge you to continue to express your views as we move forward.

 

Again, thank you for contacting me. For further information or to sign up for my newsletter please visit my website at http://warner.senate.gov.

 

Sincerely,
MARK R. WARNER
United States Senator

Please continue to contact Senator Warner and make your views heard that you oppose any new restrictions on our rights.

Talk of Confiscation: First It Was New York, Now it is Iowa

From the Daily Caller:

In an interview with the Daily Times Herald in Caroll, Iowa, state Rep. Dan Muhlbauer said governments should start confiscating semi-automatic rifles and other firearms.

Muhlbauer, a Democrat from the western Iowa town of Manilla, is a cattleman and farmer. The newspaper reported that he owns a .410 shotgun, a .22 rifle and a .22 pistol.

“We cannot have big guns out here as far as the big guns that are out here, the semi-automatics and all of them,” Muhlbauer told the newspaper during a December 19 audiotaped interview. “We can’t have those running around out here. Those are not hunting weapons.”

Rep. Muhlbauer, I suggest you check out this video.

Just a little note, states are not the only folks talking about confiscation in some form as an option. At the appropriate time, VSSA will have more on that.

State Senator Marsden Wants to Hold Gun Onwers Liable for Crimes When Firearm is Stolen and Used in a Crime

State Senator Dave Marsden has prefiled bills that would make the victim of a crime of stolen firearms civilly liable if those firearms were used in a crime, and a bill that would fine the owner if they do not report the firearm(s) as stolen withing 48 hours of when "he knew or reasonably should have known that such firearm had been lost or stolen." SB 785 and SB 786 were prefiled within days of the Sandy Hook, CT, school shooting.

While only total of six firearm related bills have been prefiled to date (five restricting our rights and one that yet again creates an exemption from concealed handgun permit fees for a class of public employees), it is expected that a range of anti-rights bills will be introduced to include bans on private transfers which was first introduced last year by Richmond State Senator Donald Maceachin , as well as the annual so-called "gun show loophole" bill.  WTOP reports that Richmond Delegate Joe Morrissey is drafting legislation that would ban modern sporting rifles and standard capacity magazines.

The 2013 General Assembly convenes on January 9th and will be in session until February 23.  The Reconvened Session to consider the Governor's vetoes and amendments will be held April 3rd.  The last day to introduce legislation is January 18th and "Crossover" is February 5th. 

Talk of Confiscation

Since the Sandy Hook school shooting on December 16th, the gun ban lobby has been almost giddy with the prospect of getting everything they want on their long wish list, especially a renewal of the Clinton Gun Ban. But in some places, the talk is of confiscation or forced compensated confiscation (so-called buy backs).

This report by a New York CBS affiliate notes that New York Police are actually considering how they would go about collecting all those "assault rifles" in the event the ban is renewed.

The last time the ban was enacted, existing firearms were grandfathered.  Would the new darling of the media, West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin, go along with a ban that also called for confiscation?

New Mayors Poll of Virginians on Guns Flawed

The Richmond Times Dispatch is reporting today that Mayors Against Illegal Guns (MAIG) released a poll of Virginians that says a large majority support stiffer gun regulations.

•84 percent of Virginians support requiring gun dealers to notify police when someone fails a background check.
•88 percent of Virginians support a law to require background checks for all guns sold at gun shows.
•85 percent of Virginians support tracking the bulk purchase of semi-automatic assault rifles.

First, most everyone knows you can get the outcome you want from any poll simply by the way the question is asked.  Add to that the fact that the poll was conducted by Democratic polling firm Hart Research, and one can quickly determine that the questions are most likely more favorable to an anti-rights perspective.  In addition, the regions of the state where the respondants live are not identified in the polling data provided by MAIG.  So, if the respondants were slanted toward urban areas or Northern Virginia, one would expect responses more favorable to gun control.

The MAIG Poll asked  questions for everyone, then had specific questions of people surveyed in certain states, including Virginia.

While the MAIG press release noted that there was some support for stricter gun laws in Virginia regarding the sale of firearms, when you look at the results of the poll, there was actually a larger percentage of Virginia respondants (46%) that said they should stay the same than thought they should be stricter (42%).

On the Federal legislative front, New York U.S. Senator Charles "Chucky" Schumer used the occasion of the poll results release to introduce the "Fix Gun Checks Act of 2011."  The legislation would require federal agencies disseminate records on people who are prohibited from purchasing firearms, such as felons, drug abusers and the mentally ill. It also would require background check on private sale of firearms.

In the lead of to the 2012 election, the gun ban lobby is doing everything they can to get President Obama to take a more prominent role in pushing their agenda.  The fact that Chucky Schumer is now introducing legislation in the U.S. Senate, it appears that the leadership of the Democratic Party is ready to once again step into the issue and push the agenda too.

I will be discussing the poll on today's NRANews' Daily News at 5:00 PM.

Correction: The documents provided by MAIG regarding the Poll shows support for stricter regulation of firearm sales to be 55%-35% in Virginia but does not indicate if that is among all respondants or just among the non-gun owning households.  The numbers referenced in the above paragraph refer to the rate of support among gun owning households, which they provided as a separate category to show that "Even in gun households, there is some support for stricter gun laws."

NRANews Provides the Real Story that Felipe Calderon Won't Tell

NRANews.com tells the real story behind the numbers regarding Mexican Drug Cartels and guns used in Mexican crimes.

RPV Responds to Criticism of Ads Targeting Boucher and Perriello

The Danville News is reporting today that RPV stands by their ads targeting Boucher and Perriello.

Garren Shipley, RPV director of communications, said in an e-mail statement that pro-gun Democrats like Perriello should have spoken out against Calderon’s speech. He said the ads would stay online until Perriello gives his opinion on Calderon’s call to ban sporting guns.

“I find it hard to believe Rep. Perriello is really arguing that since he wasn’t in the room at the time, he shouldn’t have to stand up for his constituents’ Second Amendment rights,” Shipley said. “It’s easy to be pro-gun when all you have to do is sign a letter. It’s another thing entirely to stand up for the Second Amendment when Speaker Pelosi hasn’t given you a permission slip to oppose her.”

If the point is to get Boucher and Perriello to state publicly that a) Calderon is wrong; and, b)their colleagues were wrong to applaud Calderon's comments, RPV is on a little stronger footing than saying the two Democrats are anti-gun when there is ample evidence to the contrary. The ad does not specifically say either were there, just calls for them to state their position.

I do however stand by my assertion that it is a little too cute by half. In the end, I'm not sure how this helps the GOP candidates running against the incumbents. What you succeed in doing is giving the incumbents an opportunity to further strengthen their pro-rights credentials.

Gun Show Bills, Others, Surface at General Assembly

It took less than a week for bills attacking Virginia's gun shows to be introduced for the 2010 General Assembly Session. There are bills in both the House of Delegates and the State Senate. The Senate bill (SB 595) was introduced by Senator Louise Lucas. The House bill (HB 1234) was introduced by Delegate Jennifer McClellan. In the past two sessions, Richmond Senator Henry Marsh has been the champion of the anti-rights crowd, carrying their water to the bitter end. He apparently has had enough and passed the torch to Senator Lucas. The bill has only made it out of committee once and that was in the State Senate, only to be killed by the full Senate. It has always been a close vote. This year will be even closer as the make up of the Senate Courts of Justice Committee has changed for the worse with the departure of both Senators Ken Cuccinelli and Ken Stolle. Now the anti-rights forces can count on the vote of Senator Don McEachin. They will also be lobbying hard new committee member Chap Petersen. Gun owners need to stand ready to do battle on the gun show bill when it comes up in committee.

Other bills that have been introduced since Thursday include:

HB 1217 Firearm safety education program. This bill requires local school divisions to offer firearm safety education programs in the elementary grades. The bill requires that the program objectives incorporate, among other principles of firearm safety, accident prevention and the rules of the National Rifle Association's Eddie Eagle Gunsafe Program.

HB 995 Firearms; purchaser may present military identification card or concealed handgun permit. This bill allows a purchaser of an "assault firearm" to present a current or retired military identification card or a concealed handgun permit in order to establish citizenship or lawful admission for permanent residence. Currently, a purchaser has to provide a birth certificate to prove they are a citizen in order to purchase such a firearm.

Modern Sporting Rifles

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) announced a new media campaign yesterday aimed at dispelling the anti-rights crowd's myth that "you don't hunt with assault weapons" and other misinformation about the AR-15 platform. There are a good number of gun owners as well who don't think an individual needs to own an AR-15, or as NSSF said in it's release, the "new sporting rifle."

Today's AR-15-style modern sporting rifles are just another step in the evolution of the tools hunters and target shooters use to enjoy their activities. These rifles may not look like current hunting rifles, but remember, your current hunting rifle probably doesn't look much like your grandfather's rifle either.

NSSF will use a multi-pronged campaign utilizing print, video and Web-based components to reach as wide an audience as possible. It will emphasize educating sportsmen whose preference for "traditional-looking firearms" can lead them to misunderstand AR-15-platform rifles and to even describe them using terms such as "assault weapon," which inadvertently plays right into the anti-rights crowd's attempts to ban these rifles.

Ads have already been placed in major firearm and sporting magazines such as Field & Stream and Outdoor Life as well as outdoor cable television networks. The campaign's materials can also be seen on a dedicated web site, that will expand on the educational messages delivered in the media campaign for an even better understanding of how civilian sporting rifles have evolved from military rifles over time.

Included on the web site is a timeline of military-to-civilian rifle evolution, interactive features that identify the components and functionality of modern sporting rifles, and video. There is also a section on the web site, where gun owners can arm themselves with the facts to correct the anti-rights crowd's misinformation about these popular rifles.

Gun Rights and Congress

This morning's online edition of Congressional Quarterly had this story titled Gun Rights Lobby to Weigh in on Sotomayor. The story spent most of its text talking about the current climate in Congress that looks very bleak for increased restrictions. That hasn't changed the plans of those who do seek more restrictions. For instance, Senator Diane Feinstein, who when asked about her "assault weapons ban" renewal:

said she has not ruled out trying to attach the ban to another piece of legislation to get it approved. “I’ll pick my spot,” she said.

Governor "Fast Eddie" Rendell and Wayne LaPierre Debate

Sunday's Face the Nation featured a continued discussion of the "Assault Weapons" ban for a good portion of the show. First White House advisor David Axelrod said now is not the time to take the focus off the economy to push for a renewal of the ban. Then Pennsylvania Governor "Fast Eddie" Rendell debated Wayne LaPierre on the subject. Even Rendell agreed that while he wants to see the ban renewed, he agreed with the President (and Senator Diane Feinstein) that now is not the time to bring this issue up.

So, even though the media keeps pushing the issue, we know that while the President does not want to touch this issue with a ten foot pole right now, you can bet that at such time as the economy turns around, President Obama will most certainly try and find some way to bring this issue to the front burner.

Fast Eddie hasn't changed any of his talking points in a decade. He makes the comment during the debate "Who needs an 'assault weapons'? Not hunters, not Olympic shooters." Later when trying to get LaPierre to agree to handgun rationing he asks, "Who needs more than 12 guns in a year?"


Watch CBS Videos Online

Obama Still Believes Assault Weapons Ban is Good Policy

During a joint Q&A session with the Mexican President yesterday, both President Obama and President Calderon were asked about the expired American ban on certain semi-automatic firearms.

President Obama was asked if he had backed off on his campaign promise to push for a renewal of the ban and if so, how would he explain his broken campaign promise to the American people? Obama responded:

I haven't backed off at all from my belief that the assault weapons ban made sense...Having said that, none of us are under any illusion that reinstating that ban would be easy. What we've focused on is how we can improve our enforcement under existing laws.

It's interesting that he chided "those who have put off the hard decisions" in a speech earlier in the week during a speech at Georgetown University, but I digress.

The President went on to day that he continue to believe that we can respect and honor the Second Amendment right in our Constitution, throwing out the obligatory support to the rights of sportsmen and hunters. He even mentioned the rights of those who want firearms for self-defense (this from a man who was quoted on the campaign trail as being an opponent of concealed carry). But he immediately returned to the talking points on the teleprompter by saying we can respect the rights of all of these people and still help Mexico fight the crime committed by the drug cartels.

Both Obama and Calderon referenced the now debunked figure of 90% of illegal guns in Mexico come from the U.S.

Mexico Wants Stronger U.S. Gun Laws

While Mexico has agreed to submit more of the guns they seize to the U.S. for tracing, the Washington Post reported today that the Mexican government wants the Obama Administration to reinstate a ban on importing "assault weapons" that was lifted by President George W. Bush in 2001. On Face the Nation this past weekend, the Mexican ambassador to the U.S. repeated the l lie that most of the "assault weapons" coming into Mexico are coming from the US.

Looks like everyone is reading from the same talking points.

Speaker Pelosi Hints at Compromise on Semi-auto Ban

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi appeared on Good Morning America Tuesday morning (April 7th). The topic of the Pittsburgh shooting came up. After mentioning "53 people have been killed between March 10th and April 5th" by gun violence, she said we "have to have answers to this and a level of compromise." She called the D.C. gun rights amendment on the D.C. Voting Rights bill "draconian". She also admitted the ball is in Congress' "court" to renew the "assault weapons" ban.

Sounds like her comment immediately following Attorney General Eric Holder's call for a renewal of the semi-auto ban were just words masking her true intent.

Hat tip to VA-Alert.

Update: Seattle Gun Examiner Dave Workman adds this about the segment:

Responding to a question from ABC’s Robin Roberts, Pelosi said that while Congress apparently does not want to take anyone’s guns away, “We want them registered.”