Never Let the Slaughter of Innocents Go to Waste

Governor Northam to Call Virginia General Assembly into Special Session to Address Gun Violence

I will propose many of the same ideas that we have proposed before:

  • Universal background checks;
  • A ban on assault weapons, to include suppressors and bump stocks;
  • An extreme risk protective order;
  • Reinstating the one-gun-a-month law;
  • Child access prevention;
  • Requiring people to report lost and stolen firearms; and
  • Expanding local authority to regulate firearms, including in government buildings.

None of the above items woud have prevented the Va Beach shooting.

The Dem Governor is pushing his anti-gun agenda on the bodies of the victims.

1 Like


No, but a general reduction in arms would. America is the only country with more guns than people.

So who do you propose we take the guns from?

Law abiding citizens or criminals?

Well, the young black man in Virginia Beach, a gun owner, was a law abiding citizen…until he wasn’t.

Felons (“criminals”) are already prohibited from gun ownership…

This coincides perfectly with Trump moving to ban silencers as well. It almost seems like Trump is on the same side as far left Democrats doesn’t it?

Well, bump stocks and suppressors are not specifically protected by the 2nd. Neither even existed when the 2nd was added to the constitution.

How many people have been injured or killed with a suppressor?

The “never existed when the second was added to the Constitution,” is wrong on two points. First it was not added to the Constitution, it was included in the Constitution at the Constitutional Convention and ratified in 1789 with the rest of the Document. And secondly, suppressors and bump stocks are not protected by the 2nd because they are not arms, not because they did not exist in 1789.

But for the most part all federal gun control laws are forbidden by the 10th Amendment because no power is enumerated for congress to restrict the possession of Arms by the citizens.

In fact, the only federal regulations concerning the ownership of Arms that were lawful were those that required persons eligible to serve in the militia to own and be proficient with Arms suitable for the purpose.

They’re amendments to the original…:wink:

They’re components of. I suppose triggers and extractors/ejectors aren’t protected either…

I agree with that, States should be much more proactive in this. States have abdicated to congress, congress has abdicated to the president, there’s much wrong with the way things are.

It goes deeper though. A4:S2:C1 requires the States to basically continue to respect the Privileges and Immunities known among them when the Constitution was ratified. This did not federalize civil rights so much as amount to just requiring them to keep on doing what they were already doing.

So it is actually quite easy to discern what are NOT the P&I: for example anything that was unlawful under English common law at the time of Ratification or unlawful in any of the several States.

At the same time the possession of Arms suitable for military service was lawful among all the several States when they Ratified. So while the 2nd Amendment was not intended to apply to the several States it’s function was already covered.


No … they are part of the original Document. They were enumerated as Amendments, because the Founders were wise enough to recognize that the need would arise for additional protections from Government excess would be required as the newly formed government evolved.

1 Like

Yes, they are amendments TO the constitution. That’s what I said.

They are not components, they are accessories. Triggers and extractors are integral to the functionality of the arm. A suppressor and/or a bump-stock are an attachment similar to an optical sight or a laser pointer. They change the functionality, but are not critical to it.

That’s not true at all. The vast majority of gun laws are State and Local, not Federal.

1 Like

I didn’t say anything that contradicts that. But are you suggesting that the feds haven’t usurped state authority by regulating firearms or accessories thereof…

And if states weren’t rolling over on that, they wouldn’t enforce or allow such federal laws to be enforced in their respective states.

I’m not the one treating firearm attachments as integral parts of the firearm or regulation thereof to be a restriction on the second amendment…:man_shrugging:

The Constitution itself would not have been ratified without the Bill of Rights.