VA: Tazewell County Forms Militia in Response to New Virginia Gun Laws

[philip964]

https://www.newswars.com/proposed-virgi ... dLS4d3uMOA

Proposed Virginia law would also ban any form of martial arts such as jiu jitsu etc.

They really want honest Virginians to be defenseless against criminals and their government.

[Lynyrd]

https://www.newswars.com/proposed-virgi ... dLS4d3uMOA

Proposed Virginia law would also ban any form of martial arts such as jiu jitsu etc.

They really want honest Virginians to be defenseless against criminals and their government.

This is lunacy! It's so absurd as to be straight out of The Twilight Zone. I know I dated myself with that analogy, but come on people. What kind of insanity is this?



Only lawmakers who yearn for a subservient populace would propose such a thing.

[The Annoyed Man]

Here is a different approach.

This podcaster claims that the nullification of the Virginia proposed gun control laws should focus NOT on the U.S. Constitution but on Article 1, Section 13 of the Virginia Constitution.


He says, however, that it really doesn't matter because this not really legal issue but more of a Public Relations one. The State officials understand that sending the Virginia State Police to try to enforce these laws when the local constables will not will cause massive election losses.

There is a reference to a book which talks about nullification that predates the Constitution. Here is a link to that
https://uncpress.org/book/9780807845134 ... ct-crisis/

The podcast says that Northum and his cronies have backed down and will not pass the legislation.

Very interesting video so far (I’m about half way into it), but he says something here that I do not believe is correct—although I’m willing to be demonstrated as wrong—and that is this: if I’m not mistaken, one of the effects of the SCOTUS McDonald decision was to incorporate the 2nd Amendment as an individual right under the 14th Amendment. And states may NOT abrogate individual rights. For instance, states cannot permit slavery or involuntary servitude. Ever. The 13th Amendment forbids it. It doesn’t matter what local sentiments happen to be, slavery is against federal law, and violating it is virtually guaranteed to lead to federal prosecution.

For the time being, there is no federal law mandating mass-confiscations or bans of guns. Yes, there are ongoing infringements which chip away at the free expression of the right, but there is no outright ban, and as of yet, there is no ongoing mass-confiscation. Since the individual right is still incorporated under the 14A, a state cannot constitutionally abrogate it.

Now....that doesn’t mean that they don’t try to, as states like California, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New York amply demonstrate; but when they DO, it is undeniable that they are acting in violation of the Constitution. Had McDonald not incorporated the 2A as an individual right under the 14th, such abrogations/infringements at the state level might still be constitutionally permissible. But purely technically, they are NOT.

So how are states still pulling this off today, post-McDonald? Easy....nullification. They are nullifying federal law AND the federal Constitution, by acting locally...and the fedgov’t refuses to face down and stop those challenges to its authority. I would argue that this sets a precedent vis-a-vis sovereignty. If states can tell the fedgov’t to step off, EVEN WHEN DOING SO VIOLATES FEDERAL SOVEREIGNTY, then counties/cities can do the same to the states. Indeed, as potentially dangerous as it is from a standpoint of criminal violence or social unrest, the individual may violate county and city sovereignty by telling that govt to step off whenever it transgresses his/her natural rights. This is especially true in matters of the conscience.

The fact is that, under OUR system of gov’t, gov’t governs with the consent of the governed....and under no other terms. And ultimately, the "governed" is made up of individuals who have individual rights that gov’t is absolutely obligated to protect. The majority may pass legislation which benefits public safety....i.e. laws against unlawful discharge of a firearm within the city limits....but under no circumstances may the majority tell me what kind of firearm I may own, or whether or not I may discharge it in self-defense, regardless of whether it’s inside city limits or not. This principle is why no gov’t, at ANY level, can place an individual into slavery. There is simply NO constitutional justification for it, at ANY level. The individual's rights in the matter of slavery supersede the govt's authority. A gov’t can detain/arrest an individual suspected of a crime; and it can jail him if if convicted. But even if imprisoned, it cannot place that individual into uncompensated labor, or even force him to work at all. And barring a life without parole sentence on a murder conviction, his sentence is not open-ended.

So whenever a gov’t at ANY level—whether federal, state, county, or municipal—violates the guaranteed rights of an individual through legislative abrogation, absent that individual having been convicted of a serious crime against person or property, that individual has a moral foundation for individually nullifying the law. This is the very foundation of our tradition of civil disobedience.

I have never been convicted of a crime against person or property. NONE of my firearms has ever been used in any such crime, or in ANY violation of laws concerning the public's safety or disorderly conduct. Gov’t therefore has absolutely NO legitimate authority at ANY level to pass legislation abrogating my individual right to keep and bear ANY kind of firearm. Furthermore, the extent to which any gov’t attempts to do so, is the extent to which that gov’t loses its moral authority to govern, and therefore also loses its legitimacy.

If your gov’t is no longer legitimate, then at the very least, you have a perfectly acceptable justification to ignore its edicts; and you certainly have a cause to actively resist it if you have the energy for that.

You know what you have to do, so do it with open eyes, no fear, and a happy heart.

[SQLGeek]

https://www.newswars.com/proposed-virgi ... dLS4d3uMOA

Proposed Virginia law would also ban any form of martial arts such as jiu jitsu etc.

They really want honest Virginians to be defenseless against criminals and their government.

Again...the part about training is already law and has been since 1987.

The proposed bill only adds this language to the existing law

3. Assembles with one or more persons with the intent of intimidating any person or group of persons by drilling, parading, or marching with any firearm, any explosive or incendiary device, or any components or combination thereof

The existing law can be found here:

https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/18.2-433.2/

[chasfm11]

TAM,

Perhaps Charles will provide some insight but if we focus on a couple key points in the podcast, one of which you brought up, I think what he is saying is correct.

1. It is NOT the Federal government which is trying to infringe. The 2nd Amendment is a prohibition for the Federal government on infringement. Since the 2nd Amendment grants no power, any power associated would be retained by the States. They formed the Federal government and ceded only the power to it that they wanted it to have. It is a separate discussion about how much power the Federal government has usurped. If the 2nd Amendment granted rights, which we all agree that it does NOT, Virginia would have to abide by those granted rights.

2. It appears to me that the Virginia Constitution is more restrictive on the State government than the 2nd Amendment is at the Federal level. It would seem to be easier to challenge the new confiscation laws as Virginia unconstitutional than to try to nullify them. The problem would come if the Virginia courts are packed with Liberal justices who have no intention of ruling on the Virginia Constitution and would rather undermine it.

This all applies to the banning of weapons and not the parts of about banning militia training. I have no thoughts about how to address that in Virginia.

INAL.

[chasfm11]

This showed up in my Facebook feed this morning.

[Grayling813]

VIRGINIA CHECKPOINTS: WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG?
https://www.americanpartisan.org/2019/1 ... -go-wrong/

An except from Bracken’s novel “Enemies Foreign and Domestic”