Virginia legislators have clearly lost their minds on this latest bill that was drafted and filed this month, which will be open to discussion come January 2020.

This of course is in reference to Senate Bill Number 64, or SB64 as it may appear on various print or spoken discussion.

Virginia is attempted to chip away at the rights of citizens, one small hammer stroke at a time; and this bill is going to attempt to outlaw firearm training. We’ll display the language used in the bill and get into dissecting how it may be perceived generally, or even presented, versus how it can also be enacted.

The first portion of the bill goes as follows:

“A person is guilty of unlawful paramilitary activity, punishable as a Class 5 felony if he: 1. Teaches or demonstrates to any other person the use, application, or making of any firearm, explosive, or incendiary device, or technique capable of causing injury or death to persons, knowing or having reason to know or intending that such training will be employed for use in, or in furtherance of, a civil disorder”

How it will be Perceived/Explained:

The way that they drafted the bill, and the portions that will be either emphasized or broadly digested will be the portions related to people “knowing” that they’re preparing someone for some “civil disorder”.

They might even say that this law can be used against Antifa, which it could, but will it?

Talking heads will go on television, hyping up that this is a good measure that will criminalize people training for acts related to domestic terrorism; although why would we need a law for something there’s already a law for? That could be addressed already by Virginia law § 18.2-46.5.

How it can be Enforced:

The most dangerous words in this proposal are “knowing or having reason to know” and “in furtherance of”.

The reason being that intent is no longer really required, leaving every gun range owners and employees susceptible to prosecution for simply doing business. It’s plain as day why this language is the way it is, because with these key words, only loose connections need to be established to criminalize gun owners and enthusiasts.

Furthermore, civil disorder is also quite a broad term as well to be concerned about.

The second and also third portion of this bills is as follows:

“2. Assembles with one or more persons for the purpose of training with, practicing with, or being instructed in the use of any firearm, explosive, or incendiary device, or technique capable of causing injury or death to persons, intending to employ such training for use in, or in furtherance of, a civil disorder; or

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.”

How it will be Perceived/Explained:

Well now this will try to put you at rest from thinking that someone can legally start up some kind of training camp to prepare people to wreak havoc on your city, which with the way the law is written it can certainly be applied in that fashion.

And that portion pertaining to marching, well that’s to stop anyone from making it look like they own your streets via a militaristic grip and toting their scary guns. Keep in mind, this is how it will be sold and broadly digested.

How it can be Enforced:

That last Section, 3, is the most unique part of the law. While Section 2 can be applied much like Section 1 can, that third portion has the ability to criminalize open-carry demonstrations and peaceful protests.

As we saw last year in Washington, D.C., the “March for our Lives” demonstration which had a theme that was about banning guns, encountered some counter-protesters proudly displaying their second amendment rights and openly carrying.

These few dozen individuals held what they called a “Patriot Picket” and that pesky third portion of the proposed bill can send someone to jail for having a firearm on their person whilst attending a march such as that.

I’ve never quite understood the anti-gun movement. Guns seemed to be the only object that gets blamed for murder when they’re used for murder. No one tries to ban Hondas when someone strike a pedestrian with one.

No one tries to ban Clorox when someone’s kid drinks it. Nor do people try to ban kitchen cutlery when someone is murdered with a knife, but for some reason guns are just so awful to some people.

The people that hate them, but don’t stand to benefit from their ban or confiscation are only one thing: potential victims of crime. Don’t stand idly while these laws slide into your state.