A subset of “This is why we can’t have nice things.”
For most of the history of this blog, I left Gun Owners of America alone. To me they are just a shrill group that is very good at chest beating, shouting “NO COMPROMISE” and nothing else. I don’t have to point out they have been as successful as a fart in a category 5 hurricane, but for the sake of keeping the laundry properly stashed in the laundry room, I ignore them.
But this one? To actually trying to fuck up real advancements because their stupid interpretation of the deal? I have to call it sabotage for relevance’s sake.
What are they bitching about? Let’s quote them and see:
* By establishing “voluntary” background checks — such as in HB 1386 and SB 715 — the infrastructure will be created for “mandatory” background checks in the future.
Newsflash: The infrastructure has been there since pretty much the Brady Background Checks have been working. So, you are not discovering life in Mars but tadpoles in the canals near the Everglades.
* Expanding background checks to cover private sales — with a police officer present — multiplies the possibility that innocent gun owners will be arrested when their NICS check erroneously reports them as “denied.”
I guess they forgot the “voluntary” part of the background check. I have to ask, was this an oversight or in purpose? And in case you have not figured it yet, nobody gives a damn about Denials anymore. Feds don’t care and certainly not cops…the same cops that work at gun stores and run background checks when you buy a gun. Some of those transactions end up as Denials and the cops themselves tell you to appeal the denial.
* Expanding background checks to cover all gun sales puts the final puzzle piece in place to implement a Universal Registration System.
Seriously, see above.
* Finally, in regard to protective orders, two of the compromise bills (HB 1391 and SB 49) can result in the incarceration of non-violent individuals who had no idea they even had a protective order against them.
On this one, I am going to quote Sebastian:
GOA’s other premise is that there’s no state analogue mens rea requirement of “knowingly” in the state mirror to the Domestic Violence Restraining Order prohibitions from the Lautenberg Amendment. Looking at the federal statute, 18 USC 922(g)(8), I’m not seeing where it says knowingly. The Virginia bill does in fact say “knowingly.” I’m pretty sure if you can show that the person knew they were subject of a DVRO, and knew they were in possession of a firearm, the mens rea requirement is fulfilled. I admit, I don’t really understand GOA’s argument here. Proving mens rea is always part of the state’s burden for a serious offense even if the statute does not explicitly say so.
And besides, if VCDL (Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc. A.K.A The local team) is not opposing the bills because they “simply codify federal law.” And only a fool would dismiss what VCDL has to say knowing that it has been one of the most effective pro-gun state organizations in the country, if not the most.
The other win that the deal has provided us was a monumental slap to the face and crumbling of the morale of the Gun Control groups. Let us not forget McAuliffe was Bloomberg’s golden boy, heavily baptized with his cash that put him in the governorship. He has been the shinning example of Governor that has been paraded by Moms Demand, Everytown, Brady and CSGV. The Chose/Bought One was brought down by Gun Owners and good political moves, something that was not supposed to happen, yet it did. It is a colossal PR win for our side. Why screw with it when there is practically no downside?
GOA confuses strategy with compromise. Unfortunately sometimes it is GOA and groups like them that really compromise what could be fixing a problem and piss enough people to kill the beginning of a solution.