Weed, Weapons and Disarmament

First, Royce delves into the issue of marijuana and gun ownership.

Then, A look at the avalanche of anti-rights laws aimed at gun owners in Virginia in the wake of their recent trifecta of communism elected to their governor's office and AG's office.

Transcript

THIS TRANSCRIPT WAS AUTO-GENERATED ELECTRONICALLY AND MAY NOT BE PERFECTLY WORD-FOR-WORD ACCURATE OR GRAMMATICALLY CORRECT. WE APOLOGIZE IN ADVANCE FOR ANY IRREGULARITIES AND/OR MISTAKES.

Freedom Guns is your local gun store for the Rockledge Cocoa area in Brevard County, Florida. Stop in and meet Mike and the gang and see the great deals they have on long guns, handguns, accessories, ammunition, AR build kits, and Liberty safes that come with free delivery and installation.
They're located at 1255 Florida Avenue, just north of Rockledge High School. For more information, check them out at freedom-guns.com. Tell them you heard about them on the Shooting Straight Radio podcast.
The Gun Sight in Merritt Island is your one-stop shop for all of your Second Amendment needs. Stop out there and see my friend, Steve Kennedy, and check out his nine-lane, 25-yard indoor shooting range. He's got handgun rentals galore out there. If you want to try it before you buy it, the Gun Sight in Merritt Island is where you need to go. Also, we've got a great selection of ammunition, accessories, range bags. You name it, you'll find it out there at 125 South Banana River.
and people that they've appointed regarding the Second Amendment. Yeah, sorry to start the show that way, but I'm really flabbergasted about some things I'm hearing. Welcome to Shooting Straight. I am Royce, your host, and this is all about firearms.
with a heavy emphasis on the Second Amendment and all things pertaining thereto. And we've got a lot to talk about today, as always.
I want to remind you, you can reach out to me, as many of you often do, at shootingstraightradioshow at gmail.com or at shootingstraightradopodcast at gmail.com. You can reach out to me there, and I always respond and respond pretty quickly. So if you've got a question, a comment, you want to share an article link, either one of those will get you right to me, and I always respond immediately. Also, speaking of which,
I need to offer a correction. A regular listener of the program, he has been for actually almost 12 years now. I'll just call him Paul to maintain his anonymity and for his own personal safety's sake.
And he wrote me something recently. He was listening to the episode where I was talking about administrative warrants and exigent circumstances and such like that. And here's what he wrote me verbatim. And thank you, Paul. By the way, I really appreciate it. I am not above correction. If I'm wrong, send me a correction. He said, hey, Roy's just catching up. And that means all the episodes that he missed.
Since coming out of retirement, I have learned that the admin warrants, as opposed to criminal warrants, do not, under any circumstances, justify entering a home without consent of a person who actually lives there. Quote, unquote, exigent circumstances are a completely different bucket of justification, and it is stressed that there better be a truly
exigent circumstance because you will be sued either way and will not be backed if violating someone's rights. Maybe I heard it wrong, but you may have conflated the two. As always, I'm just going to translate the Latin here, ever faithful.
S-C-I-T. I think that's what it is. Don't quote me on that. But anyway, thanks for the correction, Paul. And brother, you be safe out there. Paul is a federal agent, and he is involved with a lot of the removal of some of these people in our country right now. So keep him in your prayers. He's a good man. Let's dive right into things. First of all, let me say this because of the sensitive.
nature of what we're about to talk about. If you smoke marijuana or eat marijuana or ingest marijuana in any way, shape, and form, I have no problem with you. I really don't. I have some very close veteran friends who use it to help even them out and deal with their PTSD. And those guys are some of the most decent, wonderful, productive human beings on the planet.
I don't have any problem with them using it. If it helps them, good. A lot of people use alcohol to help settle the frayed nerves. Whatever. I don't care if you want to have yourself a drink or two or even four in the privacy of your own home and not get behind the wheel and endanger other people. Help yourself. Honestly, I have no problem with it at all.
And so when it comes down to things like people who have been arrested for marijuana use or are currently marijuana users, I've got no problem with you owning and carrying a gun. Now, before I get some shocked and outraged emails from some of you, let me go ahead and just put this out here. I've never seen any of my friends. By the way, I used to smoke at stuff way back when, okay?
So I'm not coming from a standpoint of purity here, but I've never seen anybody ingest marijuana and beat the living crap out of his family under the influence of it. Now, I've seen them destroy several bags of Doritos and a couple of boxes of Oreo cookies, but I've never seen them hurt their family. As opposed to alcohol has definitely done quite a bit of damage.
to families, especially when people carry guns and drink alcohol. I have been to, let's say, outdoor shooting areas where some of the people felt it was a good idea to pop the tab on a beer and then proceed to want to go shooting. And I'm flat out, nope, I am not going to be here for that. I'm not going to stay here. I'm not going to sanction it with my presence and turn around and leave because alcohol and guns, in my opinion,
is not a good mix now i'm not so sure i'd want you smoking weed or
me while handling guns, too. From what I hear, the stuff they have these days ain't like granddaddy's weed, and it's pretty potent, so I don't know what it does to the human system like the old stuff. But if you want to ingest it, help yourself. As long as you're not a danger to anybody, I don't care what you're taking. Listen, here's the other side of things. I know people who are on opioids.
Yeah, opioids, yeah, the hard stuff, the stuff that they really deeply criminalized, but their doctor prescribed it for them, and they still carry a firearm. So if you want to get into conflating all drugs, all illegal, unlawful drugs, and it's funny, those same illegal, unlawful drugs sold by Ray Ray and Ice Pick on the street corner are somehow illegal, but when it's sanctioned by the government, oh, then it's okay.
Same stuff. What's the problem? So an article I'm about to get into here by Duncan Johnson writing for Ammo Land Incorporated. The title of the article is Second Amendment Foundation Files Amicus in Case Challenging Firearm Ban by Marijuana Users. And here's the article. The Second Amendment Foundation and its partners have filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court.
in support of the respondent in United States v. Hamani, a case challenging the federal lifetime ban on firearm possession for marijuana users. Well, again, if you're going to conflate marijuana with alcohol or anything else, do you ban people who drink from owning firearms? Again, I'm going to throw this out here. I think alcohol and guns are the much worse mix than marijuana.
Second Amendment Foundation is joined in the amicus filing by the California Rifle and Pistol Association, Second Amendment Law Center, Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, and the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus. Second Amendment Foundation Director Costas Moros made this comment. The government's position defies Bruin and Rahimi, those two very famous SCOTUS rulings.
By seeking to impose a permanent disarmament on law-abiding citizens who use marijuana, even when sober, without any distinctly similar historical tradition to justify such a draconian restriction. And you know what? Right after the Bruin decision, I was kind of asking this. Well, how can you justify banning somebody for life simply because they
used marijuana or were arrested with it. I mean, still on a federal form, if you mark the box that says you are an unlawful user, quote unquote, of marijuana or other controlled substances, well, I'm not allowed to sell you a firearm where I work. But here in Florida, it's legal. Marijuana is legal. So it's quite a conundrum.
Matter of fact, if you come in to buy a firearm where I work, and if we see when you open your wallet up and we see a marijuana card in your wallet while you're pulling out your driver's license and carry permit, we have to stop the sale. Okay? It doesn't make sense to me. Back to this quote by Costas Moros.
He says, history shows that founding era laws addressed the dangers of intoxication and firearms through, listen, temporary restrictions on those actively impaired. Okay, I can understand that. I don't have a problem with that. I don't think anybody with a brain of, you know, half full of decency would have a problem with that.
He said, but it was never by stripping gun rights completely from sober individuals who occasionally use socially accepted substances like alcohol or, by analogy, marijuana today. We urge the court to affirm the Fifth Circuit and reject this constitutional overreach. Okay, I'm down with this. The ban on firearm possession by marijuana users.
affects millions of law-abiding Americans who face losing their Second Amendment rights simply for using a substance that is state legal in many states and widely accepted often for medical reasons. Marijuana is currently legal to a various extent in 40 different states. Okay, so...
It's legal in 40 states, obviously, because a lot of state legislatures have realized that it's not the heinous, addicting drug that some people make it out to be. It's nothing like cocaine or crack or anything like that, which, by the way, they still use in hospitals. I went to the hospital probably, I don't know, this was back in 2002, I think.
with a horrific nosebleed that would not stop. I had some lacerated capillaries up inside my nasal cavity, and I went to the doctor and flat out said, hey, make this stop, whatever you got to do. Well, what he didn't tell me he was about to do was cauterize those capillaries with silver nitrate, which is what he shoved up my nose and burned the living dickens out of me. It felt like he'd stuck the end of a propane torch up my nostril.
But then he stuck this cotton swab up into my nose that tasted, well, let's just say familiar from my Royce BC days. And I looked at that. I looked at the bottle that was sitting on the table after the doctor walked out. And I said, man, this stuff tastes badly familiar. And I picked the bottle up and it said cocaine, HCI 4%.
Okay, so they use it medicinally. They also use THC medicinally. Though, of course, it's nowhere near as bad as the cocaine and everything else like that. I don't think people that use cocaine regularly should own a firearm because of the proven debilitating long-term effects.
on people that use that stuff regularly. They become psychotic. And I have a recent case to back that up, but I'm not going to talk about it right now. So that's the Second Amendment Foundation's amicus brief regarding this decision about marijuana and firearms ownership. Now, let's go to Colorado because the same issue is taking place there.
There's an article by Cam Edwards. You can follow him on BearingArms.com. Great article, a great writer, a staunch Second Amendment advocate, too. And here's the title. It says, Colorado Governor Breaks with Attorney General Over Guns and Marijuana.
According to Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, anyone who regularly uses marijuana should be prohibited from exercising their Second Amendment rights, a bold statement in a state where gun ownership is common and marijuana is available for both medicinal and recreational use. Weiser was one of 20 attorneys general, all of them Democrats,
except for the Ohio Attorney General David Yost, to side with the Trump administration in U.S. v. Hamani, filing an amicus brief that argues, quote,
Consistent with the Second Amendment, protect the public by imposing restrictions on firearm possession and carriage by habitual drug users. Okay, carriage meaning carrying your firearm. What do you mean consistent with the Second Amendment? I don't read anything in the Second Amendment that references drug use or alcohol use in the least. So where does this amicus brief that says legislatures may
Consistent with the Second Amendment, protect the public. What do you mean consistent with the Second Amendment? You guys don't know much about the Second Amendment out there in Colorado as it is. You guys just passed a bunch of draconian assault weapons bans and other things there. So don't think that you're going to be able to be consistent with the Second Amendment.
and tell people they cannot own firearms simply because they use a drug or even a drug like alcohol as a recreational thing. So it says, protect the public by imposing restrictions on firearm possession and gun carrying by habitual drug users, even when the drug of choice is lawful under state statute.
In fact, the amicus brief does not differentiate between unlawful drug use and the legal use of drugs, be it recreational marijuana, alcohol, or even prescription opioids. As far as these attorneys general are concerned, any habitual drug users, quote unquote, should lose their Second Amendment rights. Well, how about we apply that to legislators? Yes, senators.
Congressmen. How about we do the governors? How about we do that? Because a lot of y'all got drug problems. Bad. I know this for a fact. Yeah, and alcohol problems. Bad. Well, let me ask you this also. If they should lose their Second Amendment rights, then why not take all of them? Why give them the right to speak freely? They may say something stupid, or they may say something psychotic. They may yell,
fire in a crowded theater even. I mean, why don't you just go ahead and tell them you have to wear duct tape over your mouth unless you are going to bed or eating or communicating with your family. Why that? Why not tell them you can't go to church? You can't petition your government for a redress of grievances. Matter of fact, you cannot be free from
unreasonable searches and seizures, as long as you're using marijuana or have been arrested for marijuana use, felonious marijuana use, whatever amount that is these days. Well, why not? Why just Second Amendment? Well, people with a gun can do terrible things. Well, people with lips and tongues have done terrible things. Matter of fact, it's usually words.
that started most of the wars in our history of mankind. So, why just the Second Amendment right? Hmm?
It says, indeed, the public can be endangered by habitual drug users who experience ongoing psychological deficits that cause them to make dangerous decisions while handling firearms, commit dangerous actions that put others at risk, and expose themselves to unsafe environments to obtain drugs. You know, like doctor's offices, you know, those kind of environments.
Given those dangers, because by the way, more people are killed by doctors than guns. Yeah, 6.25 times more people annually killed by doctors and medical malpractice. And that's not including all the medical injuries or the addicts created by these doctors prescribing opioids. Given those dangers, a large majority of states have made a similar legislative choice as the federal government.
to regulate how habitual users may use firearms. These restrictions typically regulate habitual drug users by imposing a temporary restriction on their possession or their carrying of firearms. Under this position, someone who enjoys a glass of wine with dinner every night or even three times a week could be prohibited from possessing a gun while they are quote-unquote habitually
using drugs. Someone who goes on an occasional binge of cocaine and methamphetamine, on the other hand, would presumably still be able to exercise their Second Amendment rights since their drug use is not habitual. Needless to say, says Mr. Edwards, I completely disagree with the position taken by these attorneys general in their amicus brief. Surprisingly, though,
Governor Jared Polis does too. And here's a tweet from Governor Polis. He said, there is no reason that someone should be banned from exercising their Second Amendment right simply because they use marijuana, especially when that logic is not being applied in the same way to other substances such as alcohol.
Cam said then, while I do agree with Polis about marijuana users and their Second Amendment rights, I couldn't help but point out the governor's inconsistent position on the right to keep and bear arms. So Mr. Edwards tweeted, very true. Speaking to Governor Polis when he said there's no reason someone should be banned from exercising their Second Amendment right based on marijuana use. He said true. Also true.
There's no reason someone should be banned from purchasing a 30-round magazine, have to apply for a state-issued permission slip to purchase an AR-15, or wait days after passing a background check before getting their gun, all of which you, Governor Polis, support.
Well done. Well played, Mr. Edwards. I like that. And I agree 100%. Let's face it. We're going to talk about Virginia in the second half of the program, and you have people in that state who are about to be stripped completely of their right to own assault weapons, assault firearms, as they call them.
and other types of things like 30 round magazines and such based on nothing. They did nothing wrong. They violated no law. But according to the Democrat communist who had their communist trifecta election sweep there recently, they based on what they claim are criminal actions by criminals with those guns, they think they have the right to ban.
those guns from the hands of people who have done nothing wrong, they don't use any drugs, a lot of them don't even drink, and they're being told, you may not own these weapons anymore. And based on what? Literally,
No reason whatsoever. Also connected with this, an article by the MLN editors and staff. This was major Second Amendment win. The Fifth Circuit strikes down lifetime gun ban for nonviolent felon. You know what? I'm for that too. If you had a felony in your past, but it was not a violent felony, because let's face it, you can catch a felony pretty easy these days anyway.
I don't think you should be banned for life. I don't think you should be banned at all. If you're not a violent person, someone predisposed to violence against his fellow man, I don't think you should ever have had your gun rights suspended. One more time for the people in the back. If you can suspend one right, then you can suspend them all. Where does it stop? It's a slippery slope.
That's really what it is. That's what it comes down to. I'm not going to go into this entire article here, but the point is, just because you use medical marijuana or even, I don't care if you buy it from Ray Ray and Ice Pick down on the corner. As long as you're not a violent psychopath, I have no problem with you owning and keeping and bearing arms. I have no problem at all. Oh, Royce, come on, man. You think dope heads should... If they're not dangerous...
They should not be restricted from being able to defend themselves with firearms. That is my position. I don't care if what they're doing or what the government passed a law against, because let's face it, you and I, my fellow keepers and bearers, if we went and purchased a fully automatic giggle switch for our Glocks or built our own suppressor, guess what?
That's a felony as far as the ATF is concerned and the NFA. So you tell me, is that a felony that you think we should be saddled with? I don't think so at all. Mere possession crimes are crap. Just because you possess something doesn't mean you have the intent necessarily, especially when it comes to being a weapon.
That's my two cents on that. Smoke all the weed you want. Be responsible with your firearms. If you have a felony in your past where you didn't do anybody any harm and you are not predisposed to violence, I don't have a problem with you keeping and bearing arms. We'll be right back after this brief commercial timeout. Don't go anywhere. All of the listener retention squads are on standby.
This is your humble host, and I am proud and honored to say that Sicario's Gun Shop is a sponsor of the Shooting Straight Radio podcast. They're up on North Wickham Road in Melbourne. They are your full-service gun store. They offer a wide range of firearms, including Class III and NFA weapons, ammo and accessories, gunsmithing. If you want to buy or trade, head on down to Sicario's Gun Shop. They also offer transfer service, custom builds. If you need a muzzle device pinned and welded, no problem.
They can do that too. Coatings, refinishings, cleanings, survival safety items. Sicario's Gun Shop is your full service gun store in North Melbourne. They also have a fine selection of gun safes to choose from. Check them out at Sicario'sGunShop.com. Make sure you tell them you heard about them on Shooting Straight. Sicario's Gun Shop, where you come first for your second. Norm's Music Shop, producer and music creator for Shooting Straight Radio Podcast.
I can write and record a personalized music track for your audio or video projects. Do you want a song for a special occasion? I can do that. For more information, contact Norm's Music Shop at gmail.com. Let's create your musical identity. Thank you. Welcome back to the program. We've been talking about all kinds of fun things in the first half of the program. Guns and weed and Second Amendment rights being restored for nonviolent felons.
I'm all for all of those things. As long as you're not a danger to me by being stupid or being violent, you're not a danger to anybody else. Bless your heart. You keep and bear arms. That's Royce's two cents on that. So my point to start the second half of the program is, so if no Americans should be denied.
their God-given rights based on a conviction for a nonviolent crime or based on them being a user of marijuana or a drinker of alcohol or anything like that that doesn't alter their mind and transform them into a violent psychopath, then if they shouldn't be denied based on those things, how can millions of innocent Americans who've never even been arrested
be denied their rights based on the criminal actions of other people and no wrongdoing of their own. That's what happened here in Florida after the Marjory Stoneman Douglas Act was passed. All of the 18 to 20 year olds here suddenly were being punished and told, you may not go purchase a firearm. You are having your rights restricted based on the actions of one human being.
One person who just happened to be 18 years old, and so all of you now have to pay with your rights. Yeah, so this is what's been just simmering in my head for probably about the last three hours. Can't wait to get home and get behind the studio, Mike.
How can you tell people like it's about to happen in Virginia, what happened in Colorado, what has already happened in California, New York, Washington, D.C., and beyond, where all these gun control laws were passed and aimed at innocent people who have no violent felonies in their past, and they're probably not even drug users or drinkers?
How is it that the government can come along and say, you may not have these guns? Why not? Because bad people are doing bad things with them, and therefore you are restricted from ownership. Sounds crazy, right? Well, because it is. It's not sensible at all. All gun control laws are based on the false, fallacious premise.
that people in government are cut from a higher moral fabric than the rest of the citizenry, and that they therefore possess the right to restrict possession of certain types of arms and guns from the hands of the people. You don't have that right.
legislators. There is not any of you, there's not one government within this nation, whether it's a state government, local government, or the federal government that has any constitutional authority to enact or enforce any gun control laws at all. Period. Hands down. End of story. You don't get to make blanket laws like this. But yet, the people in Virginia
think they have the right to do it because they won the election. Now, whether they won it truthfully and fair and square remains to be seen because little Miss Spanberger, the governor,
suddenly now wants all kinds of laws passed to keep immigration enforcement officials away from polling places. Why would you need that to happen unless maybe you sailed into the governor's mansion on the fraudulent vote? By the way, people, voter fraud is nothing new. Voter fraud is what...
basically was a prelude to a Civil War 1.0. Yeah. Google bleeding Kansas and do your research on that. You'll see Democrats from Missouri actually came across the border into Kansas and lied about their residency and voted in Kansas elections. Funny. There's nothing new under the sun. Here's an article by M.O. Land.
Multiple gun control bills advance in Virginia. You people in Virginia have a fight on your hands, and I tell you the best way to win it is to go ahead and send all the governor, the state attorney general, and the lieutenant governor a notice of noncompliance. You can pass this if you want, tell them.
but we're not going to comply. And if you attempt to have your goons arrest us for freely exercising a right we were born with, we also maintain the right of resistance. That's exactly how it should be put to them, by the way. See, there have been no consequences for any of these tyrants passing this crap. There have been no consequences for them. They've been strictly forbidden.
by the Second and the Fourteenth Amendment from passing any gun control laws, but they've done it anyway. And unfortunately, all of the people in the states that it has happened in have made that precedent permanent with their compliance. That's sad.
Here's the article. Multiple gun control bills advance in Virginia. On Monday, January 26th, the Senate Courts of Justice Committee advanced a slate of gun control bills targeting semi-automatic firearms, standard capacity magazines, carry rights.
home storage, and much more. Most concerning, a substitute to Senate Bill 749 was adopted. The bill now bans all magazines above 10 rounds that are currently owned by law-abiding Virginians. This will instantly turn individuals into criminals for owning most common handguns, semi-automatic rifles, and semi-automatic shotguns.
Moreover, this hearing went forward while much of Virginia was under a winter storm state of emergency, making it difficult or impossible for many gun owners to safely travel to the Capitol to testify in person. Oh, funny how they like doing that, huh? Yeah, a lot of them like having midnight legislative sessions, too, to pass things while people are sleeping.
Most of these bills now move to the Senate Finance Committee. The following bills were reported from Senate Courts of Justice. Senate Bill 749 bans certain semi-automatic firearms, including many semi-automatic rifles, pistols, and shotguns, and arbitrarily limits magazine capacities. With the removal of the grandfather clause for magazines, anyone in possession?
there's those possession crimes, of magazines that exceed the arbitrary limit will become a criminal overnight. You tell me what right the legislature in Virginia has the right. You tell them what right they have to do that. This bill is an attempt to redefine and ban firearms that are in common use by law-abiding citizens. By the way, that in common loose, loose, in common use.
fallacy is indeed that. It's a fallacy. That is something that we got from the Heller decision that should have been burned and buried and set on fire and scattered to the four winds. In common use is a stupid, fallacious notion to add to court decisions regarding firearms.
So it says it's plain and simple gun confiscation by definition. And that's exactly what it is. Confiscation via legislation. Senate Bill 272 limits who can carry firearms at public institutions of higher learning. Higher learning, they call that, huh? Senate Bill 348 creates mandatory storage requirements for homes where minors and or prohibited persons also reside.
Let me translate that for you. That is a bill designed to strip away Fourth Amendment protections. That's right. In order to really enforce these mandatory storage requirements, you're going to have to be able to walk up to someone's door, knock on it, and say, we're here for a compliance check. Oh, you got a warrant? Nope. We don't need one. And people, listen to me. They are going to add that later.
The safe storage laws, they're going to be adding that stipulation. Mark my words, all of these gun control bills they like to pass are only basically their formats, and they're foundational to other laws. Yes, more draconian laws. Senate Bill 312 prohibits carrying, quote-unquote, assault firearms in public places.
including streets, sidewalks, and parks. Because of vague definitions, SB 312 effectively criminalizes carrying any centerfire semi-automatic firearm in the Commonwealth. All right, you Virginians.
You better get up and you better stand up and you better make your voice heard. And I tell you what, the best thing you can do is send to them, send the state legislature, send the governor, the lieutenant governor and the attorney general, a declaration of noncompliance and a declaration of resistance. You tell them if you try to enforce this, we declare and we'll exercise our right of resistance.
If you try to arrest us, we have the right to resist and do your read into that, however, whatever and however you may. But that's where we need to be with this people. This is where exactly where we need to be attitude wise. We're done with this crap. We're not going to comply. If you try to enforce this, we have the right to defend ourselves against your enforcement. We declare these laws null and void.
Because we the people have the right to do that. In every state and across the country, we have the right to point our fingers at our government and say, we're not complying and you dadgum well better not try to enforce these laws. They are constitutionally repugnant. We're not required to wait for the Supreme Court to rule on this. We're not required to wait for any lower court to tell us that it's legal. We're telling you that it is constitutionally repugnant and we're not going to comply.
Hear us. Ignore us at your own peril. That's exactly how you need to handle this crap. Senate Bill 323 ends the centuries-old practice of individuals building laws.
Well, that negates a lot of firearms when it comes to the plastic stuff.
This legislation would also penalize individuals who lawfully purchased unfinished frames and receivers before the bill's effective date. How do you like that? How many of you out there have built your own rifle? I got my hand up too. I built a couple of them. So you're trying to tell me that I have to adhere to this crap now in the state of Virginia? I mean, I don't want to move to Virginia in the first place, but if I did live there, you think I'd want to comply with this?
Hmm, not on your life. Senate Bill 496 places further restrictions on the ability for a law-abiding individual to keep a firearm in their vehicle for self-defense. There's all kinds of crap come out about that now. Senate Bill 115 jeopardizes concealed handgun recognition and reciprocity agreements.
as we have with many other states, and this could impact the ability of Virginia concealed handgun permit holders to carry their firearms in other states as they travel. Meanwhile, the committee rejected Senate Bill 78, a measure that would have increased mandatory minimum sentences for repeat firearm offenses, sending a clear message that their priority is restricting lawful
gun owners rather than repeat offenders. Well, after all, that's what Democrat communists are all about. They coddle the real criminals while prosecuting to the nth degree conservatives and others that they hate. If you'd like some evidence to that fact, let's see here. Yes, here's an article by Brian Lonergan titled Spanburgers, and that's the new governor, the new communist governor of Virginia, Spanburgers.
Sanctuary agenda. Turn Virginia into California East. Mm-hmm. Commie see, commie do. Here's that little blurb. In a stunning display of political sleight of hand.
Virginia's newly elected Governor Abigail Spanberger and her Democratic majority in the legislature have wasted no time unveiling a radical agenda that prioritizes illegal aliens over law-abiding citizens. Shocking. Campaigning last fall as a moderate with bipartisan appeal, Spanberger promised...
pragmatism and unity well that's what all the communists do then they get into office and totally go back on their campaign promises and do exactly what their little commie heart desires yet mere days into her term she has signed executive orders and backed bills
that push the same far-left anti-borders policies that have turned California into a cautionary tale of economic decline, soaring crime, and mass exodus. These moves not only encourage illegal immigration, but also pave the way for electoral interference.
making voter fraud harder to detect and potentially compromising the integrity of Virginia's elections. I think I've already told you she wants ICE agents away from the polling places. Why would you want that? Unless you have dirty elections.
Consider Spanberger's Executive Order No. 10 signed on her first day in office, which totally rescinds Governor Glenn Yonkin's Executive Order No. 47, which has to do with all that immigration stuff, too. So, yeah, she definitely wants to have a—I like the way the author put it there. She wants to be the East.
California, while California is the West California. Yeah, she wants to be the, what should I say, the mirror image of commie California. She wants Virginia to be communist too.
Back to the article we were in originally. It said, adding fuel to the fire is House Bill 1442, introduced by Delegate Alfonso Lopez, which would prohibit any enforcement of immigration laws near polling places or electoral board locations during elections. Why would you want to do that? Hmm? Well, yeah, yeah, yeah.
The new Virginia Attorney General Jay Jones is also doing his part, filing a motion to withdraw from an agreement his predecessor made with the U.S. Department of Justice to invalidate the Virginia Dream Act of 2020, which allows illegal aliens to receive in-state tuition.
Well, I tell you what, if that's not enough to piss you off about Ms. Spanberger and Virginia and Jay Jones and all the other communists there, Ms. Spanberger, remember I told you about parallel legal systems, right? That's what we have in this country. We have one court system that serves the leftists, and we have another court system that serves justice. She's part of the left.
She is set to release an illegal alien there. Let me see if I can pull the article up here. Where is it at? Give me just a second here. Where is it at? Where is it at? Okay. Yep. Got it right here. Okay. Article by the Gateway Pundit.
It says, outrage. Democrat Governor Abigail Spanberger set to release illegal alien accused of strangling an eight-month-old baby and refuses to hand him over to the ICE agents. You tell me why. Tell me you're not pandering to the illegals when you won't even make sure that a man like this, this disgusting piece of trash who
murdered his own eight-month-old baby sister. Yeah, she wants to keep him. Yeah, she don't want him deported. She will not turn him over to ICE. You tell me how morally dyslexic you have to be to think like Ms. Spanberger here. And listen, people, she's the one that wants to disarm all of you people in Virginia.
while letting this piece of trash walk free. She doesn't want him deported, but you, she wants disarmed. Yes. It wouldn't shock me if she came out later saying she wants to defend this guy's right to keep and bear arms. Well, you shouldn't. You lose your Second Amendment rights just because you killed your own eight-month-old baby sister. Yeah, it wouldn't shock me at all. Is that enough to piss you off yet?
Well, all right. Well, let me just throw this out here because the Supreme court does have the opportunity to shut down all this Virginia gun control. But my issue is, will they, will they actually do that? They have, they're the key to stopping the Virginia, the Democrat communist gun control, but will they actually do it?
Well, that's a great question, because lately the Supreme Court has not been fulfilling their duty and upholding their Bruin decision, and they need to...
do that. They haven't enforced it. They haven't told lower courts, no, you, this ruling is crap because it violates the principle of text and history. And you can't do this. They're not doing that. So again, I'm not, I wouldn't be counting too much on the Supreme court to defend you people there in Virginia, you in Virginia.
need to go ahead and craft yourself a resolution of noncompliance and a resolution of resistance to all of this gun control crap. That is the fastest way that you're going to take care of this, especially if the Supreme Court drops the ball and refuses to uphold and defend the Constitution, which sadly they have shown a propensity for doing lately. And that makes me worried. What it does also, though, it makes me fall back.
on a known constant, and that is my fellow keepers and bearers. I know I can count on you when I cannot count on the Supreme Court. I know I can count on you when I cannot count on governors to do the right thing, or even presidents or state legislators or federal legislatures or legislators. I know that you
My fellow keepers and bearers, my fellow brethren under arms, I can count on you to stand up for your Second Amendment rights. And I am counting on all of you in Virginia to do exactly that. If you have to do it with a show of force like you had to for Governor Ralph Nau, then do it. You walk to the Capitol under arms and tell them flat out, you can pass this crap if you want.
We're not going to comply. And you point your fingers to all the law enforcement agencies up there too and tell them flat out, do not enforce this. We have the right to resist. That's what it's going to come down to, people. We the people standing up for all this crap. That's right. Not the courts, not the legislatures, not anything else. We the people are the key to holding our rights in place.
especially in the face of repeated assaults against our rights to keep and bear arms. Stay in contact with your reps. Stay armed up. Stay trained up. Get ready to defend yourself. Get ready to defend your family. Get ready to defend your neighborhood. Always be ready and never forget, incoming rounds always have the right of way. Royce out.