One gun a month is dead. The bill repealing this prior restraint on a Constitutionally protected act was signed into law by Governor McDonnell last night, as promised.
The media coverage actually hasn’t been too bad. The AP/Reuters Report couldn’t resist giving quite a bit of space to the hysterical rantings of the anti-gun side, and didn’t find it necessary to point out that this law had nothing to do with the tragedies that they attempted to equate with it.
Goddard, president of the Virginia Center for Public Safety, reserved his harshest criticism for legislators who passed the bill.
“They have not learned a damn thing,” Goddard said. Alluding to Monday’s school shooting that left three students dead in Ohio, Goddard said: “Here we are watching kids dying in other states, and we’re going to be a purveyor of firearms for other states.”
Lori Haas, whose daughter Emily was wounded in the shooting that left the gunman and 32 others dead at Virginia Tech, said she was disappointed by the governor’s action.
“Getting rid of the one-handgun-a-month law will make it easier for gun traffickers to purchase handguns in bulk,” she said in a written statement. “There have been too many tragedies in other states fueled by guns that come from Virginia, and this will only make the situation worse.”
So, basically, what they’re saying is that the repeal of Virginia’s one gun a month law will cause more School shootings.
They don’t even seem to grasp the irony of that claim considering that Virginia Tech occurred in Virginia, while one gun a month was in effect, and the perpetrator used two, legally purchased firearms…which had to have been purchased at least 30 days apart.
Didn’t seem to have any deterrent effect on that incident, now did it?
At any rate, this is a pretty minor victory. Don’t get me wrong…one gun a month was a useless law, did nothing but inconvenience law abiding gun owners, had no discernible effect on crime in other states and (as I mentioned in the beginning) was an (admittedly debatably) unconstitutional prior restraint on a fundamental right.
With that said, it really was nothing more than an inconvenience, had little practical effect on anyone, and there were so many ways around it, that it effectively did nothing. It’s a minor victory, but a victory nonetheless. And, using the same standard set forth by professional victim Lori Haas, the anti-gun side hasn’t offered a single, rational explanation for keeping a demonstrably ineffective and potentially unconstitutional law on the books.