The real reason behind the gun control change in Virginia

Some of you may be familiar with the situation going on in Virginia. Now that Democrats have got a foothold in the state legislature, they are passing all sorts of gun laws like crazy and making things home.

This would have been completely unprecedented in Virginia just two decades ago. Virginia was a pretty solid conservative state that valued individual liberties.

So what happened?

I will tell you what did not happen. The people living in Virginia did not just one day decide they were going to vote for Democrats and change their view of guns.

What happened in Virginia stems from a phenomena that’s been happening in different parts of the country. Heavily populated areas in heavily Blue states have been the primary ones taking on the majority of the mass immigration that’s happened over the last 30 years. However, that immigration displaces a portion of the population that already lived there, and then they go on to other states to find greener pastures. But they take their politics with them and want to make these new states home.



In the case of Virginia, the real underlying issue going on is that the city areas in the northeastern part of the state have been continuing to grow and sprawl, as people from up north (D.C. area, New Jersey, New York) continue to move there.

"Of Virginia's 8.5 million residents, fewer than half (49.5%) were born in the commonwealth, according to the latest American Community Survey."

https://patch.com/virginia/richmond/1-7-virginians-was-born-outside-u-s
"1 in 7 Virginians Was Born Outside U.S.", Virginia Capital News Service, Dec 23, 2019


You can see on this map from which states the majority of in-flow to Virginia came from:



https://news.virginia.edu/content/out-migration-virginia-continues-fourth-consecutive-year


Also the population in those white rural areas are declining. (low birth rates)

A map showing that can be seen here:



https://wtkr.com/2019/02/01/virginia-sees-population-booms-big-declines/


The factor that has been changing things in Virginia is demographic change, not people changing their opinions.

This is also the same reason why Pennsylvania has also recently begun to come under increasing pressure, and I suspect North Carolina and Florida could be next in the not so distant future.

And you people who live in the Western half of the country, I’d be very very wary of California, it’s been spilling out people and turning cities in outlying states Blue. People as far away as Idaho and Montana have been complaining about the influx.

(Don’t forget California has a gigantic population of 40 million, and the entire Western region of the United States only contains about 75 million people) Even all the major big cities in Texas have been turning, or already turned Blue, due in large part to the massive exodus of people that have left California (that in combination with plenty of illegal immigration Texas has received on its own). Colorado is another state to keep an eye on, a lot of Californians have been moving there, and the Denver area has been sprawling outwards.

New Hampshire is another example. It used to be fairly conservative until about the late 1980s. But it just kept getting a lot of the population that was emptying out from New York and Massachusetts. (Even in this last presidential election, Hillary only won the state over Trump by a tiny 0.4% margin. It is, or it was 25 years ago, the most Red state in New England)

But don't forget that as late as 26 years ago, California was still sort of a purple state, where a Republican governor may have had a decent chance of winning. I know it seems virtually unbelievable today, but in 1994 the California voters passed a referendum banning public funds for medical care and education to illegal aliens. Of course activist judges in the state courts quickly overturned it. You can research Proposition 187.Progressives in the state couldn’t convince the population that was already there to vote for them, so they had to bring in a population that would vote for them from outside. Well now with 1 in 4 people in the state living in poverty, they've pretty much cemented their power.

 

related thread: Virginia is the front line now

 

Such is a natural side-effect of the united states not practicing viewpoint discrimination. As a result of such an approach, bad ideologies are allowed to fester, find supporters, gain traction, and ultimately lead to widespread fallout as a result.

The only way to prevent such from occurring is to not only practice viewpoint discrimination, but also hold that certain viewpoints are so dangerous in nature that they cannot be tolerated, nor even be allowed to be shared with others. They must either be classified as treasonous, or those who hold certain viewpoints must be removed from the equation entirely.

 

You obviously didn't bother reading the thread.
It's not about ideas, it's about people, and the movement of those people.

Nobody has been changing their opinions or viewpoints.

 

The problem is that the individuals who hold certain viewpoints swarm into new territories, bring their viewpoints with them, and through sheer numbers serve to change the new territory to match their own outlook, serving to displace those who were present before them.

 

This particular post isn't about gun control, but demonstrates how Progressives have taken over the state politics and are trying to rapidly "terraform" the state to make it more like the cities in the Northeast where they came from.

Just to give you some idea of the type of things that are going now, and the current political environment.

Virginia Democrats want to outlaw suburban zoning, bring in poor & higher density

Democrats Seek To Outlaw Suburban, Single-Family House Zoning, Calling It Racist And Bad For The Environment
Luke Rosiak, December 2019

Virginia House Del. Ibraheem Samirah introduced a bill that would override local zoning officials to permit multi-family housing in every neighborhood, changing the character of quiet suburbs.
Oregon passed a similar bill, following moves by cities such as Minneapolis; Austin, Texas; and Seattle.
Proponents say urban lifestyles are better for the environment and that suburbs are bastions of racial segregation.
Democrats in Virginia may override local zoning to bring high-density housing, including public housing, to every neighborhood statewide — whether residents want it or not.
The measure could quickly transform the suburban lifestyle enjoyed by millions, permitting duplexes to be built on suburban lots in neighborhoods previously consisting of quiet streets and open green spaces. Proponents of “upzoning” say the changes are necessary because suburbs are bastions of segregation and elitism, as well as bad for the environment.
The move, which aims to provide “affordable housing,” might be fiercely opposed by local officials throughout the state, who have deliberately created and preserved neighborhoods with particular character — some dense and walkable, others semi-rural and private — to accommodate people’s various preferences.
But Democrats tout a state-level law’s ability to replace “not in my backyard” with “yes, in your backyard.”
House Delegate Ibraheem Samirah, a Democrat, introduced six housing measures Dec. 19, coinciding with Democrats’ takeover of the state legislature in November.
“Single-family housing zones would become two-zoned,” Samirah told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “Areas that would be impacted most would be the suburbs that have not done their part in helping out.”
“The real issues are the areas in between very dense areas which are single-family zoned. Those are the areas that the state is having significant trouble dealing with. They’re living in a bubble,” he said.
He said suburbs were “mostly white and wealthy” and that their local officials — who have historically been in charge of zoning — were ignoring the desires of poor people, who did not have time to lobby them to increase suburban density.
In response to a question about whether people who bought homes in spacious suburbs have valid reasons, not based on discrimination, for preferring to live that way — including a love for nature and desire to preserve woods and streams — he said: “Caring about nature is very important, but the more dense a neighborhood is, the more energy efficient it is.”
He said if local officials seek to change requirements like setbacks to make it impossible to build dense housing in areas zoned to preserve a nature feel, “if they make setbacks to block duplexes, there’d have to be a lawsuit to resolve whether those zoning provisions were necessary.”
He wrote on Facebook, “Because middle housing is what’s most affordable for low-income people and people of color, banning that housing in well-off neighborhoods chalks up to modern-day redlining, locking folks out of areas with better access to schools, jobs, transit, and other services and amenities.”
“I will certainly get pushback for this. Some will call it ‘state overreach.’ Some will express anxiety about neighborhood change. Some may even say that the supply issue doesn’t exist. But the research is clear: zoning is a barrier to more housing and integrated communities,” he continued.
He tweeted Sunday that that would include public housing. “Important Q about new social/public housing programs: where are we going to put the units? Under current zoning, new low-income housing is relegated to underinvested neighborhoods, concentrating poverty more. Ending exclusionary zoning has to be part of broader housing reform,” he said.
Tim Hannigan, chairman of the Fairfax County Republican Committee — in one of the areas Samirah represents — said that urban Democrats were waging war on the suburbs.
“This could completely change the character of suburban residential life, because of the urbanization that would develop,” he told the DCNF. “So much of the American dream is built upon this idea of finding a nice quiet place to raise your family, and that is under assault.”
“This is a power-grab to take away the ability of local communities to establish their own zoning practices … literally trying to change the character of our communities,” he said.
He said suburbs were not equipped to handle the increased traffic, and “inevitably it will just push people to places where they feel they’ll get away from that, they may move to West Virginia to get their little plot of land.”
Minneapolis became the first city to eliminated single family zoning in December 2018, after a push by progressive advocacy groups promoting “equity.” Austin, Texas, and Seattle soon followed suit.
But those cities were amending zoning codes that have always been the domain of local governments. Oregon passed state legislation blocking local governments’ single-family zoning in July, CityLab reported.
It quoted Alex Baca, a Washington, D.C., urbanist with the site Greater Greater Washington, saying that single-family zoning is a tool for wealthy whites to maintain segregated neighborhoods and that the abolition of low-density neighborhoods is necessary for equity.
CityLab acknowledged that “residents might reasonably desire to keep the neighborhoods they love the way they are,” but said that implementing the law at the state level makes sure that those concerns can be more easily ignored.
“By preempting the ability of local governments to set their own restrictive zoning policies, the state policy would circumnavigate the complaints of local NIMBY homeowners who want to block denser housing,” it wrote.
While he implied that suburbs are prejudiced, Samirah himself has a history of anti-Semitic comments, including saying sending money to Israel is worse than funding the Klu Klux Klan.
“I am so sorry that my ill-chosen words added to the pain of the Jewish community, and I seek your understanding and compassion as I prove to you our common humanity,” he said in February.
He interrupted a speech in July by President Donald Trump in Jamestown, Virginia, and said, “You can’t send us back! Virginia is our home.”
His father is Jordanian refugee Sabri Samirah, who authorities banned from the U.S. for a decade after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, in part because of his membership in the Muslim Brotherhood, the Chicago Tribune reported in 2014.
​

https://dailycaller.com/2019/12/23/virginia-house-zoning-environment/


Virginia governor Northam just signed background checks, red flag, and purchase limit bills into law.

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/v...check-red-flag-purchase-limit-bills-into-law/ (article April 10, 2020)

quote from the article:

The governor announced Friday he’d signed bills that include requiring universal background checks on gun purchases, a red flag bill to allow authorities to temporarily take guns away from people deemed to be dangerous to themselves or others, and limited handgun purchases to one a month.

Virginia was once a socially conservative state where lawmakers in both parties viewed gun rights as sacrosanct and the National Rifle Association held great sway.

But as the state has grown more urban and suburban, the gun lobby’s influence has waned.

Gun-control advocates said Friday they’re planning to replicate their success in Virginia in other states. John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety, said his group plans to spend heavily in key battleground states this year like Arizona, North Carolina and Pennsylvania to elect lawmakers who support new gun restrictions.

Feinblatt said polling shows a gun-control agenda is popular in those states and that Virginia is a “bellwether” of what’s to come.

The gun lobby was not totally shut out of Virginia’s legislative session and were able to water down many bills backed by Northam.

“While we still don’t like them, they’re not as bad as they once were,” said Philip Van Cleave, president of the Virginia Citizens Defense League.

Moderate Democrats also balked at passing one of the most high-profile gun measures debated this year: banning assault weapons like the popular AR-15-style rifles.

The governor acknowledged that he “came up short” on that legislation but said he will try again next year.

“I will not stop,” he said.​

 

That's been happening in Florida for years, so far we have been able to push-back against the NE attitude from the SE Tri-County area and with the support of the Cubans fleeing Communism, have been able to outlive the the Northeastern attitude.

It's a constant battle, the Democrats want to pollute the state with illegals, but our locals and federals under Trump are doing a good job of making this state a not so friendly place to live for them, yes there a lot of them here, but the tide is turning, business's are getting fined or shut down, ICE is doing neighborhood raids and gathering people up to be deported and as a result many illegals are self deporting understanding they are not welcome here anymore.

 

Do you think it's a good thing considering the current pandemic? Fewer guns would lead to fewer people dying of the coronavirus.

"We need I.C.U. beds, we need ventilators, we need personnel to care for the wave of Covid-19 patients. But gunshot victims are now fighting for space and resources inside America’s overcrowded I.C.U.s.....

"Mayor Jack Young of Baltimore issued a plea to his city last month: Save hospital resources for Covid-19 patients by putting your guns down.....

"I’ve also watched with concern as people line up in front of gun stores, stocking up on firearms and ammunition, supposedly to protect themselves. Instead, they are likely putting themselves and their families at risk, as cooped-up children are at risk of exploring these newly purchased weapons and injuring themselves or others.....

"Neighborhoods and communities that are already at increased risk for violence because of systemic racism and poverty will suffer, and violence in those areas may increase even further."
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/01/opinion/covid-gun-violence-hospitals.html

 

I think big cities like NYC and Baltimore should build a big wall around their cities, with metal detectors at all the entry points. No public cars allowed inside the city, everyone can use public transportation, and you can have electric-powered taxis for the rich and old people. If someone wants to own a car they can keep it in a rental garage just outside city limits. (There's often not enough space for a garage inside these big cities anyway) I think that would be a dream for everyone involved, since city people are always saying they want to get rid of guns and wish everyone would take public transportation to get cars off their overcrowded roads.

 

Just more anti-gun BS from the NYT.

 

And then when it hits the fan and they discover not being armed means becoming a victim and not having the basic needs to survive, food, water, toiletries then wishing to come out of their big cities to take what they need from the rest of us, we can weld the doors shut from the outside and let them enjoy the big city lifestyle they so deserve.

 

A claim for which there is no evidence.

Then what is ultimately needed are fewer criminal individuals remaining free in society to victimize others as they see fit. Remove them from the equation, and there will be significantly less strain on the intensive care units as a direct result.

 

this would be a complete violation of the first amendment

 

And yet it could be argued that doing such would actually serve to save the united states from becoming a socialist nation where the united states constitution, and the constitutional rights held by the people, simply no longer exist.

Otherwise, in the name of fair play, the united states will fall and simply become another Venezuela. Where will individuals flee to then?

 

Like locusts, they move on once they have consumed all they can.

 

Where will they go once they have consumed the entire united states, making all fifty states just as bad if not even worse than the state of California, and there is no longer anywhere in the nation of retreat to?

 

It’s not a where question, but a what question, what are the next rights to go?

 

Then things implode and we start all over again. Already, California cities are on the brink of insolvency and that was before Covid19.

 

Then it could be argued the only answer solution to the problem at hand is to practice viewpoint discrimination against certain ideologies. Potentially to the point of outright killing those who hold said ideologies, so that they may not be allowed to gain a foothold once again.

 

They are already killing themselves. We have record use of pharm products and Americans are sicker than ever. Those who take care of their family, their health, and their finances will be left.

 

which would be a silly argument, as the 1st amendment precludes you from doing so.

 

Clearly, there is a compelling state interest in preventing socialists from turning America into another Venezuela, and preventing them from spreading their propaganda is the least restrictive means to do so.

Thus, such a restriction is a constitutionally acceptable limit on the right to free speech.

 

lol, no

 

this will lead to the rural areas seceding from the urban areas. A necessary divorce.

 

Unfortunately, rural areas and cities are often trapped in the same state.

Two examples, the most prominent I can think of, are the rest of the state of Illinois being held hostage by Chicago, and the Upstate New York region being held under the sway of a small area around New York City.
In both states, the big city politics imposed on the vast expanses of the rest of the state have, over several decades, led to depopulation out of the rural areas in those states and into other states, even as the populations around the big cities have swelled.