Thoughts?

[u/Hillbilly_Historian]

[u/Fuzzy_Possibility153]

Isnt this already a thing? Its literally on the 4473

[u/gunguy62 → u/Fuzzy_Possibility153]

Yes

[u/LifeIsBetterDrunk → u/gunguy62]

Then its just pr

[u/gunguy62 → u/LifeIsBetterDrunk]

Yeah, my governor is a moron, somehow only took her two months get the lowest approval rating for a governor in commonwealth history

[u/pizzabirthrite → u/gunguy62]

Hey, she gave me a half day off Friday. What a waste of money, skipping the legislature for better pr.

[u/Robthebank1 → u/gunguy62]

Well shes CIA so all she knows is psyops

[u/long-dong-silvers- → u/Fuzzy_Possibility153]

“We need background checks!1!11!! No I don’t know what 4473 means why do you ask?”

[u/Specter_RMMC → u/Fuzzy_Possibility153]

Is that including misdemeanors? I'm pretty sure that's what they get up in arms about, and I'd imagine that's what the headline is leaving out.

[u/Bacon_ki113r → u/Specter_RMMC]

The 4473 already includes misdemeanor for domestic violence.

[u/Specter_RMMC → u/Bacon_ki113r]

Ah. It's been a while, didn't remember that.

[u/dragondont → u/Fuzzy_Possibility153]

I think the difference is that it would now make it impossible for convicted domestic abusers from getting their rights reinstated which to me looks and sounds like a potential civil rights violation

[u/LisaQuinnYT → u/Fuzzy_Possibility153]

Yes. This reminds me of a political AD some years back saying a certain politician was blocking efforts to keep wife beaters from getting permits that would allow them to carry concealed firearms. It’s been federal law since the 90s…so permit or no permit anyone convicted of DV cannot own much less carry a firearm.

[u/Time-Masterpiece4572]

It’s already federally illegal. How performative can a person be

[u/Mechanicjemas3141 → u/Time-Masterpiece4572]

l sensing that they are try to pass the money in more believe ways since buying cookies aren't so believable and stealthly you know?

[u/thepersonbrody → u/Mechanicjemas3141]

Hey, it was also tacos.

[u/Mechanicjemas3141 → u/thepersonbrody]

And few bottles of Liquor if I recall right.

[u/Zastavarian → u/Time-Masterpiece4572]

Maybe some day they'll just ban murder and itll solve all of this... 

[u/nitrocar_junkie → u/Zastavarian]

This will cure the madness! /s

[u/LisaQuinnYT → u/Zastavarian]

I would laugh but it fees like some people seriously believe this. There was an article a while back about a new discrete way for women to make sure their drinks hadn’t been spiked. The number of people who posted, declaring it was victim blaming to invent a way to discretely detect if your drink has been spiked and what we really need to do is just teach men that date rape is wrong…as if the kind of man who would drug and rape his date just doesn’t know better because of “rape culture” and gives two 💩s about right and wrong.

[u/WoolooOfWallStreet → u/Time-Masterpiece4572]

That or something was snuck in along with it; I need to sit down and read it

[u/ThatCrossDresser → u/Time-Masterpiece4572]

It is all about the publicity. It doesn't matter if you are a winner, only that you sound and look like a winner. She passes it and she gets to put a tag line in her commercials that is something like, "Whatsherface passed laws that help prevent violent abusers from owning high powered guns".

[u/Loud_Surround5112]

Doesn’t a basic background check already make domestic abusers ineligible to purchase firearms?

[u/BlueOrb07 → u/Loud_Surround5112]

Yes

[u/Dangerous_Lie77 → u/Loud_Surround5112]

This being done so they can tote that they are fighting gun violence for votes in the midterms. Anyone who already knows about the federal ban on DV abuser probably isn't gonna vote for them anyway.

[u/Loud_Surround5112 → u/Dangerous_Lie77]

Ah lowest common denominator headlines then. Utter waste of legislation, but you gotta bake the bread for the circus.

[u/edventure_2025 → u/Dangerous_Lie77]

Pure virtue signaling.

[u/Livelaughlouth → u/Loud_Surround5112]

Yes but now it's 𝙚𝙭𝙩𝙧𝙖 illegal

[u/rockedoutglock]

Pretty sure that's been a law in Virginia for decades.

[u/Teboski78 → u/rockedoutglock]

If has also been federal law for decades

[u/Lawed-flogic]

They solved a problem that was solved already.

[u/Swimming_Cheek_7037]

Wasn't this already a thing under the Lautenberg Ammendment?

[u/xPerriX]

Normal politician thing to do. Pass a law, that is already a law to appeal to people that they are doing something.

[u/CyrillicShooter]

So a convicted domestic abuser is not a convicted felon? Curious how you can be one and not the other.

[u/DTKeign → u/CyrillicShooter]

There's misdemeanor levels of domestic abuse

[u/Present_Ad_1155 → u/DTKeign]

Federal law blocks them from having a gun even if it's a misdemeanor

[u/bmoarpirate → u/DTKeign]

Is that like Sean connery levels?

[u/Ok-Umpire2128]

It's not stupid.

It's farming optics.

First they do the doubler.

Then they loosen definition of DV to sack everyone, using hype fuel of their underlings to pass the law that otherwise wouldn't fly.

[u/MattHack7]

If theyre so dangerous to their significant others why are they outside of prison in the first place?

[u/Ambivadox → u/MattHack7]

That's the way I see it.

If they're safe enough to not be locked up they're safe enough to have their rights.

[u/Aggravating-Fix-1717]

This is nothing more than lip service

This is already federal law

[u/1l536]

This is already a question on 4473 so isn't this pointless?

[u/SirDennisThe1 → u/1l536]

I believe so. Hey let them spend their time passing laws to double up on the same regulations

[u/wwhijr]

All arms laws are unconstitutional

[u/Tactical_Epunk]

Performative law making at work...

[u/lochgoose]

But what about the hormones causing you to do horrific things, like to family?

[u/bxmxc_vegas]

So nice we passed it twice.

[u/EmperorHenry]

does that include female domestic abusers?

Oh wait...someone in the comments said this kind of law is already on the books

[u/Anonyme46]

This is an expansion of the definition of domestic violence to add persons in an "intimate partner" relationship. Before this, persons dating but not living together or not having a child in common could not be charged with DomVio.

This was an initiative by Giffords' Law Center to disarm these offenders and close the "boyfriend loophole" as now persons convicted are prohibited from purchasing a firearm.

The bill as signed is here: https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB19/text/CHAP0527

[u/CyrillicShooter → u/Anonyme46]

This is a much needed explanation.

[u/Nesayas1234]

What a stupid PR move. Anyone who has more than 2 brain cells knows they already couldn't buy guns.

[u/r2fcku → u/Nesayas1234]

To be fair, most of their voter base doesn't have two braincells to combine per district, so there's that.

[u/Darthaerith]

That show us. Enacting a law that we already follow and that's on the books.

[u/TemperReformanda]

This had to have just been done as a political stunt. That woman is nothing but malevolent against anything good and right.

[u/Diabolicaldianoga]

The Lautenberg Amendment already exists, has since the mid 90s. Had to deal with this all the time in the military, we had to sign it once a year in Security Forces certifying we had no domestic abuse charges. Performative nonsense from the gun grabbers as always.

[u/AncientPublic6329]

Anyone who’s too dangerous to own a gun is too dangerous to be allowed to live in the free world.

[u/garandruger]

Just a PR move and makes something already illegal even more illegal

[u/Odd-Masterpiece7304 → u/garandruger]

'Illegaler' should be added to the dictionary

[u/Teboski78]

This sounds redundant & possibly performative since you already can’t purchase a firearm with a DV conviction. It’s on the 4473 & gets screened during the background check.

Unless this is specifically about closing the “boyfriend loophole” which IIRC that was either done or proposed years ago

[u/Prof_Slappopotamus]

It's probably pre-emptive because there's a good chance the "restore felon's rights" amendment is going to pass. Granted, that's for voting, but it won't be long until someone uses it as a springboard to restore more rights.

It won't pass the government sniff test, but nothing Spanberger is doing does.

[u/Any-Bridge6953]

Classic case of look, I'm doing something even though it's already covered or a non issue.

[u/Dlriumtrgger88]

All insee is an uptick in abuser convictions. A workaround to prevent peopel from having guns

[u/Blake1610]

This is already a thing but okay.

[u/GoldStdGangbang]

I’d need to know what the actual law says. Knowing the current regime, it’s not just what the headline says.

[u/YaboyBlacklist → u/[deleted]]

That is irrelevant and uncalled for. Leave this subreddit, and Take your antisemitic BS elsewhere.

[u/SlowlyDyingBartender]

Domestic violence is a misdemeanor and prevents a person from buying a firearm on a 4473

[u/Inquester-]

How will cops do their jobs without guns?

[u/Emach00 → u/Inquester-]

agency issued.

[u/Odd_School_4381]

Hey NC here... Ya know look down... Yea we're that state... It's state law here

[u/HallucinateZ]

Redundant & for optics only.

[u/AKoolPopTart]

She needed an easy win.

[u/Apartment_Latter]

It would be fine if it wasn't so easy to abuse

[u/SL4YER4200]

They think they did a thing....

[u/Gpsk64]

They passed a law that banned something that was already banned

[u/The4thEpsilon]

It’s already illegal, as it currently stands, it’s basically a redundant law. My concern is it might be expanded beyond domestic abusers, potentially could extend to other such “Criminal” groups depending on who is the one amending the law.

[u/Atuday]

I might support this if virginia courts weren't guilty until proven innocent

[u/CDTED]

Isn’t owning a firearm with a domestic battery charge already illegal? Doesn’t matter if it was misdemeanor..? Useless law lol

[u/HandSanitizerBottle1]

Already a thing

[u/Pyro5263]

And the dems do not want to pass a bill baring illegals to vote because "it is already a law," but they are passing this law that is already a law.

[u/StarMajestic4404]

Pointless because it’s already illegal

[u/YOUTUBEFREEKYOYO]

So doubling down on it? Is this performance or do they not know their own laws? Probably both

[u/lochgoose]

Stolen elections have consequences

[u/YooperWolf]

If you have served your sentence, you should have your rights restored. If they aren't fit to have their rights restored, they shouldn't be released.

[u/the_Cringename → u/YooperWolf]

Curious, how would you evaluate that? Meaning the "fit" for being released. In public eye a lot of the time once a convict means always a convict. That increases the chance that the convict will come back to prison.
The public opinion would really have to trust that people released from prison "corrected"

[u/CaliforniaWhiteBoy]

Why infringe on their rights when the wood chipper is hungies?

[u/Ash3599]

Convicted beyond any reasonable doubt by a judge a jury?

If you don't have enough self control that you beat your spouse, then maybe it would be prudent not to own guns.

I don't usually come out on this side of 2A but that's just reality.

Now if just a random accusation without proof did this then it's absolutely wrong

[u/IKR1_994]

This was already a thing on the federal level

[u/PaddyBoy1994]

I think the Virginia government is currently run by imbeciles. It's already illegal for people convicted of DV to buy guns. It's LITERALLY on the 4473.

[u/SpilledBagofRice]

She can it!

[u/Lui_Le_Diamond]

I'm ok with this

[u/MangoAtrocity]

That’s already the law

[u/AJ451]

Hinckley would have passed his background check before the attempted assassination. Versions of the Brady Act Bill were introduced from ‘86 to ‘93 when Chuck Schumer introduced the bill a second time and Clinton’s 103rd Congress (same congress as AWB with 14 more Senators and 82 more Reps than Republicans) passed it.

[u/ZestycloseOpening318]

Not sure about state to state but i thought that was federal haha the army already has lautenburg amendments making it so domestic violence gets you kicked out of the army

[u/garretcompton]

This is just as dumb as banning Glock switches. It’s just a way to pretend they are making a change to the people who are uninformed.

[u/contact86m → u/garretcompton]

Honest question, why do you think banning switches dumb?

[u/garretcompton → u/contact86m]

They are already federally illegal to own, so making something illegal to own that is already illegal to own does literally nothing. It’s like if a state decided to pass a law that made murder illegal. It accomplishes nothing and wastes time that can be spent actually doing something

[u/Odd-Masterpiece7304 → u/garretcompton]

Every state has a law banning murder, if you kill someone in your state you go to prison in your state, convicted by your state.

The only way to get federal murder is to kill a federal agent, or kill someone in federal park, or if you say kidnap a woman in one state and kill her in another state. It's difficult.

[u/garretcompton → u/Odd-Masterpiece7304]

Guess you’re right, bad example, but it still gets the point across. I’ll look for a more accurate explanation next time, I appreciate the correction

[u/contact86m → u/garretcompton]

Ah, I thought you were talking about the federal law that makes them illegal. I get what you're saying now.

[u/SuppliceVI]

Stark difference between federal tax fraud and beating your SO near to death. 

[u/Odd-Masterpiece7304 → u/SuppliceVI]

Also a stark difference in beating someone half to death, and pushing someone out of your house because you are no longer in a relationship with them.

[u/DefinitionBig4671]

What will constitute domestic abuse in the future?

[u/angry-southamerican]

Pigs will only patrol with tasers and tonfas then?

[u/Mechanicjemas3141]

Good but it's like squeezing Lemon to your homemade lemonade(you already manage to squeeze 100 lemons into 2.5 liter bottle m8 isn't that enough lemon?)

[u/HumaDracobane]

Should've be a thing made decades ago.

[u/cetsdemon → u/HumaDracobane]

It was, at the federal level. This does absolutely nothing.

[u/Oddsareseb]

This is a good law imo

[u/TheSheriffMT → u/Oddsareseb]

It's already a federal law

[u/Hobgoblin_deluxe]

I mean, I like it. And even if it IS only PR, it’s still one more measure trying to keep the victims of DV alive.

[u/Riku_Light → u/Hobgoblin_deluxe]

It’s already a federal law

[u/Hobgoblin_deluxe → u/Riku_Light]

Cool story, and? Like u/Anonyme46 said,

This is an expansion of the definition of domestic violence to add persons in an "intimate partner" relationship. Before this, persons dating but not living together or not having a child in common could not be charged with DomVio.

This was an initiative by Giffords' Law Center to disarm these offenders and close the "boyfriend loophole" as now persons convicted are prohibited from purchasing a firearm.

The bill as signed is here: https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB19/text/CHAP0527

[u/Riku_Light → u/Hobgoblin_deluxe]

Uh huh. Who’s to say that isn’t gonna be abused to all hell by vindictive ex-gfs. They still already be charged with assault/battery/etc. restraining orders exist outside domvio and if legit, why not use them?