©
Twenty years ago, Virginia's lax regulation of firearms earned the commonwealth the distinction of being the No. 1 source of guns illegally trafficked to other states.
In 1993, Republican and Democratic lawmakers responded by coming together to approve a law that limited handgun purchases to one per month. The law allowed Virginians who wanted to purchase multiple guns to apply for a waiver.
Two years later, the Virginia State Crime Commission conducted a study of the measure's impact on public safety and the illegal flow of firearms to other states. Its findings were clear.
Virginia dropped from first to eighth on the list of states used by illegal gun traffickers. The chances of a gun purchased in Virginia being recovered in a criminal investigation dropped 36 percent nationwide, 66 percent along the northeast corridor and more than 70 percent in New York and Massachusetts. Meanwhile, State Police reported 92 percent of Virginians who applied for a waiver received one.
"Virginia's one-gun-a-month statute... has had its intended effect of reducing Virginia's status as a source for state gun trafficking," the report concluded. "The imposition of the law does not appear to create an onerous burden for law-abiding gun purchasers who apply for a multiple handgun purchase waiver."
Since then, gun-rights advocates have persisted in their effort to undermine a prudent, bipartisan solution. They've posted successes. In 2004, lawmakers approved a bill allowing concealed-carry permit holders to buy multiple handguns. It also lifted the restriction on private sales.
Today, some legislators, led by gun-rights advocates and apparently unencumbered by memory, are pushing to end the restriction altogether.
"One-gun-a-month is no longer needed," Del. Scott Lingamfelter said recently. "It has been obviated by actions of this body over the last 20 years."
His assessment of the General Assembly's actions may be correct, but his solution is not. If anything, lawmakers' success in diluting the one-gun-a-month restriction suggests a need to return to the initial version of the law.
Several studies in recent years show Virginia climbing back among the favorite sources of gunrunners.
In December, federal officials touted the arrest of 10 Virginia men suspected of operating a gun and drug ring out of Manassas and Fairfax County. The arrests brought the total to more than 60 over three years. A few months earlier, a New Jersey man and two Virginia men pleaded guilty to running guns from Virginia's Eastern Shore to Trenton. Authorities linked two fatal shootings there, including the drive-by killing of a 13-year-old girl, to weapons purchased in Virginia.
The General Assembly in the past decade has made it easier for gunrunners to operate in Virginia. It has eroded the gains made possible by a law that prevented weapons from falling into the wrong hands.
The latest push ensures that the progress made over the past 20 years is undone. 1992, here we come.

Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Twitter
Google
Yahoo
Hmmmm...
It seems to me that the more strict the laws in neighboring states are the more likely OUR great commonwealth is to be used as the place to get guns. This creates a problem because we would, in essence, need to keep our laws just as strict as other states to avoid being an "easy" target. If every state but Virginia banned guns, for example, I'll bet I know which state would lead the nation in "gunrunning"! So, it stands to reason that we should just ban guns outright. We could be the first. Think about it... If we want to be looked at as the leader in keeping guns out of other states, then we should just get rid of them completely! Then everyone will be safe and we will have peace and harmony.
Yes , lets get rid of all
Yes , lets get rid of all gun and while your are at it. Let stop free speech and freedom of the press. Then every body will be safe and we will have peace and harmony.
Yes , lets get rid of all
Yes , lets get rid of all gun and while your are at it. Let stop free speech and freedom of the press. Them every body will be safe and we will have peace and harmony.
What's not to like?
Increased gun sales mean more jobs.
HB/SB: Gun Law 101E
Maybe the General Assembly should pass a law requiring anyone seeking to purchase a gun to view the before and after photos of those who have been murdered as they lay in the morgue before they make that decision to buy another gun. Then the potential gun purchaser needs to listen to the heartbreaking hospital sounds including those of the heart monitor flat-lining and of a family when they hear the news that the family member has died.
I would like to respond to
I would like to respond to your comment about Gun laws 101E. If you had check any of the available statistics of gun related deaths. You would have found the Automobiles kills more people than Guns.I've got some simple stats from the 2002 Time magazine almanac.
Accidents in general accounted for 97,289 deaths in 1999.
Car accidents accounted for 42,437 of these deaths in 1999.
Death by firearm did not even make the top 10 leading causes of death that year.
It's About Hypocrisy...Not Guns....
You totally missed my point....I'm attacking the hypocrisy of law makers who encourage gun sales, but pass idiotic morality laws about issues such as requiring an ultra sound before a woman chooses to have an abortion.
I don't care whether you own a thousand guns. But before you buy those guns you should be subjected to the same idiotic rules women are subjected to when they make choices for control of their body. Maybe gun dealers should be forced to have crime scene pictures of bloody victims of shootings in their places of business. Might make people think more about the dangers and responsibilities of owning a gun.
I do understand
I do understand your point about abortions. But your comparison using abortions and Guns dealers don't make sense. I agree 100 % that owning a gun is a big responsibility. But to force a Gun Dealer to see the Crime scene photo's would be the same as asking, a car dealership to look at every fatal car accident photo to which they sold a car. Abortion is a issue on it own and needs to be address on it's own.
Comparison
Should that also apply to purchases of cars and trucks given the carnage related to automobile accidents -- not that car ownership is protected in our Bill of Rights?
To the Extreme....
If you want to carry the irrational argument for forcing women to undergo an ultra-sound and listening to the fetus heartbeat when considering an abortion to an even more intrusive extreme....you bet.