I am writing to you as a concerned constituent of Senate District 13 to express my firm opposition to the package of firearm-related legislation currently moving through the General Assembly. These proposed laws represent a significant departure from our constitutional traditions and, in my view, constitute an impermissible infringement upon the fundamental rights of Virginians. As you cast your votes on these bills, I would like to respectfully remind you of the oath you took upon assuming your office: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge all the duties incumbent upon me as a Senator... according to the best of my ability, so help me God." This oath is not a mere formality; it is a binding promise to protect the framework of liberty that governs our society. Central to that framework is Article I, Section 13 of the Constitution of Virginia, which explicitly states: "That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power." Furthermore, the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution makes it clear that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right that "shall not be infringed." Through the Fourteenth Amendment, this protection is applied to the states, ensuring that: "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..." The legal landscape regarding these rights has been further clarified by the United States Supreme Court in NYSRPA v. Bruen. The Court’s decision established that the government must demonstrate that any firearm regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Crucially, the Court has long held that firearms "in common use" for lawful purposes are protected. The AR-15, as the most popular rifle in America, is undeniably in "common use" by millions of law-abiding citizens for self-defense, competition, and hunting. To vote for a ban on such a platform would be a direct violation of the standard set by the highest court in the land. Beyond these legal mandates, I urge you to consider the practical impact on your constituents in Petersburg. These measures do not target criminal intent; instead, they criminalize peaceable citizens for possessing hardware legally acquired and used safely every day. If the goal is to address gun-related violence, I recommend a return to the proven success of Project Exile. In the first year of its implementation in Richmond, homicides dropped by 33% and armed robberies dropped by 30%, according to the Department of Justice. As a legislator, you have the power to prioritize the certainty of prosecution over the administrative restriction of hardware. I urge you to honor your oath and the constitutional protections of all Virginians by voting against these overreaching measures and focusing instead on holding criminals accountable. Sincerely, John G Chaney

I write in stark opposition to the misguided and naive attempts at gun control Virginia legislators have advanced in this term. I’m deeply concerned with Virginia Democrats’ eagerness to immediately pass these sweeping gun bans, such as (but not limited to) HB217 and SB749. These bills, as written, are deeply flawed for many reasons, ranging from the ideological to the practical. First, the practical. The way these bills define “assault weapons” is certainly unconstitutional. They would ban virtually every firearm from private ownership. This will make its way quickly to the Supreme Court, and we all know how that will end. There is precious little evidence supporting the idea that bans like these reduce crime. They are based more on banning what looks scary, rather than what is actually dangerous. It is plain to see that you are passing these laws to score points with your base. Well, I am your base, and I am here to tell you that the opposite is happening. I also want to speak to the ideological side of this. In my time as a community organizer, working with grassroots organizations to do things like defend drag story hours and organize community meals, I have met a broad spectrum of left-wing activists in the DMV community, most of them from marginalized populations. What you may not see or hear is that these people want to learn how to defend themselves. The Liberal Gun Club is overwhelmed with requests for training. Several organizations have been organizing queer-friendly range days, which are also totally overwhelmed with interest. Mainstream firearms training is often unwelcoming and unsafe for these populations, so they rely on the meager capacity of progressive people like me to learn safe and responsible gun ownership. It’s in this environment that we witnessed the cold-blooded murder of Alex Pretti, a man who wanted to protect his community and was summarily executed for exercising his constitutional rights. Interest from marginalized folks in learning to defend themselves has spiked even higher than it already was. A recent free range day offered to members of the queer community filled up signups in 3 minutes. In this time, we cannot be passing laws to deprive our most oppressed populations of the means to defend themselves. Even if you believe that law enforcement is not a threat to us - an idea many I know would firmly reject - it is well known that groups like Patriot Front and the Proud Boys count a large number of NoVa residents amongst their ranks. Beyond HB217/SB749, the other gun control bills that have been advanced (except the one that removes mandatory minimum sentences, which I wholeheartedly support) would increase the rate at which people of color would have to interact with law enforcement, which WILL lead to more incidents like Alex Pretti and Renee Good, and Philando Castile before them. What we need from our legislators in this moment is steadfast PROTECTION of our constitutional rights and of our right to defend ourselves, after four long years of constant bigoted assaults by the Youngkin regime. I urge you to stand up for marginalized communities and what we actually want, which is the protection and preservation of our civil and constitutional rights. Focus your efforts on stopping ICE in our streets, protecting free & fair elections in 2026, and dismantling right wing extremism, not on stripping us of the means to protect ourselves, in a time when we need it most.

I stand with the Virginia Citizens Defense League on these bills.

Every one of you have taken an oath to defend the constitution of the United States of America. You also took an oath to uphold the constitution of Virginia. By passing these bills, you have broken your oath. The people of the great state of Virginia will remember this.

Good Morning, I am writing to you in opposition to HB217 and SB749. These bills are restrictions on law abiding citizens who purchase firearms in the correct manner; doing nothing to keep illegal purchases or out of state acquisitions of so-called "assault weapons" by those circumventing lawful purchases. While I can understand the desire to reduce firearm related deaths in the state, rifles of any used only in an extreme minority of cases. I know many pro-gun ownership people would be opposed to any regulations, but most countries around the world, it is the owner and not the firearm that is evaluated. If any regulation on firearms ownership should be passed, it is a thorough background check, training requirements for safe usage of the firearm, and potentially a waiting period. These laws, as written, are creating a rash of purchases across the state and people who are not trained in their usage are purchases every gun they can in preparation of these bans. Please oppose the passage of these bills and work on creating laws that would actually decrease gun deaths in the state like training requirements, waiting periods, and a better background check system.

Opposition to SB749 I am writing to express my strong opposition to this bill, specifically regarding the restrictions on magazine capacity. As a resident of Virginia, I am deeply concerned that this legislation ignores the shifting safety realities for LGBTQ+, immigrant, and minority populations. Vulnerable communities are currently facing an unprecedented rise in targeted rhetoric and organized extremist activity. This includes the moral panic directed at the transgender community, which the Lemkin Institute has flagged for its genocidal potential. It also includes the visible presence of groups like Patriot Front. The reality is that violent extremist groups are already heavily armed. This bill does not disarm the aggressors. It only creates barriers for their intended victims to access modern means of self-defense. Furthermore, the language regarding magazine limits is technically flawed and out of step with modern manufacturing. A 15-round limit arbitrarily classifies standard, off-the-shelf handguns and rifles as "assault" weapons. These are not specialty items. They are the modern industry standard for personal protection. By criminalizing these common items, the state is effectively forcing law-abiding citizens to choose between being under-equipped or becoming accidental felons. Finally, there is a significant political miscalculation at play. In the 2025 elections, many voters crossed party lines specifically to prioritize broader democratic stability over single-issue gun rights. However, passing a bill that retroactively denies access to items previously legally owned will alienate this fragile coalition. At a time when we need all hands on deck to defend our institutions against radical populist nationalism, this bill creates a rift that could drive voters back to the opposition. Requested Action: At a minimum, I urge the committee to strike all language regarding magazine capacity and reconsider the impact this bill will have on the marginalized Virginians who now feel the need to defend their own communities. Respectfully, Maya Karabinos (She/They) MayaK@Tricityqueer.org

In other states where this type of legislation has passed, there has been no measurable reduction in gun violence, but the laws themselves have caused an undue burden on communities of color. https://wethesecondcolorado.com/colorados-firearm-barrel-bill-sacrifices-minority-families-for-gun-control-lobby/ "From Fiscal Year 2021 through 2024, a total of 203 individuals in Colorado, a state with a population exceeding 6 million, were convicted and sentenced for possessing a “high capacity magazine”. ... Black defendants were 42.4% of convictions for possession of “high capacity magazines” in that time period, when we would expect them to be proportional to the population and track national trends (about 5 to 5.5%). ... we cannot determine from such a low sample size of 203, or even the 423 POWPO data, that there is any large-scale beneficial effect since compliance bills such as these are enhancements, meaning the crime that is theoretically prevented by the proposed legislation has already been committed. Data suggests that none of these crimes were actual mass shootings." Handguns are overwhelmingly more likely to be used in mass shootings than assault weapons and equally deadly (see attachment). Even the much-celebrated Australian gun ban, which went much father than this bill, has not actually resulted in a decrease in mass *killing* events in Australia, instead it has shifted those events to the types of guns that remain legal (such as last year's Bondi Beach shooting) or other types of weapons. This bill is presupposed on the fiction that changing a gun's ergonomics, or perhaps its visual appeal to gun enthusiasts, can enhance its deadliness in a non-military scenario. The sober reality is that all firearms are deadly, and this sort of window dressing ban of certain firearms accessories holds no promise of changing that fact.

I support this bill because although Virginia is No. 15 nationally in gun violence prevention laws, the commonwealth could do more to restrict dangerous weapons and regulate public carry.

Hello, my name is Caitlin Knight and I am urging you to oppose or strike the restrictive provisions in SB749. Particularly language that aims to ban certain firearms and limit magazine capacities. This bill, in its current form, violates the Second Amendment by banning common firearms and standard-capacity magazines that are in widespread civilian use by Virginians on both sides of the aisle. The Second Amendment protects an armed citizenry capable of forming militias to secure liberty and deter tyranny; not just self-defense, as some courts have narrowly misinterpreted. In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Supreme Court (Scalia) clarified that ‘well-regulated’ means proper training and discipline, not government bans on common arms. This is the dominant judicial interpretation. A basic understanding of how the US gained its independence provides the necessary context as to the intent of the 2nd amendment. Furthermore, within the limited scope of Bruen, “text, history, and tradition” confirm that outright bans on these firearms and magazines violate our rights, as they are ‘in common use’ under this framework, if you prefer to apply this standard in lieu of the above. Self-defense is certainly within the scope of the Second Amendment. As a woman, my everyday carry firearm with a standard 15-round magazine would be the equalizer should I ever encounter a predatory man looking to harm me. Statistically, the likelihood of me physically overpowering a man is unlikely. This is why I carry. Many women in Virginia feel the same. I remain vigilant and aware of my surroundings, but I don’t feel as vulnerable while unloading groceries in my van, or walking my dog at night. 15-17 rounds is a reasonable capacity, and has been the de facto national standard for decades. Moreover, such bans lack efficacy. RAND Corporation’s comprehensive reviews find inconclusive evidence that assault weapons bans reduce violent crime, mass shootings, homicides, or most gun outcomes. Everyday gun violence primarily involves handguns, not the firearms described in this bill. Such weapons play a minor role in crimes in Virginia, and nationwide. Research shows the most effective legislation addresses high-risk individuals gaining access to firearms, and proper firearm storage. Legislation should rely on evidence and constitutional limits - not emotion, or perhaps wanting to rebuke the Trump administration and its atrocities. Our laws should be effective, not oppressive or punitive. Groups like Everytown/Moms Demand Action are advocacy organizations with a mission to promote these exact restrictions. They are not impartial sources. As such, they should not be relied upon to justify this legislation. Please protect Virginians’ constitutional rights. Work to do right by your constituents when it comes to reducing gun violence in Virginia. Be the beacon of reason amidst the fog. Thank you for your consideration Caitlin Knight Chesapeake/South Norfolk, Virginia

At one time minorities could not acquire firearms.. for self defense..Now working class citizens of all races are losing rights ..Discrimination in years past and discrimination now are the same.. The legislation created by the authors causes financial hardship,harm to the citizens .This is affecting your constituents who placed you into office..Do any of you have the fortitude to vote for pro gun bills and against anti gun bills..? That is your challenge..