It looks like there's been another escalation in the debate over gun rights in Virginia today. The headline from NPR says, Virginia Governor Declares State Of Emergency Ahead Of Gun Rights Rally.
Fearing potential violence, Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam is declaring a state of emergency and is banning firearms and other weapons on the Capitol grounds in Richmond ahead of a gun rights demonstration planned for next week.
"We have received credible intelligence from our law enforcement agencies that there are groups with malicious plans for the rally that is planned for Monday," Northam said during a press conference Wednesday afternoon.
Gun rights supporters are preparing to converge on Richmond for a lobbying day and a rally Monday morning. They're opposed to efforts by Virginia Democrats — who've just taken over control of the Virginia legislature following the November 2019 elections — to pass a slate of gun control bills backed by Northam.
Apparently the excuse of internet chatter is sufficient evidence for suspending the law and imposing restrictions upon the people of Virginia. If you're afraid of gun owners and their scary black rifles, this may strike you as a sensible response to a clear and present danger, but reality is quite different. Virginians planned a peaceful assembly to make their opinions known to the government. They plan to carry their rifles as a form of protest. In response, the government has threatened violence against them.
Let's see what Article I of the Constitution of Virginia says about such things. It remains essentially the Virginia Declaration of Rights from 1776, and retains the sentiments of the revolutionary era.
Section 1.
That all men are by nature equally free and independent and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.
I see nothing objectionable here. In fact, this looks more robust than the later Constitution of the United States. However, if we look further, I will show exactly how Northam's announcement lays bare the emptiness of constitutional protections from tyranny.
Section 7
That all power of suspending laws, or the execution of laws, by any authority, without consent of the representatives of the people, is injurious to their rights, and ought not to be exercised.
A "State of Emergency" is by definition a suspension of laws, and the explicit aim of Northam's announcement is injurious to the rights of Virginians. How? Let's read on.
Section 12
That the freedoms of speech and of the press are among the great bulwarks of liberty, and can never be restrained except by despotic governments; that any citizen may freely speak, write, and publish his sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that right; that the General Assembly shall not pass any law abridging the freedom of speech or of the press, nor the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for the redress of grievances. [emphasis added]
"The General Assembly shall not pass any law..." but the governor can just make an announcement to the same effect despite this and Section 7 above because of guns? What does the Virginia constitution say about guns, anyway?
Section 13
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.
So, the people of Virginia have an explicitly enumerated individual right to own and carry arms without any infringement whatsoever. They have the explicitly enumerated right to peaceably assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances, and any restraint is evidence of a despotic government. The suspension of laws by any authority is declared to be injurious of the rights of the people, and may only be done by representatives of the people. According to the plain language of the founding document for the State of Virginia, Northam is in violation of his oath as defined in Article II, Section 7.
All officers elected or appointed under or pursuant to this Constitution shall, before they enter on the performance of their public duties, severally take and subscribe the following oath or affirmation:
"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 ...................., according to the best of my ability (so help me God)."
Northam is citing internet chatter to justify this violation of his oath by comparing this protest to the 2017 white supremacist march in Charlottesville. This can only be interpreted as an effort to smear his detractors through guilt by spurious association. But people revere party and politics above principles. Police obey the political class who pays them, not the people who are extorted for that pay. Constitutions are just words on paper to such arrogant people, and those who seek political power always have a streak of tyranny in their soul. As at the federal level, the state constitution will be used to claim a veneer of legitimacy for any act of trespass, but will be set aside the moment the government finds its restraints inconvenient. The mask of the "public servant" is shed when the subjects show the slightest sign of resistance. We need a better solution, because the Constitutional experiment is an abject failure.
