Then why are you suggesting capitulation, instead of vehement resistance to passage, if you are advocating ignoring the laws anyway?
I'm not suggesting capitulation. I'm all for "vehement resistance," but I'm also trying to be realistic as to the prospects. We need to think about our next moves as this thing moves through the legislature, as well as what we do, collectively and individually, if it passes.
Second, registration of grandfathered "assault weapons" is not necessarily the same thing as confiscation -- but it would make confiscation a lot easier, so is not desirable. Grandfathering leave us on the intellectually spongy ground where we are saying, hey, this device is legal for anyone who had one last year, but anyone who had one in another state last year and just moved to Virginia, or anyone who just turned 21 here in Virginia, somehow isn't allowed to have one now. Why is that new person different, in terms of rights, from the grandfathered person? In practical terms, I guess I am making the hard choice of passive grandfathering being the best possible outcome in the current situation.
This is where it gets interesting. The fight is going to be about grandfathering and registration, and the exact meaning of each of these terms. Of course, the best outcome would be to have
no AWB at all, but if it comes, the least harmful version would include grandfathering of existing weapons (and those to be acquired before July 1st). Then, the question would be grandfathering
with registration, or grandfathering
without registration. Obviously
without registration would be preferable.
The governor is now, apparently, proposing a registration scheme as the price for agreeing to grandfathering. On its face, the
sole purpose of this registration scheme would be to facilitate a later confiscation (or "buyback," etc.). Nothing else would be linked to it. You would register, and I suppose that would let you use your guns in public, whereas unregistered guns would be relegated to the underground.
Let's look at registration under the NFA of 1934. Initial registration of machine guns, etc., was free, but thereafter it was linked to subsequent transfers, which would be regulated and taxed. There was no freeze on new machine guns until 1986. We have seen what has happened to the "transferable" machine gun market after 1986. (Prices have soared.)
The governor's plan includes a flat ban on sales and transfers of AWs. Therefore, presumably, registered guns would be forfeited upon the deaths of their owners. (That's assuming that confiscation is not enacted in the interim.)
There has to be an incentive to get people to register. Suppose, for example, that there's a carve-out from the ban on sales and transfers for AWs that are registered. This would make them far more valuable than ones that are unregistered.
The mechanics of registration would also be an issue. Virginia currently has registration of machine guns with the State Police (under the Uniform Machine Gun Act). That could be expanded to cover AWs, rather than create a whole new bureaucracy. But the additional staffing of the State Police would cost. Would a fee be levied for registrations? That would go against the idea of making registration as easy as possible.
These are all things to think about.