Va 7th Congressional District Candidate, Spanberger, Wants Universal Background Check

Wherever you look, Bloomberg’s fingerprints are all over these attempts to pass “universal” background checks.
Wherever you look, Bloomberg’s fingerprints are all over these attempts to pass “universal” background checks.

Virginia – -( Candidate Abigale Spangerger, who is running against Dave Brat, has stated on her website that she wants to ban “assault weapons” and “high capacity” magazines, and that she supports “guilty until proven innocent” red-flag laws to take away someone's gun without due process.

Now she's talking about eliminating the non-existent “gun show loophole” and supporting universal background checks. She also seems to think that the police not responding immediately during the Parkland, Florida school shooting was acceptable!

Member Mark Hile sent me this, which includes a link to a video on Brat and Spanberger debating gun rights:

I was in attendance at the Brat/Spanberger debate and Spanberger implied that there is a gun show loophole in one of her responses. She also did not seem to think that the Law Enforcement Officer at the Parkland shooting should have gone into the school to stop the shooting. Wonder if she would think differently if her own children were in that school?

I will provide the quotes, but anyone can look up the quotes in the transcript on C-SPAN, I will provide the link at the bottom.

Here is the quote though,

“Three out of four dues-paying NRA members believe that background checks should be in place for all firearm purchase, applying the same standard that exists if you go to a federally point of sale as if you buy at a gun if you buy at a gun show. That is a first step forward.”

I bet she has never purchased a firearm herself, my guess is that she has just been assigned one as a Law Enforcement Officer and CIA Agent. Therefore she does not know about the process of purchasing a firearm. I bet she is just taking for granted what Moms Demand Action tell her, and does not do her own research or reach out to someone on the other side of the issue to better inform her.

Here is the other quote about the Parkland School shooting,

“The discussion I would like to address related to the gun violence. One there was an armed officer at parkland. He did not make entry on the building. He did not attempt to stop the shooter which I do not blame him for, but when we talk about hardening our schools it's necessary to reflect that was the case.”

I guess she would agree with the Obama administration's suggestions that Law Enforcement Officers not go into the schools to stop the shooting, but I sure bet she would think differently if it were her children in the school.

Here is the link to C-SPAN, you can do a search for the word gun to find the quotes faster and then listen to them if you want.

Virginia Citizens Defense LeagueAbout Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc. (VCDL):

Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc. (VCDL). VCDL is an all-volunteer, non-partisan grassroots organization dedicated to defending the human rights of all Virginians. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms is a fundamental human right.

For more information, visit:

  • 10 thoughts on “Va 7th Congressional District Candidate, Spanberger, Wants Universal Background Check

    1. let me explain what all this so called gun control is all about.
      this has been PLANNED FOR DECADES, and with the election of President Trump they have come out like the COCKROACHES THEY ARE INTO THE LIGHT, because he and US WHO VOTED FOR HIM HAVE UPSET THEIR PLANS. FOR NOW ANYWAY.

    2. I live in the 7th. I will be voting for Spanberger. There been no discussion on reducing school shootings. That was her point and she was brave enough to take a position. More years of doing nothing but praying is unacceptable.

      Dave Brat has been supportive of the Virginia Citizens Defense League whose president has supported arming four year olds in kindergarten with stuffed animal covered assault weapons. He also met with them on Martin Luther King day with Corey Stewart who openly campaigns with the KKK.

      Please do continue to fight for gun rights, but here in the 7th, Dave Brat and VCDL, these folks have gone completely bonkers.

      1. @ Charles, what do you want, a medal or a chest to pin it on. Why do you bother to type on this site other than start something. I notice others didn’t bite but I did. That’s ok I will call you a troll and maybe you are a bloomturd paid troll trying to make a few bucks. All the democrat freebees probably sound good to you.

      2. The right of decent private citizens to personally possess, transport, and responsibly use arms without government interference is the ultimate freedom and the main pillar supporting all other liberties. Few cultures have allowed their general population access to weapons, the tools of power, to the same degree as the United States. Instead, most societies have restricted the keeping and bearing of arms to a select few power brokers and their agents, often resulting in oppression on a grand scale.
        Despite a massive amount of historical evidence to the contrary, there is a substantial body of Americans, many occupying positions of influence, who contend that the abrogation of the Second Amendment is the quickest path to domestic tranquility. Since this is as absurd as advocating blood-letting as a cure for anemia, it would seem advisable to question the motives and mentalities of the gun control advocates themselves.
        In my observation, weapon prohibitionists can be broken down into seven major categories. Even though their motives may vary they all pose a mortal threat to liberty.

        Many of those in favor of oppressive firearms legislation are best classed as elitists. Elitists frequently identify with a peer group based on wealth, power, rank, social status, occupation, education, ethnic group, etc. and perceive themselves and their peers as inherently superior to and more responsible than the “common people”, thus more deserving of certain rights. Since elitists practically consider those outside their class or caste as members of another species, that most anti-elitist list of laws, the Bill of Rights is viewed by them as anathema. Naturally, the Second Amendment is their first target as it serves as the supporting structure for other nine amendments.

        Another type of individual who favors the restriction of private gun ownership is the authoritarian. Authoritarian personalities are characterized by their belief in unquestioning obedience to an authority figure or group and a disdain for individual freedom of action, expression, and judgement. Those with authoritarian personalities function well in symbiosis with elitists occupying positions of power. Because authoritarians repress their desires for autonomy they harbor a deep resentment toward free and independent thinkers. Of course, authoritarians do not want firearms in the hands of the general population as this constitutes a major obstacle to fulfilling their pathological and obsessive desire to control people.

        It goes without saying that career criminals would like to see the public disarmed for obvious reasons. A well-armed population makes crimes such as assault, robbery, and burglary hazardous for the perpetrator and this is bad for “business.” Also, even non-violent or “white collar” criminals live in constant fear of retribution from the public that they financially bleed and would therefore prefer that the public be disarmed. Evidence supporting this hypothesis can be gathered by studying the Second Amendment voting records of those legislators who have been convicted of willful misconduct.

        Cowards are easily or excessively frightened by things and situations that are recognized as dangerous, difficult, or painful. It therefore stands to reason that the mere thought of guns and the circumstances in which they are employed causes them abnormal amounts of stress. Rather than admit their weakness to themselves or others, some fearful types jump on the anti-gun bandwagon and purport moral superiority to those “barbaric” enough to employ lethal force against armed assailants by claiming various humanitarian and pragmatic motives for allowing evil to remain unchecked. Many of these individuals harbor an envy induced resentment toward anyone with the means, skill, and will to successfully stand up to criminal aggression.
        The desire to assert oneself exists in nearly everyone, wimps included, so cowards seek out tame enemies against whom they can ply their pitiful brand of machismo. Instead of the sociopaths who commit acts of wanton aggression with guns, guns themselves and responsible gun owners are the main targets of their attacks. After all, real criminals are dangerous, so cowards prefer doing battle with inanimate objects that do not have a will of their own and decent law-abiding people whose high level of integrity and self-discipline prevent them from physically lashing out against mere verbal assailants, however obnoxious they may be.

        Ideological chameleons follow the simple social strategy of avoiding controversy and confrontation by espousing the beliefs of the people in their immediate vicinity or advocating the philosophy of those who scream the loudest in a debate. Quite a few supposedly pro Second Amendment public officials have shown themselves to be ideological chameleons when they supported restrictions on the private possession of military style semiautomatic rifles following recent atrocities in which such firearms were employed. Like their reptilian namesake, people who merely blend in with the ambient philosophical foliage seem to have little insight into the moral and social ramifications of their actions. Political and/or economic gain along with avoidance of confrontation are their only goals.

        Security monopolists are those members and representatives of public and private security providing concerns who want the means of self-protection out of private hands so that they can command high fees for protecting the citizenry against the rising tide of crime. These profiteers stand to lose a great deal of capital if citizens can efficiently defend themselves. To the security monopolist, each criminal who enters and exits the revolving door of justice is a renewable source of revenue providing jobs for police, social workers, victim counsellors, judges, prison employees, security guards, burglar alarm installers, locksmiths, and others employed by the security monopolies or their satellite organizations. No wonder it is so common for an honest citizen to be more ruthlessly hounded by the authorities when he shoots a criminal in self-defense than a criminal who shoots honest citizens.

        Just as a limb will weaken and atrophy if not used, so will aspects of the mind fail to develop if nothing in one’s environment exists to challenge them. People who have led excessively sheltered lives tend to have a difficult time understanding certain cause and effect relationships and an even harder time appreciating just how cruel the world can be. These dysfunction ally unworldly types are truly perplexed at the very notion of firearms ownership regarding defense. To them, tyranny and crime are things that happen in other places far removed from their “civilized” universe. Also, they do not understand the value of private property and why some people would fight for theirs since they never had to work hard to acquire what they possess. While those suffering from dysfunctional unworldliness are most often people who have been born into considerable wealth, this condition is also common in members of the clergy, academicians, practioners of the arts, and others who have spent much of their lives cloistered in a safe and pampering environment. While many of these people may be quite talented and intelligent in some ways, their extreme naivety makes them easy prey for the tyrants who use them for the financial support and favorable advertisement of their regimes. The anti-gun movement is well represented and financed by the dysfunction ally unworldly.
        The price of liberty is eternal vigilance, and it behooves all vigilant lovers of liberty to know and be able to recognize the various types of arms prohibitionists and understand their differing but equally dangerous motives. Acquiring knowledge of one’s foes is the first step toward defeating them. We must never forget that a threat to private firearms ownership is a threat to all freedoms.
        The inalienable and fundamental right to keep and bear arms which is enumerated by (but predates) the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is not about hunting, gun collecting, or target shooting. Its purpose is to ensure that every responsible American personally possesses the means to defend the Republic from all forms of tyranny, within and without. It is what permits the other nine Amendments in the Bill of Rights to be more than mere hollow phrases on a piece of paper. Its free exercise is the antithesis of serfdom and the only meaningful form of holocaust insurance known to man.
        We must never insult and degrade the spirits of our Founding Fathers by permitting the Second Amendment, the pillar of freedom, to be destroyed by the cold flame of legislative ink.

      3. Charles, where in any statement or policy of the VCDL has the president of the VCDL ever supported such nonsense? What you are referencing is what Cohen said, not van Cleave. Also, in the video there were no “assault weapons” covered by stuffed toys, but plastic toys covered by stuffed animals. The segment was a joke and van Cleave was playing along, as clearly evidenced in the video. Also in that video, Cohen selectively edited the questions and answers to make it appear van Cleave supported or said certain things that he, and the VCDL, do not support nor advocate for – proof of which is easily found on their website. Any normal, reasonable, mature adult would investigate the facts to arrive at a better understanding. The Cohen video was not meant to inform, but to ridicule and denigrate individuals that have different views than his. That should point you toward the reality, but remain a mushroom if you wish to continue consuming the same nutrients in the same form.

        The national holiday is not named after the father of the civil rights icon, but after that civil rights leader, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Failure to get even basic facts correct just further diminishes your invalid views and worthiness of someone worth debating. Dr. King, as an NRA member believed in the RKBA. We all are guaranteed, by both the Federal 2A and the Virginia Constitution, the RKBA. Your not liking that is irrelevant.

        Based on the content, context, lack of facts, and your writing style, it appears that it is you that is “bonkers”, not the law-biding citizens you are addressing here with your post.

    3. What we really need are background checks, mental checks, fact checks, IQ checks on the assholes( maybe check that too) that run for public office

      1. @grim, not a bad idea. Persons elected to public office need all of those checks because they wield more power and have wider effect than any single individual with a firearm.

    4. I live in Virginia and I promise I will not be voting for this IDIOT LIBTARD and a puppet of Bloomberg

      1. I often long for the reality of the Virginia State Flag, “Sic Semper Tyrannis” to be reinstated as it was when my ancestors gave their lives in the Army of Northern Virginia. BTW they were not slave owners. Their land was invaded.

      2. John, it is a tight race, but if we all get out and vote, we will still have our rights after the votes are counted. It is shameful and pathetic that a former federal LEO does not believe in private citizens’ ownership of firearms and that she would knowingly lie about the “gun show loophole”. Her firearm ownership is protected under the LEOSA law, more commonly known to LEOs as HR 218. All “gun control” laws are unconstitutional, not just based on the federal 2A, but also by our Virginia Constitution under Section 13. We need to keep reminding our politicians of our rights and demand that they read and understand our constitutions, federal and state, and uphold our rights.

        Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia
        Section 13. Militia; standing armies; military subordinate to civil power.
        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.

    Comments are closed.