So, as a native of the Old Dominion I have been watching this all unfold with confusion and horror, at least at first. The confusion comes from the fact that when you look at the statistics, Virginia is actually one of the safest states in the entire country, with a very low violent crime rate and no core areas where gun crime is a regular occurrence.
Further, something a lot of people do not realize is that historically, Virginia has been a VERY pro-gun state. Texas only recently became as pro-gun as Virginia historically has been, and no, I'm not even joking, Virginia has been both an unlicensed Open Carry and Shall-Issue conceal carry State since the 90s with very few limits on people's right to keep and bear arms. And while we have suffered two notable mass shootings in the last two decades, both, interestingly, happened in legally mandated gun free zones, rather than anywhere else in the State. Further, when you look at the laws being proposed, none would really have been able to prevent those shootings save, perhaps, the proposed Red Flag laws (assuming someone reported the perpetrators) but Red Flag Laws have a LOT of Constitutional issues beyond 2nd Amendment concerns.
But Virginia has also changed a LOT over the last thirty years. It has gone from a balanced rural / urban state where you had two core urban (Richmond and the Norfolk/VA Beach region) areas balanced against the rural west and suburban north, to three core urban areas (Northern Virginia turned from suburban to core urban) and a massive influx into that region of folks from outside the Commonwealth, often from New York or California, who were coming to work or contract with the Federal Government and chose to settle in Virginia since it had better schools, cheaper land, and lower taxes than either DC or Maryland.
This influx of course would change the makeup of Virginia's electorate, but that alone doesn't explain why Northam and the Democrats are going against gun rights so hard and so fast. At least, not under a normal understanding of politics.
However, there IS a model I think might well explain the aggressive push against gun rights in Virginia, but to understand why it may work we have to understand one more thing about Virginia and that is the cultural regions of the Commonwealth and how they have historically conflicted.
Going back to colonial history of Virginia there were two main waves of European colonists who settled in what would become the Colony, and later Commonwealth, of Virginia. The first wave, that settled Jamestown and made up the core of the Tidewater and Center of the State were English, Anglican and frequently second or later sons of nobility and aristocrats who would not inherent in England and so had to make their own way. They brought with them a strong sense of British Aristocracy, to the point where there was an informal Virginia Aristocracy for hundreds of years known as the "First Families of Virginia". Some of these names you'd immediately recognize: the Washington, Curtis, and Lee families all were members of this aristocratic elite. These ties of aristocracy also were a core reason why in the English Civil War Virginia sided with the Crown, rather than with Cornwall, thus earning the nickname of "The Old Dominion" and why, for instance, the University of Virginia names its team the "Cavaliers".
That aristocratic core of Virginia is also who set up the government of Virginia and held control of it for pretty much until the Civil War. It naturally sees itself as having the right to rule, but the question is, the right to rule over who?
Thus we come to the second major wave of immigration to Virginia. Coming later, these folks mainly settled into the Shenandoah Valley and along the Appalachian Mountains. They did not come from England, like the earlier colonists did, but rather from Ireland and Scotland. They tended to be NOT Anglican (often Presbyterian or Methodist or other such Christians) and were coming to America to escape bad economic and social times in the British Isles. And yes, they ALSO brought their hostility and skepticism to English aristocrats with them, as well as their fierce desire for independence and to be left alone by the government to live their lives as they saw fit.
For the most part, though, the conflicts in Virginia between these two were subdued. One couldn't easily enforce Richmond's demands on the Appalachians before the late 20th century, as the Appalachians are big, communities are insular, and your agents could just... disappear. Not even the Federal government could really bring the Appalachians to heel, even though they desperately tried in the 1920s under Prohibition. But that's not to say the Appalachian regions thrived, in fact, they were the poorest region of the United States historically, owing to the fact that they were frequently denied the value of their own natural resources and the resource extraction corporations frequently abused and oppressed them.
If there is one group of people to whom the phrase "I'm from the government and I'm here to help" is not just laughable, but a THREAT, it's the Appalachians. The Federal and State government almost always found new and creative ways to screw them over, from siding with and enabling abusive corporations to prohibition to the general mocking and dehumanizing of folks from Appalachia in media that, if done to any non-white minority group, would have long ago been systemically called out and condemned.
But Appalachia persevered, and in some ways, even expanded its influence. The Appalachian ideal of government staying the fuck out of their business, strong identity with guns, and focus on family and faith were all embraced by the American Conservative movement of starting the late 70s and culminating in the 90s. Further, culturally Appalachia contributed significantly to American culture: Country Music, as a genre, was born in Appalachia and is directly descended from Appalachian folk music and continues to spread it's ideals through the heartland of America. NASCAR and the entire fame and money of Stock Car racing all originated from the Appalachian Moonshiners under Prohibition and still bears a lot of the influence of that origin. In some ways, the Appalachian culture has had a greater influence on American culture than the Tidewater of Virginia ever had.
Further, one thing that has also built resentment within the subconscious tidewater psyche is the fact that in the Great Question of the 19th Century, Appalachia was on the Right Side of History and they were not. Slavery was never popular in Appalachia. Not only was it not really economical due to the fact the plantation system didn't really work in the mountains, but also due to that Scott-Irish history of just having an innate cultural dislike of slavery. If you look at slave population desnity maps of the Old South pre0Civil War, you will see a inverse relationship between the number of slaves and the proximity to the mountains. Further, the most Appalachian of Appalachian region of the United States, the north-westernmost counties of Virginia, not only voted against Virginia secession but went a step further, and ceded from Virginia because of the large cultural disconnect, becoming the State we now know as West Virginia.
Yet, consider this, who is considered the "backwards" ones today? Who are the ones who are demeaned as "racists"? The elites of Virginia from the Tidewater? Or the folk of Appalachia?
So, now we've set up this long simmering conflict. Appalachia in the 20th century arguably eclipsed the Tidewater of Virginia as the most influential on America and even though it was still sparsely populated and never really ruled in Richmond, it's influence still echoed. Rural culture in the United States is HEAVILY influenced by Appalachian culture, the heroes of Appalachia are the heroes of the Frontier. One of the most highly decorated soldiers of WW1... was an Appalachian by the name of Alvin York. A core part of the Appalachian culture IS the gun. It was the way many an Appalachian family kept itself fed in hard times. It was the way the Appalachians tried to resist oppression. It was entertainment when bored and overall a core part of the soul of the Appalachians.
Thus this all brings us back around to my theory on why the hard push against gun rights in Virginia. It's not about preventing violence or saving lives. As I noted, Virginia already is one of the safest states in the Union. No, rather, as the makeup of Virginia has shifted and more Yankees and those who did not grow up within the influence of Appalachian culture come to the State, they find they despise the Appalachian culture. After all, in most media it's shown to be racist, sexist, and homophobic. It's religiously backwards with "snake handling" and they cling to their guns and refuse to vote "in their own best interests" (oh, it should be noted that up until the late 20th century the Appalachians were a stronghold of Democrats due to the Unions, but as the Democrats became more and more influenced by Urban elitism and Tidewater sensibilities, the Appalachians abandoned them so there is also a sense among the Dems that the Appalachians are, effectively, traitors).
This culture cannot be tolerated in the new, enlightened America. Bigoted cultures must be weeded out and purged. However, you cannot really attack the Appalachians economically, they are already poor. You cannot attack them culturally, they've ALWAYS been under cultural siege and are already marginalized heavily and it hasn't been working. However there is one strong symbol of Appalachia that CAN be attacked and destroyed: the gun.
Thus these laws. This is about seeking to destroy and subjugate the Appalachian culture and it's influence in America. It is a form of colonialism, outsiders coming into a region and enforcing their own ideals on the natives because they know better and want to ensure the natives a subjugated. Given the long antipathy elite culture in the US has shown to Appalachia, if you want to go to the extreme, you could even argue that this is about the genocide of the Appalachian culture. They seek to attack it by attacking one of the great symbols of Appalachia, they seek to subjugate and punish it for their abandonment of the Democrats. It is yet another chapter in the long feud between Tidewater and Appalachia and represents the Tidewater breaking the quite truce in Virginia that had kept the State together and peaceful.
www.foxnews.com
bearingarms.com
