Virginia to Outlaw Martial Arts Instruction

Unreal…

Insane it’s being proposed but I doubt it’ll pass at the state. If it does, I doubt it’ll be upheld by the supreme Court when challenged. It’s a direct violation of the right to assembly. The 3rd clause in the draft linked basically outlaws any type of reenactment as well… Won’t pass. The people of Virginia really screwed the pooch though giving the Dems control of essentially all facets of their government

5 Likes

Considering Colorado finally abolished slavery last year, there have certainly been crazier laws on the books.

2 Likes

It reminds me of a lot of the bullshit in the “Patriot” act, in that they will claim that if you’re innocent you have nothing to worry about.

“This isn’t about you” they’ll say. “You can still go to your Krav Maga classes or whatever. We’re only going to use this against the White Supremacists.” Sure. Except once they have the power they can decide what constitutes civil disorder.

It’s extremely creepy. I live in Virginia and this is the first I’ve heard of it.

3 Likes

There’s a lot of creepy shit going on in Virginia. We’re the epicenter of creepy. Our cunt of a Governor passed a law allowing sex offenders to stay in disaster shelters. So if your family gets displaced by a tornado or flood, and you have to go to a shelter you have to worry about your children getting raped if say, you let them go to the bathroom unattended. Isn’t that nice?

Not a real law. Not a real article. Northam is an idiot and is crazy, but “truly insane Democrats that support infanticide and child murder” is how I immediately knew I could google this and it’d only exist on crazy right wing websites.

7 Likes

I suspected as much, so I read the wording of the law myself, and am troubled by the “civil disorder” language. Technically all you need for civil disorder is a crowd, which could be at a political rally or a sporting event.

So no, I don’t expect them to go around shutting down dojos, but the law is too vague and allows too much discretion.

hence why it won’t pass. Even if it would somehow, as written, it would not stand up to scrutiny of higher courts once challenged…

I would take Snopes word with a grain of salt:

I wonder what the intent of such an amendment is :thinking:

Hmmm

It seems to me the intent is to target firearm instructors for liable after a shooting much the way the recent SCOTUS (think it was SCOTUS) ruled manufacturers can be sued when their product is used in a shooting. I think the impact this could have on martial arts instructors is more than likely unintended, but still relevant based on the language used in sections 1 and 2.

1 Like

I agree. Any instructor could be held liable for the future actions of their students. I think it’s likely to pass, in the wake of the tragedy in Charlottesville.

There is a problem, or, a bad thing happened! and some people’s mindset is always that the “Government needs to do something!” Which always translates into the government getting more power and more of our money.

1 Like

It’d be nice if Virginia could either join West Virginia, or give the suburbs of D.C. to D.C.

…based off of the amendment itself, the article is everything it advertises itself as - clickbait, incendiary nonsense based off of a possible interpretation of a fairly redundant amendment to an existing law. No one is closing down any martial arts institutions. They’re everywhere in Richmond, where I’m at. This has more to do with Charlottesville than anything else.

Edit: also, I’m aware that snopes is not some infallible truth-beacon. But if you read their analysis of this article, it’s straightforward and accurate. Furthermore, snopes wouldn’t even exist if articles like this weren’t disseminated as fact without even a second to check if they’re remotely accurate or not. This is why I got off of all social media a few years ago - I got too tired of asking people if they had done any research before spreading stuff. Everyone’s just reading radical news sites that reinforce their prejudices and make them angry.

Seems like a very poorly worded law.

They should be outlawing butt scooting, donkey guard and camping out in turtle. They should also outlaw teaching self defense if you can’t defend yourself. Belt farms should be punishable by imprisonment and hard labor.

When Jiu Jitsu is outlawed only outlaws will know Jiu Jitsu.

8 Likes

Badass.

1 Like

Thinking about it, do they want fight clubs? Because this is how you get fight clubs

7 Likes

Right, but that’s the problem imo. They “snoped” the article, but didn’t bother to address the actual amendment (I only scrolled through it, maybe they did), which like I said to @Uncle_Gabby could very well unintentionally shut down martial arts schools through litigation. Is that outcome likely? Probably not, but, imo, the amendment needs to be more concise. I’m not a fan of ambiguity in law.

2 Likes

I saw the name “Daily Mail” in the title and immediately assumed it to be utter bullshit. If I’m ever in doubt over what I believe on a subject, I consult the Daily Mail and immediately go in the exact opposite direction.

And before people start pulling out the rare examples of the Daily Mail being right: yes, there is a big element of hyperbole being used here.

Lol, ya… I trust exactly zero news sources at this point. I go to the source as often as I can or just move along.

2 Likes

It facially violates the First Amendment guarantees of freedom of speech and assembly.

The problem with these kind of laws is they will be selectively enforced and are very subjective. For example, this should be applied to Antifa terrorist groups, but never will be, because they make up the base of the Democrat party. They will, however, use it against (admittedly misguided) 2nd Amendment Zealots who stupidly march with rifles – because someone along he parade route will be “intimidated” (a snowflake legal standard if I ever saw one).

2 Likes