The Virginia House of Delegates approved eight gun control bills on Thursday afternoon, including a ban on the manufacture, sale, and possession of “assault firearms” and ammunition magazines that can hold more than ten rounds.
🗞️JUST IN: Virginia House Democrats pass common-sense gun safety legislation to SAVE LIVES pic.twitter.com/MLmNsznXjW
— VA House Democrats (@VAHouseDems) February 5, 2026
Bills banning the sale of commonly owned arms, expanding “gun-free zones,” and imposing storage requirements that will make it nearly impossible to easily access a firearm for self-defense aren’t common sense, nor are they about saving lives. These bills are designed to make it more expensive, more difficult, and more legally dangerous to exercise a fundamental rigiht.
The gun and magazine bill passed by the House is substantially different than the current Senate version, though, which means the bills could end up in a conference committee if the Senate doesn’t further amend SB 749 to mirror HB 217.
Virginia state Sen. Saddam Salim’s bill banning the sale and transfer of so-called assault firearms and a ban on the sale, transfer, and possession of “large capacity ammunition feeding devices” underwent some significant changes in the Senate Finance and Appropriations committee earlier this week..
The biggest change is that SB 749, for the moment anyway, no longer contains a ban on “large capacity ammunition feeding devices” at all. Under the current language magazine size would not be restricted, which means that unlike the previous version of the bill, existing owners would not be risking a criminal charge for keeping ahold of the magazines they lawfully purchased.
Another change to SB 749 is that it defines an “assault firearm”, in part, as any semi-automatic center-fire rifle with a fixed magazine capacity greater than 15 rounds, as opposed to the ten-round limit in the original legislation.
Semi-automatic center-fire rifles with the ability to accept a detachable magazine would still be considered “assault firearms” if they possess one or more of the following features:
(i) a folding, telescoping, or collapsible stock; (ii) a thumbhole stock or a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the rifle; (iii) a second handgrip or a protruding grip that can be held by the non-trigger hand; (iv) a grenade launcher; or (v) a threaded barrel capable of accepting (a) a sound suppressor, (b) a flash suppressor, (c) a muzzle brake, or (d) a muzzle compensator
Salim had indicated that his bill would undergo further revisions when it was passed by the Senate Courts of Justice committee, but I anticipated that those changes would be made to bring in line with the House bill prohibiting the sale and transfer of “assault firearms” and magazines over ten rounds.
***UPDATE****
Shortly after writing this, the Virginia Legislative Information Services website updated SB 749 with yet another amended version, and this one appears to bring it largely in line with what was approved by the House today. The magazine ban is back in, though it applies to magazines that can hold more than 15 rounds, not ten. And current owners are grandfathered in, as are current owners of “assault firearms.” Apologies for giving Virginia gun owners any false hope that the gun and magazine ban bill might be slightly less bad than we thought.
***Original post continues below***
Neither version is acceptable to Virginia Second Amendment supporters, nor are they compliant with the constitutional protection to the right to keep and bear arms. Prohibiting the sale and transfer of commonly owned arms is no better, legally speaking, than prohibiting their possession. The legislation would still prevent Virginians from accessing and owning the most popular rifles in the country unless they purchased those firearms before the ban took effect.
Democrats have also already tipped their hand by introducing legislation requiring existing owners of magazines that can hold more than ten rounds to destroy them, modify them, turn them over to police, or move them out of state if they want to avoid a potential 12 month jail sentence and a $2,500 fine. Sure, Sadim’s bill doesn’t contain that language at the moment, but there’s no reason why Democrats couldn’t enact that prohibition on possession next session or in conference committee… and they could easily do the same with possession of “assault firearms” as well.
Editor’s Note: Second Amendment advocates across the country are doing everything they can to protect our right to keep and bear arms.
Help us continue to report on their efforts, successes, and setbacks. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership.
Read the full article here
