First of all, I can’t believe I’m sharing this from former VA Del. Tim Anderson, a conservative and pro-gun (100% rating from the Virginia Citizens Defense League; also congratulated by the NRA in 2021 as one of several “pro-gun candidates” in Virginia they supported in 2021) Republican all the way. So why I’m sharing it? Because Anderson demonstrates what it’s like for a conservative, pro-gun, anti-tyrannical-government Republican to actually stand by their principles, not just do so when it’s politically advantageous for them to do so.
So…kudos to former Del. Anderson (R-VA Beach), who correctly points out the following (note: I’d argue there’s a lot of question about what the Second Amendment was intended to accomplish, and I’m not on the same page with Anderson about it being put into the constitution primarily as “a structural check on government power — a safeguard against a government that might one day turn its weapons on its own people”; other than that, though, I think Anderson’s being internally consistent, unlike the vast majority of his fellow Republicans):
- “Director Patel – yes you can bring a firearm to a protest. Your comments are disgusting and quite worthy of public condemnation. Your words are disqualifying to be the Director of the FBI.”
- “…the federal government now employs more armed law-enforcement officers than the total number of active-duty U.S. Marines.”
- “Against that backdrop, senior federal officials like Kristi Noem and Kash Patel have publicly suggested that people who possess firearms are inherently ‘dangerous’ or cannot be ‘peaceful.’ That framing is not only wrong — it is constitutionally upside down.”
- “Under the Fourth Amendment, deadly force is justified only by imminent threat, not lawful gun ownership. Treating the exercise of a constitutional right as evidence of violence flips the burden from the government to the citizen. That inversion — an armed state, paired with officials who view armed citizens as suspect — is the very condition the Second Amendment was meant to prevent. When the government amasses force and then declares that the people’s possession of arms makes them dangerous, that is not public safety. This shows the inherent tyrannical nature of government.”
Again, I’d argue that government doesn’t have an “inherent tyrannical nature,” but I DO agree with most of what Anderson says, and also find it admirable that: a) he’s being internally consistent, unlike so many other Republicans and conservatives; b) he’s actually saying this stuff publicly, while most Virginia Republicans have been silent since Alex Pretti’s muder on Saturday in Minneapolis.
