Former Green Beret and politician Nick Freitas is warning that Virginia’s newly signed assault weapons ban is not just a state-level fight, but a preview of what he believes Democrats would try to do nationally if given the chance.
In a new episode of Making The Argument, Freitas said Virginia Democrats have passed a law that bans the future sale, manufacture, purchase, transfer, and import of certain firearms and magazines, while allowing current owners to keep covered firearms they already possess. The law was approved by Gov. Abigail Spanberger in May and is set to take effect July 1, according to recent reporting on the legislation.
Freitas’ central complaint is not only that the law restricts certain guns, but that the language is broad, technical, and in his view, deliberately confusing.
“This is something they’ve been wanting to do for a long time,” Freitas said, arguing that Virginia is now being used as a “template for the rest of the country.”
Freitas Says The Ban Is Broader Than People Realize
Freitas began by pushing back on the idea that the law is not serious because it does not immediately send officers into homes to confiscate rifles.
He said that is not what Virginia lawmakers did.
Instead, as Freitas described it, they targeted the manufacture, sale, purchase, transfer, import, and potentially, in some readings, transport of certain firearms that fall under the state’s definition of “assault firearms.”
That distinction matters. A law does not have to begin with mass confiscation to change how people can use, sell, move, or pass down property they already own.
Freitas said Gov. Spanberger has suggested Virginians can keep rifles they already own, but he argued that grandfathering is not the same as freedom if the firearm becomes something that can sit only in a safe.
The Associated Press reported that the new Virginia restrictions ban the sale, transfer, manufacture, and import of certain semi-automatic firearms categorized as assault firearms, while possession is not criminalized. Gun-rights groups have already filed lawsuits challenging the law.
The Fight Over Cosmetic Features
Freitas leaned heavily on his background as a former weapons sergeant in U.S. Army Special Forces, also known as the Green Berets, to argue that the law focuses too much on external features.
He said the public often hears “assault weapon” and imagines something like a belt-fed machine gun. But under Virginia’s definition, he argued, ordinary semi-automatic rifles can fall into the banned category if they accept detachable magazines and have certain features.
Freitas pointed to items such as collapsible stocks, thumbhole stocks, pistol grips, forward grips, threaded barrels, flash suppressors, compensators, and similar attachments.
He mocked the idea that adding an adjustable stock or forward grip suddenly changes the nature of a rifle.
In his words, a rifle does not “load itself and start assaulting people” because a person added a feature that may help with comfort, control, or safe handling.
This is one of the stronger parts of Freitas’ argument, whether a reader agrees with him or not. Laws that depend on lists of features can easily sound precise on paper while creating confusion for ordinary owners who are trying to understand what is legal.
Magazines, Pistols, And Shotguns
Freitas also said the new law reaches beyond rifles.
He argued that the legislation affects magazines over 15 rounds and includes provisions for certain semi-automatic pistols and shotguns. According to the official Virginia bill summary, HB 217 and SB 749 create penalties for importing, selling, manufacturing, purchasing, or transferring assault firearms as defined by the bill.
Freitas said that earlier Democratic proposals had targeted magazines above 10 rounds, which he argued would have included many common pistol magazines. This version, he said, moved the line to 15 rounds, but still affects a large number of magazines owned by Virginians.
He also criticized the way the law treats firearms with features such as pistol grips or braces, saying those features do not automatically make a firearm more dangerous.
Freitas said the penalties are severe enough to matter deeply for ordinary gun owners. He argued that a violation could bring a Class 1 misdemeanor, possible jail time, a fine, and a firearm prohibition period.
That is where the law becomes more than a policy debate. If an owner misunderstands what can be transferred, purchased, or transported, Freitas said, the consequences could be life-changing.
Legal Challenges Are Already Underway
Freitas praised gun-rights organizations that are challenging the law, including the NRA, Gun Owners of America, and the Virginia Citizens Defense League.
He said those groups are taking the fight into both federal and state court, arguing under the Second Amendment and Virginia’s own constitutional protections.
The Associated Press reported that lawsuits were filed shortly after Spanberger signed the legislation, including a federal challenge brought by the NRA and other groups. The report also noted that the U.S. Department of Justice opposed the law before it was signed.
Freitas acknowledged that similar laws have survived in some courts, including the Fourth Circuit, which covers Virginia. But he argued those rulings rely on what he sees as a flawed idea: that “military-style weapons” are not suited for self-defense.
He said that phrase makes little sense to him as a former infantryman and Green Beret.
Freitas argued that many weapons historically owned by civilians were also military-style weapons in their era, including muskets and rifles familiar to the Founding generation. He said the Second Amendment was written to protect a broad principle, not only the specific technology available in the 1790s.
A Debate Over Crime And Public Safety
Freitas spent much of the episode arguing that the law will not solve violent crime because, in his view, it targets lawful gun owners instead of criminals.
He cited defensive gun use estimates and argued that firearms are used many times each year by private citizens to prevent themselves from becoming victims.
He also pointed to crime concentration data and FBI statistics, saying that handguns account for a much larger share of gun homicides than rifles. Freitas’ point was that if lawmakers claim to be addressing gun violence, a ban focused on rifles is, in his view, aimed at the wrong category.
He then moved into a broader political attack on Democratic prosecutors and officials, arguing that many high-crime cities are run by Democrats and that gun control is being used as a substitute for tougher prosecution of violent offenders.
This is where Freitas’ commentary becomes clearly partisan. Still, the core question he raises is one that every gun policy debate eventually has to confront: whether restrictions on lawful ownership actually reduce violence, or whether they mostly burden people who were not committing crimes in the first place.
Freitas Warns This Is Only The Beginning
Freitas said his biggest fear is that Virginia’s law is not the endpoint.
“This assault weapons ban is not the end of it in Virginia,” he said. “It’s the beginning.”
He warned that if Democrats gain more power nationally, especially over the courts, they could try to pass similar laws across the country or push even further.
Freitas urged gun owners to support organizations fighting the law, pressure lawmakers, and educate people who may not understand firearms. He specifically encouraged gun owners to take unfamiliar friends or neighbors to the range, arguing that fear often fades once people learn how firearms actually work.
That final point is more practical than much of the political fire in the episode. Freitas is not just warning people to be angry. He is telling them to organize, explain, teach, and stay involved.
The debate over Virginia’s new law is now headed into court, where judges will decide how far the state can go in restricting future sales and transfers of certain firearms.
But Freitas’ warning is aimed beyond the courtroom.
To him, Virginia is not just passing a gun law. It is testing a model. And he believes that if it survives, the same approach could show up far beyond the Commonwealth.
Raised in a small Arizona town, Kevin grew up surrounded by rugged desert landscapes and a family of hunters. His background in competitive shooting and firearms training has made him an authority on self-defense and gun safety. A certified firearms instructor, Kevin teaches others how to properly handle and maintain their weapons, whether for hunting, home defense, or survival situations. His writing focuses on responsible gun ownership, marksmanship, and the role of firearms in personal preparedness.
