Former Virginia Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax kills wife and then himself, police say

Virginia’s former Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax fatally shot his wife and himself inside their home overnight, according to local police.

Fairfax County Police Chief Kevin Davis said at a news conference Thursday morning that their teenage children were at the house in Annandale, Virginia, just outside of Washington, D.C., when the shootings occurred.

“Former Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax shot and killed his wife inside of their home and then shot and killed himself,” Davis said, adding that their older son called 911 just after midnight.

Davis described the incident as the result of a “domestic dispute surrounding what seems to be a complicated or messy divorce.”

Police are in the preliminary stage of the investigation, but Davis said that Fairfax was recently served paperwork indicating when he was scheduled to next appear in court for the ongoing divorce proceedings.

The former lieutenant governor, who was 47, served in the role from 2018 to 2022 under Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam.

In 2019, two women accused Fairfax of sexual assault years earlier, prompting Virginia Democrats to call for his resignation. Meredith Watson claimed Fairfax raped her in 2000 while they were students at Duke University. Vanessa Tyson accused Fairfax of forcing her to perform oral sex in 2004 when they attended the Democratic National Convention in Boston.

Fairfax denied the accusations, saying the encounters with the women were consensual. He said he would remain in office and called for an FBI investigation into the claims.

When he ran in the Democratic primary for governor in 2021, Fairfax, who was Black, said during the gubernatorial debate he was treated like George Floyd and Emmett Till when Democrats immediately called for his resignation after the women made the allegations.

The Curse Of The Gunnies strikes again.

California Democrat Eric Nuke’Em Swalwell resigned from Congress yesterday having been accused of sexual misconduct and was facing efforts to have him expelled.

1775-
General Gage begins preparations to send an expedition to Concord, Massachusetts to seize and destroy military supplies hidden in the town. He issues orders to the Boston Garrison to select 700 light infantrymen and grenadiers for the mission. Despite Gage’s effort to keep the expedition a secret, the movements of ships and troops are noticed by the patriot spies in Boston and reported to Joseph Warren, head of the Committee of Safety.

Elitist Chicago Doc: Average Citizens Don’t Need Armed Self-Defense Because the Poor ‘Don’t Benefit’ From Guns

Dr. Anthony Douglas, the smug University of Chicago trauma resident and arrogant mastermind behind Illinois’ Responsibility in Firearms Legislation (RIFL) Act, stepped up in a legislative hearing last week and belched up a heaping helping of elitist bile blended with a soupçon clinical detachment: “I think poor people don’t benefit from owning firearms,” he pronounced.

What the little people need, the good doctor says, is more “education and resources.” Translation: more tax dollars funneled to “non-profits” with little to no return on the taxpayers’ investment.

Besides, the physician and gun-control researcher claims it isn’t good guys or gals with guns who stop evil predators…all evidence to the contrary. As such, it really should be harder for the poors to get their hands on firearms to defend themselves and their families.

His solution, then, is pricing guns out of reach of law-abiding, responsible citizens who lack bodyguards, private security details, or live in gated enclaves. In Murder City, USA—Chicago—where gang thugs roam free, that’s not social policy, that’s sadistic malpractice.

Was this clown high? Does he have a full punchcard at the local dispensary? Because this delusional drivel sounds like it was baked in a dorm room cloud of weed.

Let’s drag his elitist fantasy out into the reality that is Chicago, the city that’s been mercilessly documented by Wirepoints.org through FOIA records from the Chicago Police Department itself.

High-priority 911 calls—Priority Level 1 and 2, the ones defined as “imminent threat to life, bodily injury, or major property damage”—are the exact emergencies Chicagoans face every day: shots fired, person shot, assault in progress, armed robbery, domestic battery. In 2019, before the progressive crime wave fully metastasized, 19% of those urgent calls had “no officers available” for immediate response.

By 2021, Wirepoints found that number had exploded to 52%—406,829 high-priority incidents in which dispatchers literally had zero cops to send. In 2022 it hit roughly 60%.

Through all of 2023, 56% of high-priority calls—437,000 of them—sat in backlog with no units available. Even in 2024, through mid-May, getting a response was still a coin-flip 50%: 127,000 out of 256,000 urgent calls in which nobody came.

That’s not “delayed,” that’s “we have no police available to send to you.”

Wirepoints documented thousands of “assaults in progress,” “batteries in progress,” “person with a gun,” and “shots fired” calls where callers were told to shelter in place while the city’s response system collapsed. In some districts, entire shifts passed with zero proactive patrol time because every available cop was already buried in backlogs that stretched 30 minutes, an hour, sometimes as long as four hours. Chicago’s own inspector general has long since confirmed the department can’t even log arrival times for huge chunks of emergency calls.

So Dr. Douglas’s prescription isn’t compassion, it’s pure, venomous elitist contempt. He (allegedly) stares at blood-soaked gurneys every shift, but still demands that we disarm the victims instead of the criminals—or fix the catastrophic policies that left over half of emergency calls with “no units available.” He wants to tax gun makers into oblivion so that self-defense becomes a rich man’s luxury that only hypocrites like him can afford.

Spare us the sanctimonious impacted fecal matter, Doctor. The poor in Chicago aren’t sipping lattes in faculty lounges debating “resources.” They’re barricading their doors and praying they make it to and from work safely and survive day to day while the failed system in which you have so much faith leaves them twisting in the wind.

They have and need the same constitutional right to armed self-defense that you take for granted from the comfort of your bubble. In the real Chicago, where cops aren’t available to show up half the time, that arrogance and contempt leaves innocent people to be victimized and slaughtered.

The Center Square has the full testimony. Read it and seethe . . .

A proposed bill gun owners say will price lower income buyers out of the market continues to get attention at the Illinois state capitol.

Opponents of House Bill 3320 estimate the Responsibility in Firearms Legislation, or RIFL Act could tack on thousands of dollars in taxes to one firearm purchase, and that would price lower income people out of exercising their Second Amendment rights.

Advocates for the bill, like Dr. Anthony Douglas, said there’d be minimal added cost.

“I think poor people don’t benefit from owning firearms,” Douglas said during a House Gun Violence Prevention Task Force subject matter hearing of the bill Wednesday. “I think more people benefit from access to education, access to resources.”

State Rep. Patrick Windhorst, R-Harrisburg, said that’s an elitist opinion and people of lesser means want to be able to protect themselves.

“The Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States guarantees that to them,” Windhorst said. “And it’s really not our place to say, ‘well, we think you’re better off not having this thing,’ which is the tone of this committee.”

BLUF
The Second Amendment’s purpose is to ensure that people can meaningfully defend their natural and unalienable rights, including the right to life. No policymaker can claim to take this protection seriously while, in practice, proudly limiting victims to a 3-inch knife in a gunfight.

Gun Control Advocates to Victims: Just Bring a Knife to the Gunfight.

Last month, at Old Dominion University in Norfolk, Va., a gunman opened fire in a classroom full of ROTC cadets. He killed the ROTC instructor and injured two others before several cadets subdued him — with one cadet using a knife to stab him to death.

To rational people, the shooting clearly evidenced the combined failure of gun control and soft-on-crime policies to protect innocent victims. The perpetrator, who’d been convicted of terrorism charges in 2016, was supposed to be serving an 11-year prison sentence but had been released early under a drug treatment program for which he was supposed to be ineligible. He’d then simply ignored the state’s laws regarding gun possession by felons, background checks, and carrying guns on college campuses, all on his way to ignoring laws prohibiting murder and acts of terrorism.

The responses from many anti-gun public officials were telling: in their view, the attack on disarmed college students clearly evidenced a need to further restrict the right of innocent victims to keep and bear arms in self-defense —and suggested that armed self-defense isn’t that important in the first place.  After all, as one Virginia Democrat insinuated, if the cadets at Old Dominion could subdue their assailant without a gun, why can’t you?

All of it missed the point entirely.

Despite what gun control advocates would have you believe, the right to keep and bear arms plays a vital role in public safety. Americans use their firearms to defend themselves and others far more often than many people realize. Even the notoriously anti-gun Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has acknowledged that most studies on the issue find that between 500,000 and several million defensive gun uses occur every year in the United States. An extensive 2021 national survey conducted by a Georgetown professor further substantiated this reality, concluding that Americans used their firearms defensively an average of 1.2 million times a year.

Continue reading “”

Giffords Hit With FEC Complaint From National Shooting Sports Foundation

The gun control group Giffords has been slapped with a complaint to the Federal Election Commission, courtesy of the National Shooting Sports Foundation.

The firearms industry trade group claims that Giffords, through its political action committee Giffords PAC, has failed to comply with the FEC’s rules on joint fundraising while soliciting funds for both the PAC and the candidates it’s supporting.

“Giffords PAC has been playing fast and loose with how they are soliciting funds to support themselves and their preferred gun control candidates for elected office,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF’s Senior Vice President and General Counsel. “The FEC’s joint fundraising rules are clear but Giffords ignores them because they believe they are above accountability.

Their fundraising misleads consumers by falsely claiming these joint fundraising solicitations are not authorized by any candidates or their campaign committees. Giffords PAC and these candidates are knowingly ignoring mandatory FEC disclosure requirements.”

Giffords PAC sent fundraising emails in partnership with preferred federal and gubernatorial candidates for office that ask potential donors to “split a donation between my campaign and Giffords PAC…” yet it has failed to properly follow the required FEC joint fundraising procedures.

FEC regulations require the appointment of a joint fundraising representative or formation of a joint fundraising committee with the associated campaigns, yet Giffords PAC’s most recent FEC Statement of Organization does not reflect its involvement in any joint fundraising efforts.

Further, these emails soliciting donations stated they were “Paid For By Giffords PAC” and “not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee.” However, the joint fundraising emails are obviously authorized by candidates. In fact, the emails are signed by candidates and jointly solicit contributions for the campaigns.

Those email solicitations sent donors to an ActBlue website that asked donors to support candidates and Giffords antigun agenda. FEC regulations require that mass mailings of 500 or more substantially similar communications include appropriate disclosures, however Giffords PAC has not included appropriate joint fundraising disclosures in either their emails or ActBlue contribution pages, and falsely claim that these communications are not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee.

Giffords PAC has sent these solicitations that enriched their own antigun agenda in coordination with U.S. Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.), Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Gov. Abigail Spanberger (D-Va.), Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Gov. Mikie Sherrill (D-N.J.), Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Gov. Roy Cooper (D-N.C.) and Gov. Katie Hobbs (D-Ariz.).

We can expect Giffords’ fundraising operations to ramp up as the midterm campaigns start to take shape, so this is a timely complaint by NSSF. It’s also the latest allegation about the gun control group playing fast and loose with rules and regulations. As we reported last week, a Giffords staffer may have violated Vermont’s laws regarding the registration of paid lobbyists.

Billy Clark serves as the group’s Senior Litigation Attorney and “Second Amendment Issues Manager.” When he recently testified before a legislative committee in Vermont, Clark acknowledged that he had “been in touch with committee members” about a piece of legislation. Giffords’ website says Clark “consults with local governments and other organizations, providing guidance on how to actualize gun safety policies,” which sure sounds like lobbying activity to me, but Clark is not listed as a registered lobbyist on the Vermont Secretary of State’s website.

So, while Giffords is trying to impose all kinds of rules, regulations, and laws on gun owners, there are allegations the group is treating some of the rules surrounding campaign fundraising and lobbying activities as optional. I’m interested to see what the FEC’s response to NSSF’s complaint will be, and if any action will be taken ahead of Election Day this November.

VA Ground Zero on Guns: DOJ Legal Action Threat

By Dave Workman

Editor-in-Chief

In office only four months, Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger has found herself in the middle of a gun rights battleground, and the fault lies squarely in her lap and with her Democrat colleagues in the legislature for passing a slew of gun control bills, including one which brought a promise of federal legal action: Senate Bill 749.

Spanberger faces a deadline of 11:59 p.m. tonight—one minute before Midnight—to either sign or veto the bill. A third option, as noted by WVEC News, would let the bills become law without her signature.

In a sharply-worded letter to Spanberger, Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon at the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, which includes the newly-created Second Amendment section, Spanberger was warned the DOJ “will commence litigation in the event the Commonwealth of Virginia enacts certain bills that unconstitutionally limit law-abiding Americans’ individual right to bear arms.” The letter specifically mentioned SB 749, which would “unconstitutionally” restrict the manufacture, purchase or sale of AR-15 rifles “and other semi-automatic firearms in common use.”

This was no idle threat. Dhillon’s Civil Rights Division has already taken legal action against the Virgin Island police and the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department over delays in approving gun permit applications.

Continue reading “”