Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 51

Thread: HB 375 Firearms; workplace rule

  1. #1
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580

    HB 375 Firearms; workplace rule

    It just went to Conference Committee so it's not dead...but probably won't go any further.
    Last edited by peter nap; 03-01-2012 at 12:51 PM.

  2. #2
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by peter nap View Post
    It just went to Conference Committee so it's not dead...but probably won't go any further.
    I don't understand why the House rejected the Senate substitute. The House amendments "broke" the original law in a drastic manner. The Senate amendment "fixed" it back to be OK.

    TFred

  3. #3
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    I don't understand why the House rejected the Senate substitute. The House amendments "broke" the original law in a drastic manner. The Senate amendment "fixed" it back to be OK.

    TFred
    There's a very heavy anti lobby TFred.
    The fence sitters are just looking for excuses so they don't make either side too angry.

  4. #4
    Regular Member streetdoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Unionville, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    342
    Yesterday the Senate requested a conference with the House for HB375 and today the House agreed. Please e-mail your Senators and Delegates urging reconciliation and agreement to pass HB375. I realize that it does not help everybody but it does not hurt anybody either. For those of us the work for Local Government it will be a big help and a stepping stone to get this for others next year.
    This morning I sent an e-mail to every Senator and every Delegate urging them to work together and pass HB375, please take a little time to do this also. This is what I sent them;

    "I am urging you to reconcile your differences and pass HB375.

    I live in Senator Reeves’ and Delegate Ed Scott’s District, Orange County and work in Fairfax County. I work for local government on 24 hour shift work. As such, they prohibit us as a condition of employment from possessing or securing a firearm in our vehicles on County Property. I leave my home at 4am to go to work and leave work the following day once I am relived at 7am. On my return to my home I may make stops for shopping, fuel, banking, hunting (in the appropriate season), etc. It is very important that we be afforded our rights to be able to provide for our own defense, or other lawful shooting sports, i.e. hunting or ranges, without having to return home to get our firearms. Local government employees should not be required to give up their rights just because we work for local government.

    Please come to an agreement and pass HB 375.

    Thank you for your time and consideration,

    Name & address"
    'Till the last landings made, and we stand unafraid, on a shore not mortal has seen,
    'Till the last bugle call, sounds taps for us all,
    It's Semper Fidelis, MARINE!

  5. #5
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by streetdoc View Post
    Yesterday the Senate requested a conference with the House for HB375 and today the House agreed. Please e-mail your Senators and Delegates urging reconciliation and agreement to pass HB375. I realize that it does not help everybody but it does not hurt anybody either. For those of us the work for Local Government it will be a big help and a stepping stone to get this for others next year.
    This morning I sent an e-mail to every Senator and every Delegate urging them to work together and pass HB375, please take a little time to do this also. This is what I sent them;

    "I am urging you to reconcile your differences and pass HB375.

    I live in Senator Reeves’ and Delegate Ed Scott’s District, Orange County and work in Fairfax County. I work for local government on 24 hour shift work. As such, they prohibit us as a condition of employment from possessing or securing a firearm in our vehicles on County Property. I leave my home at 4am to go to work and leave work the following day once I am relived at 7am. On my return to my home I may make stops for shopping, fuel, banking, hunting (in the appropriate season), etc. It is very important that we be afforded our rights to be able to provide for our own defense, or other lawful shooting sports, i.e. hunting or ranges, without having to return home to get our firearms. Local government employees should not be required to give up their rights just because we work for local government.

    Please come to an agreement and pass HB 375.

    Thank you for your time and consideration,

    Name & address"
    The bold above is not quite accurate.

    If this bill is passed, it is crucial that the Senate amendments be allowed to stand. The House amendments were made on the floor, and cripple the law that this bill is trying to change: our all-important preemption law, 15.2-915.

    If the House version is passed, our preemption law becomes virtually meaningless.


    Compare Paragraph D of the House version, to the Senate version, to see why this is absolutely critical.

    TFred

    For those who don't like to click:

    House version: [D. The provisions of this section shall apply only to workplaces of the locality.]

    Senate version: [D. For purposes of this section, "workplace" means "workplace of the locality."]

    As you can see, the House version virtually guts the scope of the entire law.

  6. #6
    Regular Member streetdoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Unionville, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    342
    TFred, I agree the Senate version is worded better so we don't loose anything, however, they added some places were firearms would be prohibited. Hopefully, they can work out their differences and we can get an appropriately worded and passed version of HB375.
    'Till the last landings made, and we stand unafraid, on a shore not mortal has seen,
    'Till the last bugle call, sounds taps for us all,
    It's Semper Fidelis, MARINE!

  7. #7
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by streetdoc View Post
    TFred, I agree the Senate version is worded better so we don't loose anything, however, they added some places were firearms would be prohibited. Hopefully, they can work out their differences and we can get an appropriately worded and passed version of HB375.
    Ah, you are right. Looks like the Senate also added these places where the new parking lot rule would be exempt:

    "any college or university, or any community services board or behavioral health authority licensed by the Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services."

    As long as they keep the Senate version of Paragraph D, the rest is not critical.

    TFred
    Last edited by TFred; 03-02-2012 at 05:15 PM.

  8. #8
    Regular Member optiksguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Town of Herndon, VA
    Posts
    69
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    House version: [D. The provisions of this section shall apply only to workplaces of the locality.]

    Senate version: [D. For purposes of this section, "workplace" means "workplace of the locality."]

    As you can see, the House version virtually guts the scope of the entire law.
    I'm usually pretty good at parsing these things but I must be especially dense today because I'm having trouble understanding the difference between the two versions as you quoted above. I'd be appreciative of a brief explanation.

    Best regards

  9. #9
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by optiksguy View Post

    House version: [D. The provisions of this section shall apply only to workplaces of the locality.]

    Senate version: [D. For purposes of this section, "workplace" means "workplace of the locality."]

    As you can see, the House version virtually guts the scope of the entire law.
    I'm usually pretty good at parsing these things but I must be especially dense today because I'm having trouble understanding the difference between the two versions as you quoted above. I'd be appreciative of a brief explanation.

    Best regards
    As best I understand it, "this section" refers to the entire section of code, 15.2-915, which is THE preemption law. Paragraph D of the House version limits the scope of the whole law to only workplaces of localities. That would leave localities free to impose any local ordinance that 15.2-915 currently prohibits, as long as that local ordinance did not apply to "the workplaces of the localities."

    It is obviously a mistake, because that wouldn't even make sense, but that would be what the law says, if it is not fixed.

    I'm a little confused on why they need to make this clarification anyway, other than to just explicitly say that it applies only to local government workplaces, and not "workplaces" in general, which is what a "real" parking lot law would cover.

    TFred

  10. #10
    Regular Member optiksguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Town of Herndon, VA
    Posts
    69
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    As best I understand it, "this section" refers to the entire section of code, 15.2-915, which is THE preemption law. Paragraph D of the House version limits the scope of the whole law to only workplaces of localities.
    TFred
    Ahh, ok, I get it now, that makes sense (well, your explanation does, not their wording). Thanks much.

  11. #11
    Campaign Veteran T Dubya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Richmond, Va, ,
    Posts
    892
    The bill has been kicked around way too much. It won't pass.
    "These are the shock troops (opencarry.org) of the gun lobby. And, they are not going away."
    Ceasefire NJ Director Brian Miller, NJ.com, August 20, 2009

  12. #12
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Midlothian, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    596
    Quote Originally Posted by T Dubya View Post
    The bill has been kicked around way too much. It won't pass.
    The intent has already been approved by both Houses - it is some word-smithing that has been the battle currently. As long as the bill that comes out of conference committee has the original intent in place with properer wording, it should pass.

    I have been working this issue with Delegate Pogge. Hopefully we will get the job done. We should know in a few days.
    Last edited by VCDL President; 03-04-2012 at 12:08 AM.

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Quote Originally Posted by VCDL President View Post
    The intent has already been approved by both Houses - it is some word-smithing that has been the battle currently. As long as the bill that comes out of conference committee has the original intent in place with properer wording, it should pass.

    I have been working this issue with Delegate Pogge. Hopefully we will get the job done. We should know in a few days.

    As I understand things, Virginia does not reccognize "legislative intent". The law is what the law says it is, using plain language unless the courts want to twist it into some other meaning. User knows the Latin for this - I'll let him impress us all with attorney-speak.

    The point is that
    House version: [D. The provisions of this section shall apply only to workplaces of the locality.] does not mean exactly the same thing as

    Senate version: [D. For purposes of this section, "workplace" means "workplace of the locality."].

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  14. #14
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    As I understand things, Virginia does not reccognize "legislative intent". The law is what the law says it is, using plain language unless the courts want to twist it into some other meaning. User knows the Latin for this - I'll let him impress us all with attorney-speak.

    The point is that
    House version: [D. The provisions of this section shall apply only to workplaces of the locality.] does not mean exactly the same thing as

    Senate version: [D. For purposes of this section, "workplace" means "workplace of the locality."].

    stay safe.
    You are right, it is my opinion that this was a mistake created by an amendment made on the floor of the house. It was picked up on fairly quickly and always was intended to be corrected in the Senate version.

    However, see this earlier post:

    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    Ah, you are right. Looks like the Senate also added these places where the new parking lot rule would be exempt:

    "any college or university, or any community services board or behavioral health authority licensed by the Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services."

    As long as they keep the Senate version of Paragraph D, the rest is not critical.
    I believe the Senate added those four exceptions to the House version. I suspect that this is the change under debate, not the correction of the poorly worded floor amendment from the House's version.

    Although not critical to the value of the bill, I hope the House holds out on these four exceptions, those employees deserve protection no less than any other state employee. The type of work the person does, or where they do it, has no impact on whether they should be able to protect themselves on the drive to and from work.

    The argument for these exceptions is the same anti-gun insanity as every other gun-control law.

    TFred

  15. #15
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Colleges, universities, community service boards and behavioral health authorities are all places where crazy people with violent tendencies are known to congregate. They are also places where (in the first two instances) students are to be found and (in the latter two instances) people who want their lives to be better are to be found.

    The Senators apparently believes that the similarities between themselves and the folks at colleges, universities, community service boards and behavioral health authorities are too close to ignore.

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  16. #16
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580
    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    Colleges, universities, community service boards and behavioral health authorities are all places where crazy people with violent tendencies are known to congregate. They are also places where (in the first two instances) students are to be found and (in the latter two instances) people who want their lives to be better are to be found.

    The Senators apparently believes that the similarities between themselves and the folks at colleges, universities, community service boards and behavioral health authorities are too close to ignore.

    stay safe.
    That's not nice Skid....funny, but mean. Saslaw may take you off is Christmas card list.

  17. #17
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    You are right, it is my opinion that this was a mistake created by an amendment made on the floor of the house. It was picked up on fairly quickly and always was intended to be corrected in the Senate version.

    However, see this earlier post:


    I believe the Senate added those four exceptions to the House version. I suspect that this is the change under debate, not the correction of the poorly worded floor amendment from the House's version.

    Although not critical to the value of the bill, I hope the House holds out on these four exceptions, those employees deserve protection no less than any other state employee. The type of work the person does, or where they do it, has no impact on whether they should be able to protect themselves on the drive to and from work.

    The argument for these exceptions is the same anti-gun insanity as every other gun-control law.

    TFred
    We're getting down to the wire now TFred. Holding out is quickly losing any usefulness.

  18. #18
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    They've set the conference members:

    03/05/12 Senate: Conferees appointed by Senate
    03/05/12 Senate: Senators: Stanley, Reeves, Garrett
    03/06/12 House: Conferees appointed by House
    03/06/12 House: Delegates: Pogge, Merricks, Kory

    TFred

  19. #19
    Regular Member Repeater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,519

    The Senate has approved the Conference Report!

    Has anyone read the Conference Report?

  20. #20
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by Repeater View Post
    Has anyone read the Conference Report?
    The standard bill history page has a link to it, but it is not there yet.

    http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp...21+amd+HB375AC

    We wait.

    TFred

  21. #21
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Interesting in the history, the votes on the Senate side:

    02/23/12 Senate: Passed Senate with substitute (25-Y 15-N)
    03/08/12 Senate: Conference report agreed to by Senate (26-Y 13-N)

    They got more votes with the conference changes than they did with their original amendments. Hmm.

    TFred

  22. #22
    Regular Member mk4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    548
    conference report just passed the house. guess it passed senate earlier today.

    Conference report adopted by House March 8, 2012 (71-Y 27-N)
    Conference report adopted by Senate March 8, 2012 (26-Y 13-N)
    Last edited by mk4; 03-08-2012 at 12:54 PM.
    “For life, liberty and Little Lizzie.” - John Connor (2005)

  23. #23
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    It's like Christmas... wonder what's inside the package? Is it the cool GI Joe with the Kung Fu grip? Or socks?

    TFred

  24. #24
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Hmm, not as many with the House votes:

    02/02/12 House: Read third time and passed House (75-Y 25-N)
    03/08/12 House: Conference report agreed to by House (71-Y 27-N)

    This would seem to indicate that the Senate got their changes, more than the House got their changes.

    TFred

  25. #25
    Regular Member streetdoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Unionville, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    342
    (HB375)

    JOINT CONFERENCE COMMITTEE REPORT

    We, the conferees, appointed by the respective bodies to consider and report upon the disagreeing vote on House Bill No. 375, report as follows:

    A. We recommend that the Senate Floor Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute (12105585D) be rejected.

    B. We recommend that the attached Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute (12105999D) be accepted to resolve the matter under disagreement.



    Respectfully submitted,

    Delegate Brenda L. Pogge

    Delegate Donald W. Merricks

    Delegate Kaye Kory

    Conferees on the part of the House

    Senator William M. Stanley, Jr.

    Senator Bryce E. Reeves

    Senator Thomas A. Garrett

    Conferees on the part of the Senate
    **********************
    Substitute (12105999D) is not posted yet
    Last edited by streetdoc; 03-08-2012 at 02:26 PM. Reason: left out a word
    'Till the last landings made, and we stand unafraid, on a shore not mortal has seen,
    'Till the last bugle call, sounds taps for us all,
    It's Semper Fidelis, MARINE!

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •