18.2-287.4. Carrying loaded firearms in public areas prohibited

ryan7068 · May 15, 2012

It shall be unlawful for any person to carry a loaded (a) semi-automatic center-fire rifle or pistol that expels single or multiple projectiles by action of an explosion of a combustible material and is equipped at the time of the offense with a magazine that will hold more than 20 rounds of ammunition or designed by the manufacturer to accommodate a silencer or equipped with a folding stock or (b) shotgun with a magazine that will hold more than seven rounds of the longest ammunition for which it is chambered on or about his person on any public street, road, alley, sidewalk, public right-of-way, or in any public park or any other place of whatever nature that is open to the public in the Cities of Alexandria, Chesapeake, Fairfax, Falls Church, Newport News, Norfolk, Richmond, or Virginia Beach or in the Counties of Arlington, Fairfax, Henrico, Loudoun, or Prince William.

The provisions of this section shall not apply to law-enforcement officers, licensed security guards, military personnel in the performance of their lawful duties, or any person having a valid concealed handgun permit or to any person actually engaged in lawful hunting or lawful recreational shooting activities at an established shooting range or shooting contest. Any person violating the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.

Can anyone tell me what purpose this law is serving? Is this restricting a OCer to 20 rounds or less? (If no CHP)

ocholsteroc · May 15, 2012

From what I know
Yes

Can anyone tell me what purpose this law is serving? Is this restricting a OCer to 20 rounds or less? (If no CHP)

and those threaded barrels.

peter nap · May 15, 2012

ryan7068 said:
Can anyone tell me what purpose this law is serving? Is this restricting a OCer to 20 rounds or less? (If no CHP)

It started as Prevent the evil black gun violence BS.....and when gun owners complained, it was turned into P4P to keep them happy, or at least the CHPpers.:banghead:

And for the most part, they are so we still have it on the books.

Glockster · May 15, 2012

ryan7068 said:
Can anyone tell me what purpose this law is serving? Is this restricting a OCer to 20 rounds or less? (If no CHP)

Yeah, this is one of those "interesting" statutes it would seem. That's always been my understanding of it as well. In fact when I took my CHP class the instructor made mention of that as one additional reason for getting a CHP -- that even if you OC as long as you have a CHP you can carry a 20+ mag. Seemed like a fairly lame law to me, and to be honest I didn't think that I'd have a mag that would hold more than 20 anyway. 'Course now I have a 30 round mag from my Draco mini....but it's a little less likely that I'd be OC that around as it's probably total bait for MWAG calls.

But one thing that I've always pondered about this particular little GA gem is the "designed by the manufacturer to accommodate a silencer or equipped with a folding stock" and that from what I read and have been told, that CHP also allows that (having a silencer or folding stock). Frankly I'm not sure though if other laws (Fed?) would also/instead apply.

Added: Or perhaps that just allows (as PN seems to be saying) for a threaded gun, but not actually a silencer. So that makes me wonder about my Draco mini as since it has a thread at the end of it for changing out the muzzle brake.....

peter nap · May 15, 2012

drdan01 said:
Added: Or perhaps that just allows (as PN seems to be saying) for a threaded gun, but not actually a silencer. So that makes me wonder about my Draco mini as since it has a thread at the end of it for changing out the muzzle brake.....

It allows you to carry the threaded barrel....and, if you have registered it and paid your $200.00 to the Feds, a silencer.

Glockster · May 15, 2012

peter nap said:
It allows you to carry the threaded barrel....and, if you have registered it and paid your $200.00 to the Feds, a silencer.

So with a pistol that always comes with a threaded barrel such as a Draco, does that in fact mean that you couldn't even carry that pistol unless you have a CHP? Is that your sense of it?

peter nap · May 15, 2012

drdan01 said:
So with a pistol that always comes with a threaded barrel such as a Draco, does that in fact mean that you couldn't even carry that pistol unless you have a CHP? Is that your sense of it?

In the restricted areas, it's written in stone. But elsewhere, you're OK.

Glockster · May 15, 2012

peter nap said:
In the restricted areas, it's written in stone. But elsewhere, you're OK.

I do have a CHP even though I OC, but wonder if one could argue that the manufacturer didn't intend for that to be to "accommodate a silencer"? I don't think that I'd want to be standing around trying to argue the point at the wrong time, but how do they know what a manufacturer in Romania intended. I'd like to hope that the burden is on them, but know how that goes.

peter nap · May 15, 2012

drdan01 said:
I do have a CHP even though I OC, but wonder if one could argue that the manufacturer didn't intend for that to be to "accommodate a silencer"? I don't think that I'd want to be standing around trying to argue the point at the wrong time, but how do they know what a manufacturer in Romania intended. I'd like to hope that the burden is on them, but know how that goes.

When I was 16, Virginia passed a law that said everyone riding a motorcycle on a public road, had to wear a helmet.

I and many others strapped our helmets on our knees and thumbed our noses at the police. When we told the Judges the manufacturers didn't say they had to be worn on our heads, they just smiled and said "Pay the Clerk".:lol::lol:

Same logic!

Glockster · May 15, 2012

peter nap said:
When I was 16, Virginia passed a law that said everyone riding a motorcycle on a public road, had to wear a helmet.

I and many others strapped our helmets on our knees and thumbed our noses at the police. When we told the Judges the manufacturers didn't say they had to be worn on our heads, they just smiled and said "Pay the Clerk".:lol::lol:

Same logic!

Now that's funny! :lol:

VCDL President · May 16, 2012

It is my understanding that the law was originally put in place back in the early 1990s as the first step in banning open carry completely. With a few minor tweaks to the wording, you can see where that would be so. But, gun owners were mad about OHGAM and when Gov. Allen was elected, the plans were basically foiled.

VCDL tried to get rid of the law altogether, but ran into unexpected resistance which I still don't understand. At the end of the day the code was tweaked twice: first time to make it clear in the first sentence that it only applied to OC of certain guns and not all guns (original version was very unclear to those who did not read the entire law all the way to the last sentence) and, two, to exempt CHP holders (low-hanging fruit). P4P is all we could get, Peter, at the time and we saw no good reason to pass on it. Any movement forward is good movement.

Perhaps next year we should look again at getting it off the books. I don't even know if anyone has been prosecuted under that law for a very long time or at all. BTW, it only applies to centerfire, so OCing one of the new KelTec 30 round .22 Magnum pistols is legal without a permit.

mobeewan · May 16, 2012

The law originally only refered to high capacity shotguns and evil black rifles with folding stocks, threaded barrels, 30 round mags, etc and where you could not carry them in reguards to size of city and counties with a certain form of government. Those with CHP's were exempt. As Phillip indicated if you did not read the entire law completely through then you did not understand it. Also most people don't know the city populations everywhere nor necessicarily what form of government a county may have. That was a big problem with some police and magistrates as they only read the first paragragh that said you could not carry a firearm in those jurisdiction. They didn't know either, just that the first paragraph said "you can't carry firearms". The second paragraph defined firearm as I stated above (certain rifles and shotguns). The word handgun was never included in the original law. Due to open carriers having problems with cops and magistrates that could not read and understand English there were a couple attempts to "fix" the law to help them understand instead of educating the cops and magistrates. They got it "fixed" alright by adding "HANDGUNS" to the rewriting of the law. That is why certain handguns are now not allowed to be carried without a CHP that could have legally been carried openly without a CHP prior to "fixing" the law. When handgun was added the way it is worded certain features of the evil black rifles now apply to handguns as well.

This is kind of like when they almost fixed Virginia law reguarding Castle Doctrine this past winter instead of leaving it and Virginia's case law reguarding self defense alone. Sometimes it is better to let sleeping dogs lie they might bite you.

peter nap · May 16, 2012

VCDL President said:
and, two, to exempt CHP holders (low-hanging fruit). P4P is all we could get, Peter, at the time and we saw no good reason to pass on it. Any movement forward is good movement.

Perhaps it is Philip, but it does create animosity and a division in the ranks.

If you ever come up with a way to keep everyone happy, let me in on the secret. Walking on water would be handy when fishing.:lol:

On the other hand, when a bill is too far left or right, no one wins because we're all quietly trying to move it right or left or... 6 feet under.

VCDL President · May 17, 2012

mobeewan said:
The law originally only refered to high capacity shotguns and evil black rifles with folding stocks, threaded barrels, 30 round mags, etc and where you could not carry them in reguards to size of city and counties with a certain form of government. Those with CHP's were exempt. As Phillip indicated if you did not read the entire law completely through then you did not understand it. Also most people don't know the city populations everywhere nor necessicarily what form of government a county may have. That was a big problem with some police and magistrates as they only read the first paragragh that said you could not carry a firearm in those jurisdiction. They didn't know either, just that the first paragraph said "you can't carry firearms". The second paragraph defined firearm as I stated above (certain rifles and shotguns). The word handgun was never included in the original law. Due to open carriers having problems with cops and magistrates that could not read and understand English there were a couple attempts to "fix" the law to help them understand instead of educating the cops and magistrates. They got it "fixed" alright by adding "HANDGUNS" to the rewriting of the law. That is why certain handguns are now not allowed to be carried without a CHP that could have legally been carried openly without a CHP prior to "fixing" the law. When handgun was added the way it is worded certain features of the evil black rifles now apply to handguns as well.

This is kind of like when they almost fixed Virginia law reguarding Castle Doctrine this past winter instead of leaving it and Virginia's case law reguarding self defense alone. Sometimes it is better to let sleeping dogs lie they might bite you.

I'll have to investigate that - I don't remember pistol being added. The original law was causing headaches for open carriers and the first fix helped immensely.

vt800c · May 17, 2012

so, just so I am more clarified on this...

It is not unlawful for me to carry a loaded (a) semi-automatic rim-fire pistol with a magazine that will hold more than 20 rounds of ammunition on any public street, road, alley, sidewalk, public right-of-way, or in any public park or any other place of whatever nature that is open to the public in the Cities of Alexandria, Chesapeake, Fairfax, Falls Church, Newport News, Norfolk, Richmond, or Virginia Beach or in the Counties of Arlington, Fairfax, Henrico, Loudoun, or Prince William.

So I can carry my ruger single six (.22 win mags) and my S&W M&P 15-22p (pistol, .22 long rifle with a 25 round magazine)?

Thank you.

peter nap · May 17, 2012

vt800c said:
It is not unlawful for me to carry a loaded (a) semi-automatic rim-fire pistol with a magazine that will hold more than 20 rounds of ammunition on any public street, road, alley, sidewalk, public right-of-way, or in any public park or any other place of whatever nature that is open to the public in the Cities of Alexandria, Chesapeake, Fairfax, Falls Church, Newport News, Norfolk, Richmond, or Virginia Beach or in the Counties of Arlington, Fairfax, Henrico, Loudoun, or Prince William.

So I can carry my ruger single six (.22 win mags) and my S&W M&P 15-22p (pistol, .22 long rifle with a 25 round magazine)?

Thank you.

Apparently our Legislators consider the Rimfire and others (Pinfire, Etc) harmless.

Glockster · May 17, 2012

peter nap said:
Apparently our Legislators consider the Rimfire and others (Pinfire, Etc) harmless.

Yeah, which certainly brings to mind another question -- would it be assuming too much that any particular LEO or magistrate understands what that difference between rimfire and anything else is? I have a not so good mental image of watching someone at the worst of possible times unsuccessfully trying to explain the differences when all they "hear" or "see" is big mag, lots of rounds, more than 20.

skidmark · May 17, 2012

drdan01 said:
Yeah, which certainly brings to mind another question -- would it be assuming too much that any particular LEO or magistrate understands what that difference between rimfire and anything else is? I have a not so good mental image of watching someone at the worst of possible times unsuccessfully trying to explain the differences when all they "hear" or "see" is big mag, lots of rounds, more than 20.

It never matters what the LEO and/or the Magistrate understand about anything. While it would be nice to avoid the problems their lack of understanding engender, the rubber does not begin to meet the road until you get to the Commonwealth Attorney, and ends with the courts.

If you carry yourself with confidence in your knowledge and understanding of the law you have a better than average chance of not running into problems. Remaining calm and polite (as opposed to yelling and waving your hands and the Constitution about) when interacting with LEO when they intrude upon you also helps.*

stay safe.

*By no means am I suggesting one roll over and give in to illegal acts which are attempts to violate your rights. "Speak softly and carry a big stick" has many meanings.

Glockster · May 17, 2012

skidmark said:
It never matters what the LEO and/or the Magistrate understand about anything. While it would be nice to avoid the problems their lack of understanding engender, the rubber does not begin to meet the road until you get to the Commonwealth Attorney, and ends with the courts.

Was thinking more though about the whole arrest process and the inevitable wait for the CA to come to the realization that there was a problem. Which would be after someone is taken into custody, and presumably after your weapon is seized.

And yet again one more reason to have User's contact info in hand.

Tanner · May 17, 2012

do they make 19 round mags? I would carry one out of spite.

18.2-287.4. Carrying loaded firearms in public areas prohibited

Regular Member

Regular Member

Accomplished Advocate

Regular Member

Accomplished Advocate

Regular Member

Accomplished Advocate

Regular Member

Accomplished Advocate

Regular Member

Centurion

Regular Member

Accomplished Advocate

Centurion

Regular Member

Accomplished Advocate

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member