• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

2014 "Weapons" Bills

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
From the article, Cole answers this question:
Cole said he doesn’t think the state should regulate weapons policies for private schools.

“I just think on private property, it should be up to the property owners or the people who run the school to make a decision whether they want to let guns on their property or not,” Cole said. “The state should not really dictate that for private property.”​

When you think about it, this makes sense, for what other private property does the state dictate you may not possess guns? In this case, even the property owners themselves may not carry.

TFred

The Commonwealth's involvement with private school operation is more involved than just that. Teacher certification, sports, construction standards to name a few.

Should a private school not adhere to the same building codes as public schools or be able to compete in certain sports w/o safety equipment because they are private?
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
Submitted by Delegate Mark Cole:

Poll here: http://news.fredericksburg.com/news...would-allow-private-schools-to-set-gun-rules/

http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?141+sum+HB114

Possession of firearm, etc., on school property; private or religious schools. Eliminates the crimes of possession on the property of a private or religious elementary, middle, or high school; a school bus owned or operated by such school; or any property being used for functions or extracurricular activities sponsored by such school of a stun weapon, knife, or other weapon (currently a Class 1 misdemeanor) or a firearm (currently a Class 6 felony). The bill does not affect the criminal penalties for the possession of such weapons on public school property.

TFred

ETA: Of course this doesn't do anything to fix the GFSZA, so one would need to have a license to possess the firearm... problematic in states such as Virginia, which do not issue such licenses.
We're losing the poll by almost a hundred votes!

Do you support the bill proposed by Cole?
No 60.45% (240 votes)
Yes 36.78% (146 votes)
Not sure 2.77% (11 votes)

TFred
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
There is something insidious in this bill. IMO, it continues the divide and conquer theory from the anti's playbook.

Looking at the current situation, we are not allowed to carry on the property of K-12 schools whether public or parochial/private.

Who truly believes that private schools would jump on the bandwagon to condone carry in their facilities - not the ivory tower leaders who have fought tooth and nail to prevent that. So what harm you say? Consider that if/when we get the present condition changed to enable carry in/on K-12 schools, such will then only apply to public schools. We will have furthered the separate but equal divide. Henceforth, any new statute improving conditions in K-12 would not apply to private schools.

I don't want freedom of choice - I want freedom from restriction. There is a HUGE difference between the two.

Private schools/property is a false flag - it masquerades as a friend of RKBA while widening the gap. If this is about the children, then afford them all the benefit of real protection.

I do NOT like this bill. I do not see it as it is purported to be.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
There is something insidious in this bill. IMO, it continues the divide and conquer theory from the anti's playbook.

Looking at the current situation, we are not allowed to carry on the property of K-12 schools whether public or parochial/private.

Who truly believes that private schools would jump on the bandwagon to condone carry in their facilities - not the ivory tower leaders who have fought tooth and nail to prevent that. So what harm you say? Consider that if/when we get the present condition changed to enable carry in/on K-12 schools, such will then only apply to public schools. We will have furthered the separate but equal divide. Henceforth, any new statute improving conditions in K-12 would not apply to private schools.

I don't want freedom of choice - I want freedom from restriction. There is a HUGE difference between the two.

Private schools/property is a false flag - it masquerades as a friend of RKBA while widening the gap. If this is about the children, then afford them all the benefit of real protection.

I do NOT like this bill. I do not see it as it is purported to be.

From what I've seen so far Grape.....Trojan Horse bills will be common this year. We need to be very careful before endorsing any of them.
 

DrMark

Lone Star Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2007
Messages
1,559
Location
Hampton Roads, Virginia, USA
There is something insidious in this bill. IMO, it continues the divide and conquer theory from the anti's playbook.

Looking at the current situation, we are not allowed to carry on the property of K-12 schools whether public or parochial/private.

Who truly believes that private schools would jump on the bandwagon to condone carry in their facilities - not the ivory tower leaders who have fought tooth and nail to prevent that. So what harm you say? Consider that if/when we get the present condition changed to enable carry in/on K-12 schools, such will then only apply to public schools. We will have furthered the separate but equal divide. Henceforth, any new statute improving conditions in K-12 would not apply to private schools.

I don't want freedom of choice - I want freedom from restriction. There is a HUGE difference between the two.

Private schools/property is a false flag - it masquerades as a friend of RKBA while widening the gap. If this is about the children, then afford them all the benefit of real protection.

I do NOT like this bill. I do not see it as it is purported to be.

Wow... my perspective is the opposite.

I want to eliminate schools being gun free zones.

With the new administration in Richmond, do you think that's going to happen this year? I certainly don't.

If I don't think I can score a touchdown on a given play, I'll try to score a first down. If successful, I'm that much closer to the end zone for the following play.

If we can't get the right to carry prohibition lifted for all schools, let's try to get it lifted for some. We'll be that much closer to lifting it for all when we can improve the line-up of players in Richmond in the future. We'd already have to carry in schools in VA, and could just broaden the the circle some more to include public schools.

I think there'd be a good number of private schools that allowed carry. The private schools I'm familiar with (like the one my kids attend) are very conservative. My daughter has a classmate who is an accomplished shooter, shooting under the school's name, and the school posted a proud post of facebook recently touting one of her match wins. I think Sheriff Diggs recent had a son graduate from there as well. At sporting events, I'm often talking guns with other dads.

Anyway, I ask that you keep an open mind toward this bill, as I will too.

For now, I see it as a way to move us further in the right direction, until that time when we can get all of what we want.
 

DrMark

Lone Star Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2007
Messages
1,559
Location
Hampton Roads, Virginia, USA
We're losing the poll by almost a hundred votes!

Do you support the bill proposed by Cole?
No 60.45% (240 votes)
Yes 36.78% (146 votes)
Not sure 2.77% (11 votes)

TFred

I post a "Fire Mission - hit this poll" thread at arfcom.

That should help quickly.

No 55.02% (241 votes)
Yes 42.47% (186 votes)
Not sure 3% (11 votes)


:)
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
There is something insidious in this bill. IMO, it continues the divide and conquer theory from the anti's playbook.

Looking at the current situation, we are not allowed to carry on the property of K-12 schools whether public or parochial/private.

Who truly believes that private schools would jump on the bandwagon to condone carry in their facilities - not the ivory tower leaders who have fought tooth and nail to prevent that. So what harm you say? Consider that if/when we get the present condition changed to enable carry in/on K-12 schools, such will then only apply to public schools. We will have furthered the separate but equal divide. Henceforth, any new statute improving conditions in K-12 would not apply to private schools.

I don't want freedom of choice - I want freedom from restriction. There is a HUGE difference between the two.

Private schools/property is a false flag - it masquerades as a friend of RKBA while widening the gap. If this is about the children, then afford them all the benefit of real protection.

I do NOT like this bill. I do not see it as it is purported to be.
I dunno about all that... two comments... [ETA: oops, I made three comments! :)]

Mark Cole is no stooge for anti-gunners. Nobody is perfect, but he would never be a willing pawn.

Cole states, and PVC provides comment in the original article indicating this bill was submitted at the request of VCDL! The day VCDL is duped by the other side, is the day we all might as well throw in the towel!

Cole said his bill isn’t prompted by any particular incidents at private schools. He has, however, had the issue brought to him by some private schools, and put in this bill at the request of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, a group that regularly lobbies against firearm restrictions.

VCDL president Philip Van Cleave said Cole’s bill keeps intact penalties for anyone who brings a weapon or firearm onto school grounds with intent to harm.

“If you think about it, why is the state telling a private school what they should do for security? What business does the state have doing that?” Van Cleave said.

If Cole's account is true, that he was approached by "some private schools," it would certainly seem to follow that should the bill pass, at least one would change their policy as a result.

TFred
 
Last edited:

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
Wow... my perspective is the opposite.

I want to eliminate schools being gun free zones.

With the new administration in Richmond, do you think that's going to happen this year? I certainly don't.

If I don't think I can score a touchdown on a given play, I'll try to score a first down. If successful, I'm that much closer to the end zone for the following play.

If we can't get the right to carry prohibition lifted for all schools, let's try to get it lifted for some. We'll be that much closer to lifting it for all when we can improve the line-up of players in Richmond in the future. We'd already have to carry in schools in VA, and could just broaden the the circle some more to include public schools.

I think there'd be a good number of private schools that allowed carry. The private schools I'm familiar with (like the one my kids attend) are very conservative. My daughter has a classmate who is an accomplished shooter, shooting under the school's name, and the school posted a proud post of facebook recently touting one of her match wins. I think Sheriff Diggs recent had a son graduate from there as well. At sporting events, I'm often talking guns with other dads.

Anyway, I ask that you keep an open mind toward this bill, as I will too.

For now, I see it as a way to move us further in the right direction, until that time when we can get all of what we want.

Haven't made up my mind totally yet Dr. Mark.

Part of what concerns me is that the bigger heavy hitters (large church affiliated private schools) will not chose to allow guns - so there will be little progress. Then when it comes time to try the same thing with public schools, the word will be that the private sector did not endorse this.

I'm very hesitant to have a question asked to which I do not know the answer. Look who is submitting the bill and ask yourself why - where is the fishhook? Think it well may be in the paragraph just above. Peter Nap calls it a Trogan Horse.

I do agree 100% that good people with guns should be allowed in all schools. In states that permit such there have been no negative events - that speaks volumes.

Now if we must have a distinction between public and private schools, then caste the blanket of preemption over those that are public and leave the private educators with the choice - that fits the private property thinking. I fear only authorizing private schools to choose will leave public schools on a dead end street with no turn around.
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
--snipped--
Cole states, and PVC provides comment in the original article indicating this bill was submitted at the request of VCDL! The day VCDL is duped by the other side, is the day we all might as well throw in the towel!

If Cole's account is true, that he was approached by "some private schools," it would certainly seem to follow that should the bill pass, at least one would change their policy as a result.

TFred
I'm not speaking in opposition to the bill - my only point is that I have reservations. Would have preferred that all schools be included.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
This year I've already said that we aren't going to get any pro gun bills signed into law. Sorta a dry year so to speak. That reminds me of one of my '

Nap time stories:uhoh:

I get 90% of my deer hunting done during bow and muzzle loader season because of those ^&*( Dog hunters.

This year there weren't many acorns which is what Deer eat early in the season.
That means a big change in Deer movements and probably longer shots because they were searching for food.

It's illegal to bait as in putting out corn.

Some lucky hunters discovered a bumper crop of acorns under burb trees, so they scooped them up in buckets and scattered them where acorns normally are at their stands.

The Deer being desperate for acorns, threw all caution to the wind and went after these acorns....and were turned into Deer Burger.

Naps Story Moral.


Don't get turned into Deer Burger!
 
Top