Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Critical Problems With HB705

  1. #1
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Exclamation Critical Problems With HB705

    While reading through the Hunting Bills thread, Peter Nap posted a bit about HB705, regarding out of state permits. This bill has some critically important problems!

    HB705 seems to primarily remove all the caveats for accepting out-of-state permits. However, one critical problem is the substitution of the word "request" for "demand" as it is used in the section regarding Virginia-issued CHPs:

    From the change text of the bill, we see:

    A. A valid concealed handgun or concealed weapon permit or license issued by another state shall authorize the holder of such permit or license who is at least 21 years of age to carry a concealed handgun in the Commonwealth, provided that the permit holder also carries and presents upon the request of any law-enforcement officer a valid government-issued photo identification.

    Compare to various parts of this section, 18.2-308.01. Carrying a concealed handgun with a permit., which requires that the LEO demand to see the permit:

    The person issued the permit shall have such permit on his person at all times during which he is carrying a concealed handgun and shall display the permit and a photo identification [...] upon demand by a law-enforcement officer.

    Finally, HB705 does not contain any provision at all similar to Paragraph B of 18.2-308.01, which is also critically important:

    B. Failure to display the permit and a photo identification upon demand by a law-enforcement officer shall be punishable by a $25 civil penalty, which shall be paid into the state treasury. Any attorney for the Commonwealth of the county or city in which the alleged violation occurred may bring an action to recover the civil penalty. A court may waive such penalty upon presentation to the court of a valid permit and a government-issued photo identification. Any law-enforcement officer may issue a summons for the civil violation of failure to display the concealed handgun permit and photo identification upon demand.

    It appears to me that this bill was just thrown together without very much thought or oversight whatsoever. What can we do at this point to have these issues corrected?

    TFred

  2. #2
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Why this is bad

    If this bill becomes law as written, it sets up two different ways that permit holders are handled by LEO, depending on whether they carry a Virginia issued CHP, or an out-of-state issued permit, such as Utah or Florida.

    These discrepancies cannot be a good thing and we need to get them fixed.

    It looks like the bill passed the full House today and will head to the Senate. Hopefully we will have someone there that can introduce some amendments to bring it into line with how CHPs are handled.

    TFred

  3. #3
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,602
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    If this bill becomes law as written, it sets up two different ways that permit holders are handled by LEO, depending on whether they carry a Virginia issued CHP, or an out-of-state issued permit, such as Utah or Florida.

    These discrepancies cannot be a good thing and we need to get them fixed.

    It looks like the bill passed the full House today and will head to the Senate. Hopefully we will have someone there that can introduce some amendments to bring it into line with how CHPs are handled.

    TFred
    And pray that there are 22 senators who would vote "aye" to amend to better wording.

    VCDL is running this by the LAC.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  4. #4
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    And pray that there are 22 senators who would vote "aye" to amend to better wording.

    VCDL is running this by the LAC.
    Good to know! We talk an awful lot around here about the difference between "requests" and "demands", so it seems these words are pretty important.

    To be honest, I'm much more concerned about that missing Paragraph B. That returns the out-of-state permitters back to a situation where forgetting a wallet can make you a gun criminal. Nobody needs that.

    TFred

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    So if you ask the cop if it is a request or demand and he says "demand" then under the bill you could refuse? Hmmm

Posting Permissions

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