Governor to BAN OC in Executive Branch Buildings

wrearick · Nov 23, 2015

I am not a lawyer but....

Does anyone else see an issue with the
"Required Lease Term" portion of the order?

"All leases entered into where an Executive branch agency is the lessor shall contain a prohibition on open-carry firearms so as to be binding upon all tenants. All leases entered into for the benefit of an executive branch agency shall contain this prohibition to indicate the lessor's acknowledgment."

emphasis added by poster

So, to be able to lease part of your building to a state agency you have to require ALL of your tenants to enforce this restriction...I see owners just banning firearms open or concealed to be able to participate in getting state agency rental money.

wrearick · Nov 23, 2015

And from the emergency text link above for the new legislation for "Concealed Carry" :

"A. This chapter applies to all buildings and workplace facilities owned, leased, or controlled in whole or in part, by or for an executive branch agency. "

So even if they only control "part" of the building or workplace facility the words apply to the whole building?

and
"State office" means any building or workplace facility owned, leased or controlled by or for an executive branch agency, including buildings which support the workplace facility. This includes that portion of premises open to others and then used exclusively for functions or activities sponsored by an executive branch agency's tenant(s) while such functions are taking place." emphasis added.

So the lobby to access the elevators to go to a floor not occupied by state offices would also be covered?!

Grapeshot · Nov 23, 2015

Lets hope that the House of Delegates reads that the same way that wrearick does. That could cause the backlash that we need.

I am reminded of the quote by one of the delegates at a committee meeting - "This is the people's house."

jmelvin · Nov 23, 2015

With that wonderful extra bit in the regulation Terry McAuliffe and his supporting Democrats have done their best to outlaw even the accidental appearance of guns near a property where a state agency resides. Say for example you are a hunter and your regular sporting goods store is in the same strip mall as an Virginia ABC Store. Well up til now it was no big deal even if you carried a openly holstered sidearm openly into the ABC Store as you shopped for something to enjoy later; but now thanks to the Governor McAuliffe and his party intentionally targeting gun owners, that same hunter may not even sling his hunting rifle over his shoulder and carry it into the gun store for repairs lest he violate the openly carried firearm prohibition forced upon the landowner by the governor and his emergency declaration, since the carrying of that hunting rifle is certainly not incidental to hunting. Carry it in a gun bag into the store? Maybe, maybe not. Do you trust the next year of your life to the whims of those dedicated to eradicating gun ownership by anyone who is not an on duty government official or a scofflaw in the US?

Are you someone who only carries a discreetly carried (concealed) handgun and shops in your local Food Lion for groceries? Well you best hope there's not an ABC Store or a DMV location in the same strip mall operated by the same leasing company or even an accidental exposure of your normally well covered sidearm may see you spending some time on the pokey, because that thing is not completely hidden from common observation.

Make no mistake, even though McAuliffe and his party say they make concessions for those who only have guns for hunting, their actions say differently.

skidmark · Nov 23, 2015

wrearick said:
Does anyone else see an issue with the
"Required Lease Term" portion of the order?

"All leases entered into where an Executive branch agency is the lessor shall contain a prohibition on open-carry firearms so as to be binding upon all tenants. All leases entered into for the benefit of an executive branch agency shall contain this prohibition to indicate the lessor's acknowledgment."

emphasis added by poster

So, to be able to lease part of your building to a state agency you have to require ALL of your tenants to enforce this restriction...I see owners just banning firearms open or concealed to be able to participate in getting state agency rental money.

You are confusing lessor (the person/entity leasing out the property with lessee (the one paying to use the property without actually buying it or having to do upkeep/repairs).

stay safe.

skidmark · Nov 23, 2015

jmelvin said:
With that wonderful extra bit in the regulation Terry McAuliffe and his supporting Democrats have done their best to outlaw even the accidental appearance of guns near a property where a state agency resides. Say for example you are a hunter and your regular sporting goods store is in the same strip mall as an Virginia ABC Store. Well up til now it was no big deal even if you carried a openly holstered sidearm openly into the ABC Store as you shopped for something to enjoy later; but now thanks to the Governor McAuliffe and his party intentionally targeting gun owners, that same hunter may not even sling his hunting rifle over his shoulder and carry it into the gun store for repairs lest he violate the openly carried firearm prohibition forced upon the landowner by the governor and his emergency declaration, since the carrying of that hunting rifle is certainly not incidental to hunting. Carry it in a gun bag into the store? Maybe, maybe not. Do you trust the next year of your life to the whims of those dedicated to eradicating gun ownership by anyone who is not an on duty government official or a scofflaw in the US?

Are you someone who only carries a discreetly carried (concealed) handgun and shops in your local Food Lion for groceries? Well you best hope there's not an ABC Store or a DMV location in the same strip mall operated by the same leasing company or even an accidental exposure of your normally well covered sidearm may see you spending some time on the pokey, because that thing is not completely hidden from common observation.

Make no mistake, even though McAuliffe and his party say they make concessions for those who only have guns for hunting, their actions say differently.

You are wound way too tight. The Commonwealth leases the portion of the land/building from the threshold back to the plane of the back door. The property owner still owns/controls the strip mall property, parking lot, etc.

To give you but one example of the other way around - the Commonwealth has several orchards out in the western part of the state that used to be worked by prison inmates until something caused that to be unacceptably unsafe. They rent out the orchards - a few of them have "pick your own" days. The lessee (the farmer who rents the orchard from the commonwealth) will be required to post and enforce no-firearms on the property. I'm sure there are office spaces that are rented out - I just can't bring any to mind.

Many of the DMV offices are in buildings built by the property owner and rented out (along with the parking lot and surrounding lands) to the Commonwealth.

stay safe.

scouser · Nov 23, 2015

marshaul said:
You're being too charitable. Thanks to LEOSA, "when they are carrying the firearm within that authority" applies at all times. All you have to do is be a more equal animal.

:lol: I saw what you did there :lol:

skidmark · Nov 23, 2015

wrearick said:
And from the emergency text link above for the new legislation for "Concealed Carry" :

"A. This chapter applies to all buildings and workplace facilities owned, leased, or controlled in whole or in part, by or for an executive branch agency. "

So even if they only control "part" of the building or workplace facility the words apply to the whole building?

and
"State office" means any building or workplace facility owned, leased or controlled by or for an executive branch agency, including buildings which support the workplace facility. This includes that portion of premises open to others and then used exclusively for functions or activities sponsored by an executive branch agency's tenant(s) while such functions are taking place." emphasis added.

So the lobby to access the elevators to go to a floor not occupied by state offices would also be covered?!

This one is such an egregious abridgement of the property owner/lessor's rights. One lessor who feels they really do not need to rent to the state can destroy this - at least for their property. As I understand it, the lessor would be responsible for at least posting the property, and possibly calling the cops to have it enforced. That means putting a manager/agent on the premises during business hours. Do you think the Commonwealth will renegotiate the lease to adjust for that imposed additional cost? Or will they settle for losing tax money due to downward adjusted gross income?

It's also going to end up playing havoc with state employees who work in buildings rented by the state. If the state exerts control over the associated parking lots the employee's parking is considered paid for by the state and becomes taxable imputed income.

As with most state actions that are not run through and vetted by the General Assembly budget and tax committees, this is going to end up a spectacular Chinese fire drill.

stay safe.

marshaul · Nov 23, 2015

scouser said:
:lol: I saw what you did there :lol:

Well, at least somebody can appreciate it.

wrearick · Nov 24, 2015

skidmark said:
You are confusing lessor (the person/entity leasing out the property with lessee (the one paying to use the property without actually buying it or having to do upkeep/repairs).

stay safe.

Thank you, I understand the difference now. This would apply to anyone wanting to rent space in a government owned building. The proposed wording on the Permanent legislature (as you have noted) is not restricted to just the state being the lessor and is more invasive/intrusive.

Old Virginia Joe · Dec 4, 2015

peter nap said:
And, as far as I know, all the executive buildings have metal detectors and Capitol police. You won't get past there.

Not so, Guvnah. None of the state offices I enter have either of those concepts in place. Wide, FREAKING open!!!

paramedic70002 · Dec 5, 2015

I cruised by my local ABC store in Windsor yesterday. No gunbuster signs in sight. Perhaps there was a delay in delivering or posting the sign, of the manager "lost" it.

Tosta Dojen · Dec 14, 2015

The "emergency" regulation has been published in the Virginia Register, and the regulation is now open for public comment.

Our leaders say they want to hear from us. I don't believe that's true in this case, but let's take them up on it, shall we?

wrearick · Dec 18, 2015

I saw one from the street as I passed the DMV on Buckner and South Independence Blvd in Virginia Beach last weekend. Will try and get a picture next time I am near.

HPmatt · Dec 20, 2015

How come the Attorney General certification not address the EO50 conflict w the VA constitution? I would think one of the VA gun groups would sue as being unconstitutional.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Grapeshot · Dec 21, 2015

HPmatt said:
How come the Attorney General certification not address the EO50 conflict w the VA constitution? I would think one of the VA gun groups would sue as being unconstitutional.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The AG in Virginia seldom volunteers an opinion - he must be asked appropriately by an authorized official.

Me thinks this is a question that the present AG would avoid giving an honest answer to - such could (would?) amount to political suicide within his party.

A suit is a consideration. However, keep in mind that losing over a technicality or because a judge were to legislate from the bench would be worse than other outcomes. McAuliffe is not governor for life.

TFred · Dec 21, 2015

Grapeshot said:
A suit is a consideration. However, keep in mind that losing over a technicality or because a judge were to legislate from the bench would be worse than other outcomes. McAuliffe is not governor for life.

Maybe, maybe not. If you get killed by a bad guy because you had to leave your gun at home, in the car, etc, to comply with one of his heinous Executive Orders, then he very well would have been governor for the rest of YOUR life!

I get your point, but I'm just sayin'... Is this a matter of life and death, or isn't it?

TFred

tritonguy · Dec 21, 2015

If the state legislators can't figure out how to stop the gov's actions, perhaps they can require signs that have specific language like they do in Texas for private property.

Although I'm sure the wording would end up different, I suggest the following:

CAUTION!!! ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK.
OUR LAME-A$#, CARPET-BAGGING GOVERNOR
HAS DECLARED THIS A SELF-DEFENSE FREE ZONE!

The signs should be huge, especially at rest stops. Seems like fair warning is required there, especially in the middle of the night. Maybe at the DMV it could be a banner in the parking lot. Just saying...

Grapeshot · Dec 21, 2015

tritonguy said:
If the state legislators can't figure out how to stop the gov's actions, perhaps they can require signs that have specific language like they do in Texas for private property.

Although I'm sure the wording would end up different, I suggest the following:

CAUTION!!! ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK.
OUR LAME-A$#, CARPET-BAGGING GOVERNOR
HAS DECLARED THIS A SELF-DEFENSE FREE ZONE!

The signs should be huge, especially at rest stops. Seems like fair warning is required there, especially in the middle of the night. Maybe at the DMV it could be a banner in the parking lot. Just saying...

It isn't that the legislators can't figure it out - that's not the problem.

The House of Delegates might well pass a bill reversing McAwful's EO50. Such a bill might squeak through the Senate. Then the Terry McA** would just veto it and there isn't a large enough margin in the Senate to override his veto.

We need to take a broom to the Senate!

utbagpiper · Dec 21, 2015

Grapeshot said:
We need to take a broom to the Senate!

And then 5 minutes after repealing the gov's attack on RKBA, rein in his ability to exercise nearly so much authority via unilateral executive action.

Elections have consequences. But no single person should be permitted to exercise so much power when it comes to something like RKBA. Determining which rare venues or situations actually warrant limitations on private possession of arms should require nothing less than the full legislative debate process....ideally, some day with even that limited by strict judicial scrutiny.

Best of luck.

Charles

Governor to BAN OC in Executive Branch Buildings

Regular Member

Regular Member

Legendary Warrior

Founder's Club Member

Campaign Veteran

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Legendary Warrior

Regular Member

Regular Member

Legendary Warrior

Banned