Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Weapons ban in VA Community Service Boards

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    34

    Post imported post

    All VA Community Service Boards (CSBs) are political arms of the state and receive funding from both the state and local governments.

    I noticed a sign that said "All weapons prohibited" and someone who works there told me that this is also specified in the employee policies.

    It would seem to me that state pre-emption would apply since this is not a private business and receives state funding, similar to Danladi Moore's case at the mall.

    Does anyone have any definitive information or references? How valid is this prohibition?

    Thanks.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    Perhaps the Va. Administrative Code gives them authority for this? You'd have to look it up.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    205

    Post imported post

    I looked; I found nothing relating "firearms" to "Community Service Board" in the VAC. I suspect it's only a policy for employees. Plus, they are definitely part of local government per http://www.vacsb.org/aboutCSB.asp. I suggest you FOIA them for their records relating to firearms bans.

  4. #4
    Founder's Club Member Tess's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Alexandria, Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    3,765

    Post imported post

    GoldDot wrote:
    All VA Community Service Boards (CSBs) are political arms of the state and receive funding from both the state and local governments.

    I noticed a sign that said "All weapons prohibited" and someone who works there told me that this is also specified in the employee policies.

    It would seem to me that state pre-emption would apply since this is not a private business and receives state funding, similar to Danladi Moore's case at the mall.

    Does anyone have any definitive information or references? How valid is this prohibition?

    Thanks.
    I have a son who receives CSB services. I noted when we went to his intake meeting that their floor in the Fairfax County Government Building was posted.

    I mentioned this to someone - my grasp of the laws was quite new at the time - but haven't had to go back there, so I wasn't able to check.

    I believe those signs to be unenforceable, due to preemption, but haven't researched it further.
    Laws alone can not secure freedom of expression; in order that every man present his views without penalty there must be spirit of tolerance in the entire population. -Albert Einstein

  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682

    Post imported post

    By state law they have the right to prevent employees from carrying - even to prohibit storage in private vehicles. However, they do not have the authority to prohibit private citizens from carrying, as the GA has not granted that power to them.

    Since CSBs are part of the "mental health"* system, they pretty much come down in the column of "guns are bad" and "anything smacking of violence or control is bad". It's too bad their panties get all in a knot over the issue, but they need to learn to live with the fact that inanimate objects are not capable of independent action - sort of like they try to help some of their clients deal with other delusions, no?

    * disclaimer: I used to be employed in the system. I never thought it was designed to promote healthy mentality, which is why I left for other employment.

    Instead of FOIA-ing them for records about firearms bans, why not ask under what authority they are exempt from state preemption? (emphasis by underlining added below)
    § 15.2-915. Control of firearms; applicability to authorities and local governmental agencies.

    A. No locality shall adopt or enforce any ordinance, resolution or motion, as permitted by § 15.2-1425, and no agent of such locality shall take any administrative action, governing the purchase, possession, transfer, ownership, carrying, storage or transporting of firearms, ammunition, or components or combination thereof other than those expressly authorized by statute. For purposes of this section, a statute that does not refer to firearms, ammunition, or components or combination thereof, shall not be construed to provide express authorization.

    Nothing in this section shall prohibit a locality from adopting workplace rules relating to terms and conditions of employment of the workforce. Nothing in this section shall prohibit a law-enforcement officer, as defined in § 9.1-101 from acting within the scope of his duties.

    The provisions of this section applicable to a locality shall also apply to any authority or to a local governmental entity, including a department or agency, but not including any local or regional jail or juvenile detention facility.

    B. Any local ordinance, resolution or motion adopted prior to the effective date of this act governing the purchase, possession, transfer, ownership, carrying or transporting of firearms, ammunition, or components or combination thereof, other than those expressly authorized by statute, is invalid.

    (1987, c. 629, § 15.1-29.15; 1988, c. 392; 1997, cc. 550, 587; 2002, c. 484; 2003, c. 943; 2004, cc. 837, 923.)
    stay safe.

    skidmark
    "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

  6. #6
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,611

    Post imported post

    And there in lies the answer - they cannot restrict the general public.

    § 15.2-915. Control of firearms; applicability to authorities and local governmental agencies. The provisions of this section applicable to a locality shall also apply to any authority or to a local governmental entity, including a department or agency.

    Yata hey
    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.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    34

    Post imported post

    Grapeshot wrote:
    And there in lies the answer - they cannot restrict the general public.

    § 15.2-915. Control of firearms; applicability to authorities and local governmental agencies. The provisions of this section applicable to a locality shall also apply to any authority or to a local governmental entity, including a department or agency.

    Yata hey
    But it appears that they can legally restrict employees?

    Thanks.

  8. #8
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,611

    Post imported post

    GoldDot wrote:
    But it appears that they can legally restrict employees?
    Yep, sure can.

    "Nothing in this section shall prohibit a locality from adopting workplace rules relating to terms and conditions of employment of the workforce."

    Yata hey
    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.

  9. #9
    Regular Member streetdoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Unionville, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    342

    Post imported post

    Oh yes, Local Government can regulate their employees ability to carry or posses firearms while at work as a condition of employment. What I have been trying to get clearly defined is what is a condition of employment? Is it anything listed in the employee handbook of rules and regulations or does it need to state that this is a condition of employment?
    '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!

  10. #10
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,611

    Post imported post

    streetdoc wrote:
    Oh yes, Local Government can regulate their employees ability to carry or posses firearms while at work as a condition of employment. What I have been trying to get clearly defined is what is a condition of employment? Is it anything listed in the employee handbook of rules and regulations or does it need to state that this is a condition of employment?
    I might be wrong but I think a "condition of employment" is what ever the local Czar or Czarina says it is and has published....subject to change/modification at anytime.

    Few people have an employment contact and even the Rules and Regulations or Conditions of Employment are seldom (never?) part of that contract.

    Yata hey
    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.

  11. #11
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Post imported post

    To what extent does Virginia being an "at will" employment state affect state government employees?

    TFred


  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    34

    Post imported post

    My friend does not work on a contract and although it is stated in his employee handbook, I cannot see where that can be interpreted as a condition of employment as is a drug screen, background check etc.

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682

    Post imported post

    A "condition of employment" for persons employed by actual state agencies is covered in the Department of Human Resources Manual. However, CSB employees are NOT included in folks covered by that rather large document ( http://www.dhrm.virginia.gov/hrpolicy/web/pol1_80.html) emphasis added:



    Prohibited actions


    Prohibited conduct includes, but is not limited to:

    • injuring another person physically;
    • engaging in behavior that creates a reasonable fear of injury to another person;
    • engaging in behavior that subjects another individual to extreme emotional distress;
    • possessing, brandishing, or using a weapon that is not required by the individual’s position while on state premises or engaged in state business;
    • intentionally damaging property;
    • threatening to injure an individual or to damage property;
    • committing injurious acts motivated by, or related to, domestic violence or sexual harassment; and
    • retaliating against any employee who, in good faith, reports a violation of this policy.

    Note: Employees may be authorized by their agencies to possess weapons in the workplace if they are required as a part of employees’ job duties with the Commonwealth.



    There may be a workplace violence/workplace violence prevention (a much better title, IMHO) policy created by the CSB which would affect employees -- but this has NO bearing on members of the general public, including clients of the CSB who are not otherwise prohibitted persons. (Although I am pretty sure most CSBs would find a way to drop a patient/client who exercised their 2nd Amendment rights while on CSB premises, possibly resulting in said patient/client losing their 2A rights. )

    None of this bears on an employee being in an "at-will" status, as are all those employed by the State or its political subdivisions. If there is a written policy that is violated, the employee is liable for termination based on minimally failing to follow written instructions/policy, or worse violating a policy on workplace violence/workplace violence prevention. Depending on the agency, they may also be barred from future entry onto the specific agency's property with being found there prima facia evidence of trespassing. (Seen it done & seen it happen to folks merely trying to pick up personal belongings left behind when escorted off state agerncy property.)

    Should Golddot's friend be caught violating policy the least they face is termination of the contract, with all the fuss that entails.

    stay safe.

    skidmark (retired state employee - how can you tell since I don't do anything now, either? )
    "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

Posting Permissions

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