Naaa, I just made it while I was waiting for a video to render:lol:
-
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.
-
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.
HB 139 sure looks like Constiutional Carry to me
- Thread starter The Wolfhound
- Start date
Naaa, I just made it while I was waiting for a video to render:lol:
DrMark
Lone Star Veteran
Constitutional Carry is probably my #1, though state-wide pre-emption is close.
:banana:
:banana:
Lori really has very little clout. She's like a cat that gets it's tail caught under a rocker. It squals and annoys everyone, but no one really cares.
If this is to pass it needs the support here and on every pro gun board around. Places like Richmond Guns will certainly oppose it.
We need to get involved. constant emails and calls just to get it on the floor....but it can be done!
Marco
Regular Member
DrMark
Lone Star Veteran
2a4all
Regular Member
A few questions:
The exceptions (18.2-308.B.3,4) for owners to carry waepons to/from places of purchase or repair and for weapons collectors to travel to and from relevant activities with their weapons unloaded and securely wrapped are retained. About the only thing left to unload is a slingshot.:uhoh:
The provision for carrying a concealed loaded handgun secured in a container (18.2-308.B.10) is deleted.
The requirement (18.2-308.1.C) to either have your handgun stored unloaded in a closed container or to have a Virginia-Issued CHP to enter school grounds is retained (and clarified).
You must have a CHP to drive onto school property to pick up your kid, and if you have to enter the school, you'll need to leave school property, disarm, unload and store your firearm, then return to school property to conduct your business.:uhoh:
This sounds like we're back to pre July 2011 rules.
The exceptions (18.2-308.B.3,4) for owners to carry waepons to/from places of purchase or repair and for weapons collectors to travel to and from relevant activities with their weapons unloaded and securely wrapped are retained. About the only thing left to unload is a slingshot.:uhoh:
The provision for carrying a concealed loaded handgun secured in a container (18.2-308.B.10) is deleted.
The requirement (18.2-308.1.C) to either have your handgun stored unloaded in a closed container or to have a Virginia-Issued CHP to enter school grounds is retained (and clarified).
You must have a CHP to drive onto school property to pick up your kid, and if you have to enter the school, you'll need to leave school property, disarm, unload and store your firearm, then return to school property to conduct your business.:uhoh:
This sounds like we're back to pre July 2011 rules.
TFred
Regular Member
grylnsmn
Regular Member
Except that 18.2-308.1 applies all of the exceptions in 18.2-308, including the secured container exemption. That means that currently, under Virginia law you don't need a permit to store a loaded handgun in a secured container in your car on school property. By removing that provision on the basis that a permit is no longer required, and then maintaining the "drop off your kid" exception for permit holders, it forces the situation that 2a4all describes.
I would prefer to keep the secured container exception, even if we only move it to 18.2-308.1 to accompany the "drop off your kid" exception, because that would be the only circumstance where it would be needed. (After all, technically federal law requires a permit within 1000 feet of school property.)
TFred
Regular Member
Ah, yes, good point. I suspect that most people are not aware of that nuance. I think that was an accident to start with, and I'm not sure it was ever tested in a court case. Anybody know?
TFred
vt357
Regular Member
After a brief overview I like this bill (though it's silly that anyone would be able to carry a concealed handgun but not s switchblade or brass knuckles). But removing the secured container exemption is UNACCEPTABLE. For someone who frequently has business on school property and has to get out of the car, it is a HUGE PITA to have to unload before entering school property, then reload after leaving school property. This past 2 years since that exemption was added has been so nice to just be able to leave it in the glove box or console.
No real comments yet except a few caveats.
1. I'm sure the authors of this bill will amend it shortly to cover some wording.
2. It will undergo a hatchet job in committee, assuming it even makes it there.
3. If it makes it to the floor(s) it will be written, rewritten and written again and not for the better.
4. Schools and school carry in any form will be a major source of contention.
5. Even with it's flaws, it is one of the finest pieces of legislation I've seen in 20 years.
1. I'm sure the authors of this bill will amend it shortly to cover some wording.
2. It will undergo a hatchet job in committee, assuming it even makes it there.
3. If it makes it to the floor(s) it will be written, rewritten and written again and not for the better.
4. Schools and school carry in any form will be a major source of contention.
5. Even with it's flaws, it is one of the finest pieces of legislation I've seen in 20 years.
Last edited:
VCDL President
Centurion
John Pierce
John Pierce drafted that bill for VCDL and we asked Delegate Cole to introduce it for us. However, some of the wording is different (we did not have a requirement that only a VA-CHP holder would be permitted to have a handgun in his car on K-12 school gorunds) - could be Legislative Services made some changes. We will look into it. As Peter Nap points out, there will probably be some changes.
John Pierce drafted that bill for VCDL and we asked Delegate Cole to introduce it for us. However, some of the wording is different (we did not have a requirement that only a VA-CHP holder would be permitted to have a handgun in his car on K-12 school gorunds) - could be Legislative Services made some changes. We will look into it. As Peter Nap points out, there will probably be some changes.
I'm glad to hear it is a VCDL Bill Philip.
The PAC, you and especially John, deserve a special pat on the back!
Mark Cole has already gotten his portrait!:lol:
grylnsmn
Regular Member
Did the VCDL draft include the secured container portion?
Walt_Kowalski
Regular Member
Thanks! It's got my support!
VCDL President
Centurion
Yes, I believe that it did. The idea is that is not needed. As far as how that might effect K-12, is a valid question.
2a4all
Regular Member
It would seem prudent to reinstate the "closed container" clause before this bill actually goes anywhere. BTW, didn't VCDL argue for this exception originally? It seems as thought we've shot ourselves in the foot (AD?).
Last edited:
2a4all
Regular Member
The Closed Container Loophole?
As this bill deletes the basic requirement to have a valid CHP to carry concealed, it allows those under 21 to do so.
Some of these individuals would still be in high school.
If the "closed container" clause is reinstated, we could have situations where students were (inadvertandly?) legally carrying loaded handguns onto K-12 school property.
As this bill deletes the basic requirement to have a valid CHP to carry concealed, it allows those under 21 to do so.
Some of these individuals would still be in high school.
If the "closed container" clause is reinstated, we could have situations where students were (inadvertandly?) legally carrying loaded handguns onto K-12 school property.
vt357
Regular Member
Isn't that the same situation as colleges though? Don't pretty much all public schools in the major localities (ie non-rural) prohibit guns on their property for their students? I have seen quite a few news articles about kids getting in trouble for having their hunting rifles in their vehicles. That's legal if done properly, but they get suspended or expelled anyway for violating school policy.
wylde007
Regular Member
I don't see how, since public schools are administered by LOCAL governments and thereby obligated to honour preemption... they cannot institute "policies" which supersede state law. Period.
Please cite an instance where a student who has had a lawfully stowed LONG GUN was suspended or expelled in Virginia.