Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 61

Thread: HB 375 Firearms; workplace rules by localities.

  1. #1
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580

    HB 375 Firearms; workplace rules by localities.

    Kind of surprised you missed this one TFred.


    HB 375 Firearms; workplace rules by localities.

    Brenda L. Pogge | all patrons ... notes
    | add to my profiles


    Summary as introduced:
    Control of firearms by localities; workplace rules. Prohibits localities from adopting a workplace rule that prevents an employee from storing a lawfully possessed firearm and ammunition in his locked motor vehicle. The firearm must be in a secured container or compartment in the vehicle. Full text:
    01/10/12 House: Prefiled and ordered printed; offered 01/11/12 12100430D pdf

    Status:
    01/10/12 House: Prefiled and ordered printed; offered 01/11/12 12100430D
    01/10/12 House: Referred to Committee on Militia, Police and Public Safety


  2. #2
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by peter nap View Post
    Kind of surprised you missed this one TFred.
    D'oh! Sure did!! They all run together after a while!

    TFred
    Last edited by TFred; 01-12-2012 at 01:43 AM.

  3. #3
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Interesting... it's just for city/county/town employees...

    TFred

  4. #4
    Regular Member mk4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    548
    that's sure the way it reads to me, too, TF.
    i was hoping for the so-called 'parking lot' bill covering employees of private companies.

  5. #5
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by mk4 View Post
    that's sure the way it reads to me, too, TF.
    i was hoping for the so-called 'parking lot' bill covering employees of private companies.
    Perhaps it's an intentional first step. If the sky doesn't fall after a year of this, it may be easier to expand it a bit.

    Just a guess.

    TFred

  6. #6
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    Perhaps it's an intentional first step. If the sky doesn't fall after a year of this, it may be easier to expand it a bit.

    Just a guess.

    TFred
    Could be but it seems like a poor first step. There is often the hidden agenda (Which can be good or bad). That's another one I'll just have to see what Philip says about it.

  7. #7
    Regular Member DontTreadOnMeVa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    132

    So very disappointed....

    The one bill that I want the most is a good parking lot bill. How many other Virginians are like me and and are forced to not carry wile communing back and forth to work most days of the year? I am disarmed about 240 times a year because of this. I can not even began to express my disappointment.

  8. #8
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by DontTreadOnMeVa View Post
    The one bill that I want the most is a good parking lot bill. How many other Virginians are like me and and are forced to not carry wile communing back and forth to work most days of the year? I am disarmed about 240 times a year because of this. I can not even began to express my disappointment.
    There are at least 6 different bills that poorly attempt to codify a Castle Doctrine... no reason to assume that there won't be another parking lot bill come along yet.

    I haven't heard one way or another.

    TFred

  9. #9
    Regular Member DontTreadOnMeVa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    132
    Quote Originally Posted by peter nap View Post
    Could be but it seems like a poor first step. There is often the hidden agenda (Which can be good or bad). That's another one I'll just have to see what Philip says about it.
    I guess if someone is a government employee ones right to be able to carry to and from work is more important and needs special protection....work in the private sector and forget about it.

    This is the second time she has given us a crappy parking lot bill. Last year when discussing HB 2380 she said, "Virginia’s laws should be balanced and fair for all" so I must ask a question. How is HB 375 balanced and fair for all? Last year it was a bill that gave civil immunity to businesses that did not ban employees from storing a firearm locked motor vehicle but did not prevent them from having a policy that infringed on our rights. Again would have done nothing for most us.

    I want a good parking lot bill, not just for me and not just for employees of local localities. Why cant we have a strait parking lot bill offered up? Is there a reason Pogge wont put forth a clean bill?


  10. #10
    Regular Member DontTreadOnMeVa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    132
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    There are at least 6 different bills that poorly attempt to codify a Castle Doctrine... no reason to assume that there won't be another parking lot bill come along yet.

    I haven't heard one way or another.

    TFred
    I hope your right...I really do.

  11. #11
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by DontTreadOnMeVa View Post
    I guess if someone is a government employee ones right to be able to carry to and from work is more important and needs special protection....work in the private sector and forget about it.

    This is the second time she has given us a crappy parking lot bill. Last year when discussing HB 2380 she said, "Virginia’s laws should be balanced and fair for all" so I must ask a question. How is HB 375 balanced and fair for all? Last year it was a bill that gave civil immunity to businesses that did not ban employees from storing a firearm locked motor vehicle but did not prevent them from having a policy that infringed on our rights. Again would have done nothing for most us.

    I want a good parking lot bill, not just for me and not just for employees of local localities. Why cant we have a strait parking lot bill offered up? Is there a reason Pogge wont put forth a clean bill?

    Yes, there's a fairly obvious answer. As bad as the bill was last year, the private industry interests gutted it to beyond the point of useless. At least with this bill, private business has no dog in the fight, so maybe they will leave it alone... it's at least a foot in the door.

    TFred, trying to find a less dark side...

  12. #12
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Lynchburg, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,201
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    Interesting... it's just for city/county/town employees...

    TFred
    When VCDLPresident was at the VCDL Roanoke picnic back in October he mentioned that the VCDL had considered pushing a "parking lot bill" that started with localities and state agencies first. The idea behind this was to eliminate private business' objection to similar restrictions being forced on them when the government itself had no such binders.

    Of course a bill could be drafter that made the restrictions on both.
    Last edited by jmelvin; 01-12-2012 at 09:03 AM.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Pacific Northwest
    Posts
    623
    Quote Originally Posted by DontTreadOnMeVa View Post
    I guess if someone is a government employee ones right to be able to carry to and from work is more important and needs special protection....work in the private sector and forget about it.

    This is the second time she has given us a crappy parking lot bill. Last year when discussing HB 2380 she said, "Virginia’s laws should be balanced and fair for all" so I must ask a question. How is HB 375 balanced and fair for all? Last year it was a bill that gave civil immunity to businesses that did not ban employees from storing a firearm locked motor vehicle but did not prevent them from having a policy that infringed on our rights. Again would have done nothing for most us.

    I want a good parking lot bill, not just for me and not just for employees of local localities. Why cant we have a strait parking lot bill offered up? Is there a reason Pogge wont put forth a clean bill?

    As others have mentioned, this removes the potential for opposition from private interests.

    Remember, the government has multiple roles. When it is acting as an employer it has different powers than when it is acting in a legislative capacity. As a result, while the state doesn't have the authority to prosecute you for your on-the-job speech, they still have the authority to fire you if you are a state employee for that same speech.

    For the state to require private businesses to allow firearms on their property (in any way, even inside a private vehicle) introduces potential constitutional challenges that don't apply when the state is regulating property that it controls. This bill seems to be working on the latter to weaken the case against the former.
    Alma 43:47 - "And again, the Lord has said that: Ye shall defend your families even unto bloodshed...."
    Self defense isn't just a good idea, it's a commandment.

  14. #14
    Regular Member wylde007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Va Beach, Occupied VA
    Posts
    3,037

    Angry

    Quote Originally Posted by DontTreadOnMeVa View Post
    Last year it was a bill that gave civil immunity to businesses that did not ban employees from storing a firearm locked motor vehicle but did not prevent them from having a policy that infringed on our rights. Again would have done nothing for most us.
    You and I were standing right next to each other whilst another member defended that bill, saying the language was "good". I don't know about you, but I almost became violently ill.

    It was all I could do to hold my tongue.
    The quiet war has begun, with silent weapons
    And the newest slavery is to keep the people poor, and stupid
    Novos ordo seclorum ~ Mustaine

    Never argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

  15. #15
    Campaign Veteran roscoe13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Catlett, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,134
    Quote Originally Posted by wylde007 View Post
    It was all I could do to hold my tongue.
    Maybe you shouldn't have....
    "The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good." - George Washington

  16. #16
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Lynchburg, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,201
    Quote Originally Posted by roscoe13 View Post
    Maybe you shouldn't have....
    Yup, I'd have liked to hear the argument as I can't recall what it was now. I think I was in the same group as Dontreadonme... and did offer some defense of it, but only from the perspective that it at least gave employers the chance to do the right thing without forcing them.

  17. #17
    Regular Member DontTreadOnMeVa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    132
    Quote Originally Posted by jmelvin View Post
    Yup, I'd have liked to hear the argument as I can't recall what it was now. I think I was in the same group as Dontreadonme... and did offer some defense of it, but only from the perspective that it at least gave employers the chance to do the right thing without forcing them.
    That is the problem, it tossed a bone to employers but demanded nothing in return. If they want civil protection, I am fine with that as they should have it....but you can have it with the passage of a true parking lot bill. Why give away a bargaining chip for nothing? ...in hopes they will do the right thing when they have failed to do so in the past?



    Quote Originally Posted by wylde007 View Post
    You and I were standing right next to each other whilst another member defended that bill, saying the language was "good". I don't know about you, but I almost became violently ill.

    It was all I could do to hold my tongue.
    I think we both came close to brain aneurysms over it. ...if a good parking lot bill does not come up this year, I may still have one.

  18. #18
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Lynchburg, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,201
    Quote Originally Posted by DontTreadOnMeVa View Post
    That is the problem, it tossed a bone to employers but demanded nothing in return. If they want civil protection, I am fine with that as they should have it....but you can have it with the passage of a true parking lot bill. Why give away a bargaining chip for nothing? ...in hopes they will do the right thing when they have failed to do so in the past?





    I think we both came close to brain aneurysms over it. ...if a good parking lot bill does not come up this year, I may still have one.
    You have to remember that the initial version of the bill tossed a bone to employers, but only if they allowed employees to keep firearms and ammunition in their cars on the employer's property. The modified portion of the bill that became attrocious (and oddly was still supported by VCDL) game them civil immunity without regard to their stance. I've seen how that works in my former state of Ohio. It means employers can throw up No Guns signs at will and never have to worry about any repercussions.

  19. #19
    Regular Member wylde007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Va Beach, Occupied VA
    Posts
    3,037
    It only gave civil immunity, it did nothing to block employers from prohibiting firearms/weapons in personal vehicles.

    The problem is that most of them who prohibit weapons aren't interested in civil liability. They are California liberals and don't want weapons on their property and believe that by prohibiting employees from having them they will somehow prevent criminal activity or make the workplace "safe". My boss is the same way.

    What got me worst was the bill being described as "good"... and I was fresh out of duct tape.
    The quiet war has begun, with silent weapons
    And the newest slavery is to keep the people poor, and stupid
    Novos ordo seclorum ~ Mustaine

    Never argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

  20. #20
    Regular Member paramedic70002's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Franklin, VA, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,448
    Maybe they'll get around to defining the word "secured" since it seems to be gaining in popularity with gun bills.
    "Each worker carried his sword strapped to his side." Nehemiah 4:18

    Guns Save Lives. Paramedics Save Lives. But...
    Paramedics With Guns Scare People!

  21. #21
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580
    Quote Originally Posted by paramedic70002 View Post
    Maybe they'll get around to defining the word "secured" since it seems to be gaining in popularity with gun bills.

    Naps Practical Dictionary
    Secured...used with object...Verb

    Put somewhere where the cops can't see it and in a different location from license and registration.

    Used in conjunction with:
    Don't tell, even if asked.


    Often associated with:
    No sir Officer, I ain't got no guns!
    Last edited by peter nap; 01-13-2012 at 02:39 PM.

  22. #22
    Regular Member scouser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    1,232
    Devil's Advocate time.

    Let's say you want your firearm with you for your commute and any side trips on your way to and from work and leave it locked in your glovebox while you are working. If your employer has a no firearms policy how would they know you had one with you if you keep your mouth shut about it and avoid going places after work that a co worker whose stance on firearms is questionable might also be visiting?

    It's not a concern for me, I'm lucky, my bosses are reasonable people and understand there is a difference between (1) having a firearm in your vehicle because it's there and (2) carrying it into work with you. (2) would be nice, but (1) is much better than many have.
    Last edited by scouser; 01-13-2012 at 08:08 PM.

  23. #23
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by scouser View Post
    Devil's Advocate time.

    Let's say you want your firearm with you for your commute and any side trips on your way to and from work and leave it locked in your glovebox while you are working. If your employer has a no firearms policy how would they know you had one with you if you keep your mouth shut about it and avoid going places after work that a co worker whose stance on firearms is questionable might also be visiting?

    It's not a concern for me, I'm lucky, my bosses are reasonable people and understand there is a difference between (1) having a firearm in your vehicle because it's there and (2) carrying it into work with you. (2) would be nice, but (1) is much better than many have.
    The Law of Large Numbers tells us that if you do make enough stops on the way to or from work, eventually, someone from work will see you.

    "Mathematician's advocate" at work.

    TFred

  24. #24
    Regular Member 45acpForMe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Yorktown, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,803
    How about a "Respect for Private Property" bill that definies a persons car as PRIVATE PROPERTY not to be subject to employers search unless a legal search warrant were obtained (for a case of stolen property).

    I am willing to respect a companies private property and not take my gun out of my car while on their property if they will respect my private property rights meaning they can take their hands/minds/rules off the contents of my car!!!!

    To adhere to the law the gun would need to be unobservable from someone looking in through the window and the car locked while unattended.

  25. #25
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Amendments added, removing schools from the scope of this bill, and adding a section to clarify it only applies to workplaces.

    http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp...?121+sum+HB375

    As amended, passed the House 75-25 today.

    TFred

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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