SB 573: Disposal of unclaimed firearms; Capitol Police.

SB 573: Disposal of unclaimed firearms; Capitol Police.

Disposal of unclaimed firearms; Capitol Police. Provides that the Division of Capitol Police may destroy unclaimed firearms or other weapons after the items have been in their possession for 60 days.



I'm somewhat hard-pressed to imagine that this is very much of a problem... and what's the deal with destroying the gun? They need to add in Paragraph B of Mark Cole's HB 22 to require the attempted sale of such guns to licensed dealers first, then if no takers, they may be disposed of.

TFred


HB 22: Firearms; disposition thereof acquired by localities.

B. Any ordinance enacted pursuant to this section shall require that any firearm received, except a firearm of the type defined in § 18.2-288 or 18.2-299, shall be offered for sale by public auction or sealed bids to a person licensed as a dealer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 921 et seq. Notice of the date, time, and place of sale shall be given by advertisement in at least two newspapers published and having general circulation in the Commonwealth, at least one of which shall have general circulation in the locality in which the property to be sold is located. At least 30 days shall elapse between publication of the notice and the auction or the date on which sealed bids will be opened. Any firearm remaining in possession of the locality or agent of the locality after attempts to sell at public auction or by sealed bids shall be disposed of in a manner the locality deems proper, which may include destruction of the firearm or, subject to any registration requirements of federal law, sale of the firearm to a licensed dealer.

Sale to licensed dealers or auction sale to anyone who is not otherwise prohibited.

These idiots are always looking for vehicles to increase municipal revenue, I can't understand why they would let a cash cow like this slip through their fingers.

TFred said:

SB 573: Disposal of unclaimed firearms; Capitol Police.

Disposal of unclaimed firearms; Capitol Police. Provides that the Division of Capitol Police may destroy unclaimed firearms or other weapons after the items have been in their possession for 60 days.



I'm somewhat hard-pressed to imagine that this is very much of a problem... and what's the deal with destroying the gun? They need to add in Paragraph B of Mark Cole's HB 22 to require the attempted sale of such guns to licensed dealers first, then if no takers, they may be disposed of.

TFred


HB 22: Firearms; disposition thereof acquired by localities.

B. Any ordinance enacted pursuant to this section shall require that any firearm received, except a firearm of the type defined in § 18.2-288 or 18.2-299, shall be offered for sale by public auction or sealed bids to a person licensed as a dealer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 921 et seq. Notice of the date, time, and place of sale shall be given by advertisement in at least two newspapers published and having general circulation in the Commonwealth, at least one of which shall have general circulation in the locality in which the property to be sold is located. At least 30 days shall elapse between publication of the notice and the auction or the date on which sealed bids will be opened. Any firearm remaining in possession of the locality or agent of the locality after attempts to sell at public auction or by sealed bids shall be disposed of in a manner the locality deems proper, which may include destruction of the firearm or, subject to any registration requirements of federal law, sale of the firearm to a licensed dealer.

Click to expand...

This notice should also be required to be conspicuously posted on the locality's web site!

So if nobody bids (or no satisfctory bids are received) during the public auction, the locality can just select a dealer and make an offer of sale? Talk about the potential for graft! :banghead:

wylde007 said:

Sale to licensed dealers or auction sale to anyone who is not otherwise prohibited.

These idiots [ding ding ding ding ding] are always looking for vehicles to increase municipal revenue, I can't understand why they would let a cash cow like this slip through their fingers.

Click to expand...

I answered your question.

They wouldn't do a private sale. The point is that using a dealer puts the gun "back in the system", even if it was "on the street."

[By the way, the fact that the anti-gun folks generally oppose reselling and prefer destruction reveals that they truly believe that even law-abiding gun-owner citizens are really criminals. They do not view putting a gun back into the full legal accountability of the FFL is any better than it being on the street to begin with.

TFred

TFred said:

I answered your question.

They wouldn't do a private sale. The point is that using a dealer puts the gun "back in the system", even if it was "on the street."

[By the way, the fact that the anti-gun folks generally oppose reselling and prefer destruction reveals that they truly believe that even law-abiding gun-owner citizens are really criminals. They do not view putting a gun back into the full legal accountability of the FFL is any better than it being on the street to begin with.

TFred

Click to expand...

Because any gun not in the hands of LEO is on the street to them...

Sent using tapatalk

VCDL is opposing this as written. I will talk to Senator Carrico about trying to sell the guns first, and if that fails, then destruction is an option.