• 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.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • 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.

Virginia Department of Social Services bans gun owners from adopting

Dreamer

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2009
Messages
5,360
Location
Grennsboro NC
My sister an I were both adopted (in WV). My father owned shotguns and rifles, and NEVER kept them locked up, and NEVER had trigger locks, and never locked up the ammo separately. We all knew where they were and what they were for.

Never once, while living in that house, was there EVER a negative firearms-related situation, or even one that cold be construed as dangerous, hazardous or otherwise bad.

In fact, I attribute much of my success as a law-abiding adult and citizen to my parent's attitudes toward firearms. They taught me responsibility, care, safety, and how to follow rules. They taught me to respect dangerous things, to use tools properly, and to seek out training for tools I was unfamiliar with. They taught me dedication, persistence and how to develop a skill by practice. Firearms figured prominently in my interest in history, art, mechanical things, the law, and civics. Firearms figured prominently in my becoming an Eagle Scout. Firearms were (and still are) a common link between me and my family--they are why I have remained close to many of my cousins through hunting, competition, and activism. Firearms in OUR home made me a good citizen, a responsible man, and safe person, and they strengthened and reinforced family ties and community membership.

As an adopted child who grew up with firearms, I find this regulation to be insulting to adoptive parents, insulting to adopted children, and a fundamental infringement on the RKBA of some of the most CARING, LOVING, and RESPONSIBLE parents in the world--the ones who DELIBERATELY go out of their way to have a child in their lives through adoption.

I am disgusted and appalled.

I may have to write some letters on this one...
 
Last edited:

vt357

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2006
Messages
490
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
My wife and I were planning on starting the adoption process soon. I guess I'll be calling the governor's office on Monday, and my delegate's, and my senator's, and... the list goes on. As if the adoption process wasn't complicated enough.
 

Repeater

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
2,498
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
Comment period on this was a year ago

My wife and I were planning on starting the adoption process soon. I guess I'll be calling the governor's office on Monday, and my delegate's, and my senator's, and... the list goes on. As if the adoption process wasn't complicated enough.

This regulation has been pending for years, and yet it appears not a single Virginia gun owner objected to the anti self-defense language. The comment period is closed.

On the other hand, the proposed regulations would have allowed homosexual adoptions. After organized objections to that, the final regulations do not allow gay adoptions.

The Governor and the AG both have approved these regulations.
 

vt357

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2006
Messages
490
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
This regulation has been pending for years, and yet it appears not a single Virginia gun owner objected to the anti self-defense language. The comment period is closed.

On the other hand, the proposed regulations would have allowed homosexual adoptions. After organized objections to that, the final regulations do not allow gay adoptions.

The Governor and the AG both have approved these regulations.
Yeah I looked back over all the comments. The only comments related to firearms were from adoptions agencies saying it would be too difficult to possibly know all the different federal and local regulations. And honestly there's nothing wrong with that statement. It's all the substatements that no one mentioned that are the problem. We NEED full agency preemption.
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
If we can find a good solid family that was denied a child adoption because of this and only this, that is a great plea to make before the Senate committees and sub-committees for full state agency preemption. We can turn "it's for the children" around to help us for a change.

Certainly the "moderate" senators will see that a solid family who happens to have safely cared for firearms is better than bouncing around the foster system for years.

TFred
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
I had that exact same thought; it seems that the Heller case could definitely be applied here. The Court very clearly ruled that access to a loaded, fully functioning firearm in the home is a Constitutionally protected right. How can you be denied equality here based merely on the fact that you exercise your Constitutional rights.

Because 75% of demorats don't believe that the Heller case means anything.
 

user

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,516
Location
Northern Piedmont
Interesting. I wonder how they feel about "lewd and lascivious cohabitation" in violation of Va. Code § 18.2-345, "Crimes against nature" § 18.2-361, or what about members of the Church of Christ, Scientist ("Christian Science" practitioners) whose apparent neglect of the medical attention of a child would otherwise be a violation of § 18.2-314? Can a person who is unlawfully living with a "partner" be allowed under the regulations when a person who wishes to defend his home, his family, and himself be prohibited?

Seems to me that they don't have the authority to impose regulations in a matter that exceeds the scope of an existing statute, in this case, § 18.2-56.2, "Allowing access to firearms by children".
 
Top