Re: Impact of loss for firearm ownership in Virginia

354
DispositionMatrix wrote: Wed Jan 22, 2020 4:16 pm
culannmac wrote: Wed Jan 22, 2020 3:33 pm
DispositionMatrix wrote: Wed Jan 22, 2020 2:33 pm SB240 passed 21-19.
Hmmm... Question. Say you have a family member in the house red flagged. Family member doesn't own any guns, but you do. Does this mean they confiscate your guns? Even if you keep them locked up?
§ 19.2-152.13. Emergency substantial risk order.
...
B. Upon service of an emergency substantial risk order, the person who is subject to the order shall be given the opportunity to voluntarily relinquish any firearm, though voluntary relinquishment shall not preclude a law-enforcement officer from later obtaining a search warrant to search for any firearms if a law-enforcement officer has reason to believe that the person who is subject to an emergency substantial risk order has not relinquished all firearms in his possession. The law-enforcement agency that executed the emergency substantial risk order shall take custody of all firearms that are voluntarily relinquished by such person. The law-enforcement agency that takes into custody a firearm pursuant to the order shall prepare a written receipt containing the name of the person who is subject to the order and the manufacturer, model, condition, and serial number of the firearm and shall provide a copy thereof to such person.
§ 19.2-152.14. Substantial risk order.
...
B. If the court issues a substantial risk order pursuant to subsection A, the court shall order that any firearm that was previously relinquished pursuant to § 19.2-152.13 from the person who is subject to the substantial risk order continue to be held by the agency that has custody of the firearm for the duration of the order and shall also advise such person that a law-enforcement officer may obtain a search warrant to search for any firearms from such person if such law-enforcement officer has reason to believe that such person has not relinquished all firearms in his possession.
The police are, to a person, experts in law. Plus they just love people, which is why they go into law enforcement. I'm sure they do their utmost to ensure only the pre-crime designee's firearms are confiscated from the dwelling.
It's a good question and would probably come up at the hearing for the judge to decide. Likely dependent on what type and how much of a threat the person is to themselves or others. It's probably come up in other states but laws vary.

Looks like Republicans are playing their tough on crime card, misdemeanors go to felonies and increase prison terms.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Impact of loss for firearm ownership in Virginia

356
culannmac wrote: Thu Jan 23, 2020 11:22 am Any word on the house version on the AWB HB961?

https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp60 ... +sum+HB961
Referred to Public Safety, they meet tomorrow 8AM.
Consider getting involved, join VCDL!
I: ALL GUNS ARE ALWAYS LOADED
II: NEVER LET THE MUZZLE COVER ANYTHING YOU ARE NOT WILLING TO DESTROY
III: KEEP YOUR FINGER OFF THE TRIGGER UNTIL YOUR SIGHTS ARE ON THE TARGET
IV: BE SURE OF YOUR TARGET AND WHAT'S BEHIND IT

Re: Impact of loss for firearm ownership in Virginia

357
The current situation in Richmond, sorry the highlighting didn't come through:


1. Red Flag bill delayed, modified, cleared Senate, heads to House
SB 240, Barker, Substantial Risk Protection Order (Red Flag law) passed out of the Senate Judiciary committee back on January 13 had been passed by for a vote four times. Finally a modified version was voted on and passed on a party-line vote of 21-19. While the bill had some additional protections put in by an amendment, it is still very dangerous to our civil rights.

The bill now heads to the House, where it will go to a subcommittee later in February.

2. Senate Judiciary committee report: good, bad, and the ugly
If your Senator's name appears in red, below, contact him politely, but firmly, about supporting gun control. Senate contact information is here. The rare, bipartisan votes have the Senator's name underlined.

NOTES: Bills that are stricken from the docket are dead. Bills that are not heard are skipped until they can be heard at a future meeting. Bills that are passed by for the day will come up at the next meeting of the committee. Bills that are passed by indefinitely are dead.

The Senate Judiciary committee met on Wednesday. Here are the results:

S.B. 13, Ebbin, bans guns and other weapons in Capitol Square, after objections and issues from fellow Democrat Chap Petersen and Republicans, the bill was passed by for the day to consider changing it.

-

S.B. 14, Saslaw, bans bump stocks, trigger cranks, etc, not heard.

-

S.B. 15, Ebbin, bans guns in buildings owned or leased by the Commonwealth. Due to objections by both Republicans and Democrats, the bill was passed by for the day to consider changing it.

-

S.B. 18, Saslaw, implemented Universal Background Checks, raised age to own a gun from 18 to 21, and made it a felony if someone under 18 is around an loaded, unsecured firearm. Stricken from the docket by the patron.

-

S.B. 64, Lucas, makes it a felony for 2 or more people assemble, parade, or march, carrying firearms, and someone with the intent of intimidation. Who get's to decide what is considered "intimidation"? The bill was not heard.

-

S.B. 67, McClellan, requires lost or stolen firearms to be reported within 24 hours, was not heard.

-

S.B. 71, Lucas, treats child day care and preschools the same as K-12 schools for purposes of banning weapons, was not heard.

-

S.B. 75, Howell, raises age from 14 to 17 for crime if loaded gun is left unsecured around them. Stricken from the docket by the patron.

-

S.B. 76, Howell, takes away the ability to possess firearms for someone under a general protective order. Stricken from the docket by the patron.

-

S.B. 82, DeSteph, provides a mandatory minimum sentence for violation of a protective order. The bill was passed by indefinitely by a party-line vote of:

YEAS--Edwards, Saslaw, Lucas, Deeds, Surovell, McClellan, Boysko, Morrissey--8.

NAYS--Norment, Obenshain, McDougle, Stuart, Stanley, Chafin--6.

ABSTENTIONS--Petersen--1.

-

S.B. 83, DeSteph, provides a mandatory minimum sentence for brandishing at a police officer. The bill was passed by indefinitely by a vote of:

YEAS--Edwards, Saslaw, Lucas, Surovell, McClellan, Boysko, Morrissey--7.

NAYS--Obenshain, McDougle, Stuart, Chafin, Deeds, Petersen--6.

ABSTENTIONS--Norment--1.

-

S.B. 84, DeSteph, provides a mandatory minimum sentence for concealing a firearm while committing a violent felony. The bill was passed by indefinitely by a party-line vote of:

YEAS--Edwards, Saslaw, Lucas, Deeds, Petersen, Surovell, McClellan, Boysko, Morrissey--9.

NAYS--Norment, Obenshain, McDougle, Stuart, Chafin--5.

-

S.B. 85, DeSteph, provides a mandatory minimum sentence for stealing a firearm or knowingly using a stolen firearm in the commission of a felony. The bill was passed by indefinitely by a party-line vote of:

YEAS--Edwards, Saslaw, Lucas, Deeds, Petersen, Surovell, McClellan, Boysko, Morrissey--9.

NAYS--Norment, Obenshain, McDougle, Stuart, Chafin--5.

-

S.B. 86, DeSteph, provides a mandatory minimum sentence for using a firearm in the commission of a violent felony. The bill was passed by indefinitely by a party-line vote of:

YEAS--Edwards, Saslaw, Lucas, Deeds, Petersen, Surovell, McClellan, Boysko, Morrissey--9.

NAYS--Norment, Obenshain, McDougle, Stuart, Stanley, Chafin--6.

-

S.B. 88 , DeSteph, provides a mandatory minimum sentence for maliciously shooting at an occupied building or house, or maliciously shooting at a school, or maliciously shooting from a vehicle. The bill was passed by indefinitely by a vote of:

YEAS--Edwards, Saslaw, Norment, Lucas, Petersen, Surovell, McClellan, Boysko, Morrissey--9.

NAYS--Obenshain, McDougle, Stuart, Stanley, Chafin, Deeds--6.

-

S.B. 89, DeSteph, provides a mandatory minimum sentence for violating a protective order while armed with a deadly weapon. The bill was passed by indefinitely by a party-line vote of:

YEAS--Edwards, Saslaw, Lucas, Deeds, Petersen, Surovell, McClellan, Boysko, Morrissey--9.

NAYS--Norment, Obenshain, McDougle, Stuart, Stanley, Chafin--6.

-

S.B. 173, Hanger, allows a CHP holder to have a stun weapon in his vehicle while on school grounds. Treated the same as a firearm. PASSED unanimously out of committee!

-

S.B. 248, Favola, establishes a Virginia Violence Intervention and Prevention Fund. The word "Gun" was removed from the name of the fund by the committee to encompass all kinds of violence, which made the bill acceptable to VCDL. Passed by a vote of:

YEAS--Edwards, Norment, Lucas, Deeds, Petersen, Surovell, McClellan, Boysko, Morrissey--9.

NAYS--Obenshain, McDougle, Stanley, Chafin--4.

-

S.B. 263, Bell, removes the option for online training to get a CHP. Passed by a vote of:

YEAS--Edwards, Lucas, Petersen, Surovell, McClellan, Boysko, Morrissey--7.

NAYS--Norment, Obenshain, McDougle, Stanley, Chafin, Deeds--6.

-

S.B. 319, Chase, requires property owned by the Commonwealth or localities that have gun-free zones to provide law-enforcement or armed security services. Democrats weren't interested in protecting the public, just supporting Bloomberg's gun-control agenda. The bill was passed by indefinitely by a part-line vote of:

YEAS--Edwards, Saslaw, Lucas, Deeds, Petersen, Surovell, McClellan, Boysko, Morrissey--9.

NAYS--Norment, Obenshain, McDougle, Stuart, Stanley, Chafin--6.

-

S.B. 353, Bell, restricts outdoor shooting ranges within 500 yards of a residential area. After pushback that this bill was too broad from both Republicans and Democrats, the bill was passed by for the day.

-

S.B. 372, Saslaw, takes away the right to possess a gun while a protective order is in effect. Rolled into SB 479, below.

-

S.B. 436, Surovell, establishes the Virginia Voluntary Do Not Sell Firearms List. This bill was not heard.

-

S.B. 476, Chase, hold state liable for deaths or injuries in a gun-free zone in schools. Moved to General Laws and Technology committee.

-

S.B. 477, Chase, holds the state liable for injury or death in gun-free zones on state property. Moved to General Laws and Technology committee.

-

S.B. 479, Howell, prohibits possession of a firearm while there is a general protective order issued against an individual. Police are free to damage or lose any firearms the hold while the protective order is in effect, as they are immune from liability. The bill passed out of committee by a vote of:

YEAS--Edwards, Saslaw, Norment, Lucas, Deeds, Petersen, Surovell, McClellan, Boysko, Morrissey--10.

NAYS--Obenshain, McDougle, Stanley, Chafin--4.
-

S.B. 490, Favola, takes away gun rights for misdemeanor assault and battery, but also adds stalking, and other misdemeanors to the list. It does allow for restoration of rights after two years. VCDL could support this bill if it just covers misdemeanor domestic violence, as it allows a person to petition restore his gun rights. Passed by for the day to do some additional work on the wording.

-

S.B. 509, Reeves, prohibits any city or county east of the Interstate 95 corridor from prohibiting otherwise lawful hunting of migratory game birds in the jurisdictional waters of the Commonwealth. Moved to the Agriculture, Conservation, and Natural Resources committee.

-

S.B. 543, Edwards, "gun show loophole" bill. Not heard.

-

S.B. 581, Howell, raises age from 14 to 17 for crime if loaded gun is left unsecured around them and makes the crime a felony. Passed by for the day to do some additional work on the wording.

-

S.B. 593, Hanger, requires guns and ammunition to be locked up at a licensed family day home, leaving children unprotected from attack or abduction. Moved to Rehabilitation and Social Services committee.
-

S.B. 614, Deeds, adds Albemarle Count and Charlottesville to localities where a loaded gun with magazine that holds more than 20 rounds, and other things, cannot be carried without a CHP. Stricken from the docket by the patron.

-

S.B. 684, Mason, if a person appeals an involuntary commitment and is normal at the time of the appeal, he still has to file to get his gun rights back. Not heard.
-

S.B. 781, Lewis, makes a crime out of leaving an unattended handgun in public view in a public place. Stricken from the docket by the patron.

-

S.B. 825, Chase, allows state and local government employees to be exempted from prohibition on persons carrying a loaded rifle or handgun with a magazine in it that holds more than 20 rounds, and other such things. Passed by indefinitely by a vote of:

YEAS--Edwards, Saslaw, Lucas, Deeds, Petersen, Surovell, McClellan, Boysko, Morrissey--9.

NAYS--Norment, Obenshain, McDougle, Stuart, Stanley, Chafin--6.

-

S.B. 901 , Chase, Constitutional Carry. Perhaps because of the word "Constitutional" in the bill title, the Democrats decided the bill was to be passed by indefinitely by a vote of:

YEAS--Edwards, Saslaw, Lucas, Deeds, Petersen, Surovell, McClellan, Boysko, Morrissey--9.

NAYS--Norment, Obenshain, McDougle, Stuart, Stanley, Chafin--6.

-

S.B. 928, Newman, allows sanctuary localities to not be affected by any gun or magazine bans. Sanctuaries apparently threaten the power of Democrats. Passed by indefinitely by a vote of:

YEAS--Edwards, Saslaw, Lucas, Deeds, Petersen, Surovell, McClellan, Boysko, Morrissey--9.

NAYS--Norment, Obenshain, McDougle, Stanley, Chafin--5.

-

S.B. 958, Chase, repeals the "good and sufficient" reason requirement for carry in places of worship. Democrats don't want churches deciding about their own security. Passed by indefinitely by a vote of:

YEAS--Edwards, Saslaw, Lucas, Deeds, Petersen, Surovell, McClellan, Boysko, Morrissey--9.

NAYS--Norment, Obenshain, McDougle, Stuart, Stanley, Chafin--6.

-

S.B. 1009, Chase, waves sovereign immunity for person injured or killed in an attack in a gun-free zones in a state or local area. Democrats don't want government to be held liable if it needlessly endangers your life. Passed by indefinitely by a vote of:

YEAS--Edwards, Saslaw, Lucas, Deeds, Petersen, Surovell, McClellan, Boysko, Morrissey--9.

NAYS--Norment, Obenshain, McDougle, Stanley, Chafin--5.
I: ALL GUNS ARE ALWAYS LOADED
II: NEVER LET THE MUZZLE COVER ANYTHING YOU ARE NOT WILLING TO DESTROY
III: KEEP YOUR FINGER OFF THE TRIGGER UNTIL YOUR SIGHTS ARE ON THE TARGET
IV: BE SURE OF YOUR TARGET AND WHAT'S BEHIND IT

Re: Impact of loss for firearm ownership in Virginia

359
SB268 passed 39-0. Sponsored by a Democrat. Seems like a good bill, and I am surprised they passed it.
https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp60 ... +sum+SB268
SUMMARY AS INTRODUCED:
Sales tax exemption; gun safes. Establishes an exemption from retail sales tax for a gun safe with a selling price of $1,000 or less. The bill defines a gun safe as a safe or vault that is (i) commercially available, (ii) secured with a digital or dial combination locking mechanism or biometric locking mechanism, and (iii) designed for the storage of a firearm or of ammunition for use in a firearm. Under the bill, a gun safe does not include a glass-faced cabinet.

Re: Impact of loss for firearm ownership in Virginia

360
DispositionMatrix wrote: Fri Jan 24, 2020 1:18 pm SB268 passed 39-0. Sponsored by a Democrat. Seems like a good bill, and I am surprised they passed it.
https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp60 ... +sum+SB268
SUMMARY AS INTRODUCED:
Sales tax exemption; gun safes. Establishes an exemption from retail sales tax for a gun safe with a selling price of $1,000 or less. The bill defines a gun safe as a safe or vault that is (i) commercially available, (ii) secured with a digital or dial combination locking mechanism or biometric locking mechanism, and (iii) designed for the storage of a firearm or of ammunition for use in a firearm. Under the bill, a gun safe does not include a glass-faced cabinet.
No key locks?

Re: Impact of loss for firearm ownership in Virginia

363
On the Republican bills that Democrats voted down.
Following Second Amendment rally, Democrats vote against Republican-backed gun bills
Among the bills was one that would've made it easier to sue the government if someone is shot in a gun-free zone. Jason Nixon, the husband of one of the victims of the mass shooting in Virginia Beach, came to advocate for the bill.

"If you declare yourself a gun-free zone or you make your employees work in a gun free-zone and it's in your policy, well, then you should be held liable," Nixon said.

Right now, someone like Nixon would have to prove gross negligence in a lawsuit as the governments can claim sovereign immunity, according to the bill's sponsor Del. John McGuire (R-Goochland).
sbɐɯ ʎʇıɔɐdɐɔ pɹɐpuɐʇs ɟo ןןnɟ ǝɟɐs
ɯɯ6 bdd ɹǝɥʇןɐʍ
13ʞ
"ǝuıqɹɐɔ 1ɐ4ɯ" dɯɐʇsןןoɹ --- ɯoɔos0269ǝן ʇןoɔ
"ǝuıqɹɐɔ ʇuǝɯǝɔɹoɟuǝ ʍɐן sʇןoɔ" dɯɐʇsןןoɹ --- 0269ǝן ʇןoɔ
(béɟ) 59-pɯɐ

Re: Impact of loss for firearm ownership in Virginia

365
I went to the pro-gun rally in Virginia. It was not what I expected
The sheer number of firearms was astounding. Almost every protester was carrying one, either a handgun or a rifle or both. Many others brought shotguns, sniper rifles and even tomahawks. Militia groups from across the country clad in camouflage fatigues, some wearing body armor, marched down the street in formation, to the tune of a fife and drum.

But although seeing such a large concentration of high-powered weapons was a shock, it quickly felt normal, and strangely safe. The crowds at the rally were relaxed and even jovial at times, and surprisingly diverse.

“The very first gun control laws in Virginia were passed to keep blacks from owning firearms,” said Brandon Brod, 44, who is gay and a member of the Virginia Civil Defense League, the group organizing the protest. Brod held a sign that read “Gays For Gun Rights.”
sbɐɯ ʎʇıɔɐdɐɔ pɹɐpuɐʇs ɟo ןןnɟ ǝɟɐs
ɯɯ6 bdd ɹǝɥʇןɐʍ
13ʞ
"ǝuıqɹɐɔ 1ɐ4ɯ" dɯɐʇsןןoɹ --- ɯoɔos0269ǝן ʇןoɔ
"ǝuıqɹɐɔ ʇuǝɯǝɔɹoɟuǝ ʍɐן sʇןoɔ" dɯɐʇsןןoɹ --- 0269ǝן ʇןoɔ
(béɟ) 59-pɯɐ

Re: Impact of loss for firearm ownership in Virginia

367
DispositionMatrix wrote: Sun Jan 26, 2020 8:49 pm https://twitter.com/2Aupdates/status/12 ... 49377?s=20
Rob
@2Aupdates
Virginia: Upon receiving a question to "please define 'assault weapon'",
@DelegateMark
(sponsor of HB961) responds with 6 minutes of misinformation about guns, magazines, and ammo.

"The best weapons for self-defense in your home? A shotgun."

Full video: https://youtu.be/DlimCLccxpQ
Listening to Democrats talk about guns is like listening to Republicans talk about Women's Reproductive Health. :roll: I'd laugh if it wasn't for the fact this guy and his buddies are making decisions that will have a major impact on me and my family.

Re: Impact of loss for firearm ownership in Virginia

368
Bearing Arms on the 6 bills currently in play in Virginia:
Six More Gun Control Measures Advancing In VA House
House Bill 2 and House Bill 335 are both “universal background check” bills that criminalize private transfers of firearms, with only a few exceptions. Most common transfers between friends and neighbors are not exempted.

House Bill 9 is a “lost or stolen” bill that turns gun owners into criminals if they don’t report a lost or stolen firearm within 24 hours of discovering them missing by fining them. Supposedly this is supposed to cut down on “straw purchases,” but lawmakers who support the measure haven’t been able to explain how, exactly, the bill would work in practice.

House Bill 421 allows local governments to enact their own gun control ordinances, which would likely result in restrictive and unconstitutional policies being adopted in northern Virginia and other Democrat strongholds of the state.

Re: Impact of loss for firearm ownership in Virginia

369
AndyH wrote: Fri Jan 24, 2020 1:20 pm
DispositionMatrix wrote: Fri Jan 24, 2020 1:18 pm SB268 passed 39-0. Sponsored by a Democrat. Seems like a good bill, and I am surprised they passed it.
https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp60 ... +sum+SB268
SUMMARY AS INTRODUCED:
Sales tax exemption; gun safes. Establishes an exemption from retail sales tax for a gun safe with a selling price of $1,000 or less. The bill defines a gun safe as a safe or vault that is (i) commercially available, (ii) secured with a digital or dial combination locking mechanism or biometric locking mechanism, and (iii) designed for the storage of a firearm or of ammunition for use in a firearm. Under the bill, a gun safe does not include a glass-faced cabinet.
No key locks?
Yes, surprised the R's passed it. And it looks like key lock safes don't get the tax exemption. Not many pure key lock safes, but, still. I think it's a good bill.

We don't exactly have a gun safe law in California, but we tilt that way.
Use a California-approved firearms safety device on the gun, such as a trigger lock or cable lock, so it cannot be fired. Store it unloaded in a locked container, such as a California-approved lock box or a gun safe. ... For maximum safety you should use both a locking device and a storage container.
https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/tips

When you buy a gun here you have to sign an affidavit saying you have a safe, or else you'll be forced to buy a seven dollar gun lock.

The horror, the horror.

CDFingers
Crazy cat peekin' through a lace bandana
like a one-eyed Cheshire, like a diamond-eyed Jack

Re: Impact of loss for firearm ownership in Virginia

370
culannmac wrote: Mon Jan 27, 2020 9:13 am Listening to Democrats talk about guns is like listening to Republicans talk about Women's Reproductive Health. :roll: I'd laugh if it wasn't for the fact this guy and his buddies are making decisions that will have a major impact on me and my family.
Wonder why they claim gun owners equate their firearms with penis size? Maybe choose a different analogy?

:roflmao:
It is an unfortunate human failing that a full pocketbook often groans more loudly than an empty stomach.

- Franklin D. Roosevelt

Re: Impact of loss for firearm ownership in Virginia

371
K9s wrote: Mon Jan 27, 2020 1:14 pm
culannmac wrote: Mon Jan 27, 2020 9:13 am Listening to Democrats talk about guns is like listening to Republicans talk about Women's Reproductive Health. :roll: I'd laugh if it wasn't for the fact this guy and his buddies are making decisions that will have a major impact on me and my family.
Wonder why they claim gun owners equate their firearms with penis size? Maybe choose a different analogy?

:roflmao:
Ummm... Levine on guns = Akin on "legitimate rape". Both sound utterly fucking stupid, though Akin's comments are just plain evil. I think the analogy holds.

Re: Impact of loss for firearm ownership in Virginia

372
I don't speak legalese and I suck at twisting words. Is this true?


https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/virgi ... fathering/
As it relates to “assault firearms,” HB 961 amends two existing Virginia statutes, and adds a third.

First up is § 18.2-308.8. This is the statute that defines and outlaws “assault firearms.” The only exceptions to an otherwise total ban is for military and law enforcement official duties. Mere citizens have no exemptions.

Next is § 18.2-308.13. This is the new statute and it’s what Levine is peddling as the grandfathering part. At first glance, you might think that’s what it is. I think there’s a serious problem with the fact that this bill creates completely conflicting statutes.

Which statute do you think the state police will cite in order to arrest people; 308.8 or 308.13? Someone who is arrested, and their “assault firearm” is confiscated can fight back under 308.13, but that takes time and money. And you probably won’t ever get your firearm back. More on that later.

Initially 308.13 looks like grandfathering, but there’s a catch. You have to legally own the “assault firearm” “on July 1, 2020.” On, not before. You may apply for a permit which requires registration. There’s an amnesty period ending January 1, 2021.

The tricky part is the date of possession, and when the law would go into effect. The bill specifies no “law becomes effective on,” so it becomes effective once signed by Gov. Coonman. Once his ink hits the paper, § 18.2-308 kicks in and every newly-minted “assault firearm” becomes contraband unless it’s registered and permitted.

But until ink hits paper and § 18.2-308.13 becomes effective, you cannot get a permit. Your firearm becomes illegal and you cannot lawfully possess it “on July 1, 2020″ unless they stall the bill’s passage and signing until after that date. Which way would you bet on that?

If the bill does stall for another six months, there’s still that 308.8/308.13 conflict.

There are a couple of interesting tidbits in the grandfathering section. One is the government photo ID requirement.

A person shall have the permit on his person at all times when he is transporting an assault firearm in accordance with this subsection and shall display the permit and a photo identification issued by a government agency of the Commonwealth or by the U.S. Department of Defense or U.S. State Department upon demand by a law-enforcement officer.

Re: Impact of loss for firearm ownership in Virginia

373
HB421, to turn the state into a patchwork, passed 50-48.
http://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604 ... +sum+HB421

HB812, one handgun per month, passed 53-47.
http://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604 ... +sum+HB812

HB674, red flag, passed 52-46.
http://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604 ... +sum+HB674

HB1004, protective order, passed 58-42.
http://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604 ... sum+HB1004

HB1083, access to firearms by minors, passed 54-46.
http://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604 ... sum+HB1083

Re: Impact of loss for firearm ownership in Virginia

374
Here's some encouraging news. Hopefully the bills passed in the house will be moderated.

SENATOR LEWIS COMMENTS ON GUN ISSUES
The bill which rightfully had everyone very concerned (SB16) never even made it out of committee. That is why I caution everyone who was so worried about the bill that anybody can introduce a bill — whether it passes or not is a completely different question. There is no Senate bill now regarding the banning of assault rifles. The Governor’s bill on this topic was introduced in the House of Delegates and is being carried by Delegate Mark Levine. As I stated publicly before the Session and as was reported in Eastern Shore news media I will not be supporting any type of ban legislation whether on a particular type of firearm or a particular type of magazine.
https://shoredailynews.com/headlines/se ... un-issues/

Re: Impact of loss for firearm ownership in Virginia

375
culannmac wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2020 2:46 pm Here's some encouraging news. Hopefully the bills passed in the house will be moderated.

SENATOR LEWIS COMMENTS ON GUN ISSUES
The bill which rightfully had everyone very concerned (SB16) never even made it out of committee. That is why I caution everyone who was so worried about the bill that anybody can introduce a bill — whether it passes or not is a completely different question. There is no Senate bill now regarding the banning of assault rifles. The Governor’s bill on this topic was introduced in the House of Delegates and is being carried by Delegate Mark Levine. As I stated publicly before the Session and as was reported in Eastern Shore news media I will not be supporting any type of ban legislation whether on a particular type of firearm or a particular type of magazine.
https://shoredailynews.com/headlines/se ... un-issues/
Old news, and it's not encouraging. It's a political ploy.
viewtopic.php?p=747408#p747408
HB961, the House Democrats' bill banning all the things, is still in play.
https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp60 ... +sum+HB961

State Senate Democrats will copy-paste a matching bill back into existence, and ram it through--probably after the less significant bills have been passed.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests