Quantcast

Prefiled VA Anti Gun Owner proposed legislation

Discussion in 'Activism Discussion and Planning' started by Craig_VA, Jan 2, 2020.

  1. Craig_VA
    • Contributing Member

    Craig_VA Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2007
    Messages:
    476
    Location:
    Arkansas
    The previously reported budget item of $250K to enforce proposed anti-gun laws in VA was the tip of the iceberg.
    New budget proposals from Governor Northam show a request for $6.8 Million for two groups of new hires to enforce the proposed laws. 18 hires for actual LEO duty (confiscations, etc.), and another 10 new hires for the admin stuff (background checks, etc.).
    Details are in
    Virginia governor’s call for 18-person gun ban force comes under fire
    Both GOA and VCDL are getting the word out quickly to have folks attend any one of four budget review meetings tonight (1/2/20) around the Commonwealth.
     
  2. D.B. Cooper

    D.B. Cooper Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2016
    Messages:
    2,216
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 10, 2020
  3. badkarmamib

    badkarmamib Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2016
    Messages:
    2,166
    Location:
    VA
    Kevin5098 likes this.
  4. AlexanderA
    • Contributing Member

    AlexanderA Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    6,866
    Location:
    Virginia
    The antigunners are escalating the proposed Virginia AWB once again.

    https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?201+ful+HB961

    As you may recall, the pre-filed SB 16 had stepped back from the governor's plan of last summer, by fully grandfathering over-10-round magazines and deleting suppressors from the ban. Then the governor said that currently-owned AWs would be grandfathered, with registration.

    Now, HB 961 (pre-filed today) reinstates the ban on suppressors and does not grandfather magazines (or suppressors). It allows for a type of grandfathering of the "assault weapons" themselves, but only with registration and the payment of a $50 fee for each one. And, the grandfathered weapons would be restricted as to where they could be stored and used, and would not be transferable except upon the death of the owner. Grandfathered weapons would be entered in a police database that would be accessible to patrol officers (which is worse than the current treatment of registered machine guns).

    The magazine ban without grandfathering would affect all pistols (which would be restricted to 10-round magazines) and would make registered machine guns practically unusable.

    Clearly, the Democrats are raising the ante in response to the pushback by gun owners. Both sides are digging in, but the difference is that the anti side has the votes in the legislature. They obviously don't give a damn what gun owners say or do.

    This is going to get really ugly. It's no longer only about the guns, but it's just as much about punishing the "uppity" gun owners.

    ETA: Another bill pre-filed today, SB 506, would repeal state pre-emption of gun regulations.

    https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?201+ful+SB506

    What this means is that even if the proposed state AWB does not pass, the northern Virginia counties and cities would be virtually certain to pass their own. And even if the state AWB does pass, the localities could pass ones that were stricter. Either way, I'm screwed.
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2020
  5. Craig_VA
    • Contributing Member

    Craig_VA Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2007
    Messages:
    476
    Location:
    Arkansas
    Nope, not as simple as that.
    Here is the description for the linked page:
    Indoor shooting ranges; prohibited in buildings not owned or leased by the Commonwealth or federal government; exceptions; civil penalty. Prohibits the operation of an indoor shooting range, defined in the bill, in any building not owned or leased by the Commonwealth or federal government unless (i) fewer than 50 employees work in the building or (ii) (a) at least 90 percent of the users of the indoor shooting range are law-enforcement officers or federal law-enforcement officers, (b) the indoor shooting range maintains a log of each user's name, phone number, address, and the law-enforcement agency where such user is employed, and (c) the indoor shooting range verifies each user's identity and address by requiring all users to present a government-issued photo-identification card. The bill provides that any person that violates the provisions of this section is subject to a civil penalty of not less than $1,000 nor more than $100,000 for the initial violation and $5,000 per day for each day of violation thereafter.

    The language says all indoor ranges must be in a government-owned building, unless in a building with fewer than 50 employees and used essentially only by LEOs, with detailed record keeping.
    This language effectively prevents anyone not a LEO from having nearby range training available in an urban area. (since it does not address outdoor ranges.)
    Also, depending on the details, it might make all private homeowner indoor ranges illegal!

    But, yes, this bill would close the NRA range.
     
    Corpral_Agarn and 40-82 like this.
  6. badkarmamib

    badkarmamib Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2016
    Messages:
    2,166
    Location:
    VA
    Semantics, but "or", not "and"...
     
    AlexanderA likes this.
  7. AlexanderA
    • Contributing Member

    AlexanderA Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    6,866
    Location:
    Virginia
    The way I read this, because of the use of the word "or" between clauses (i) and (ii), there's a dual safe harbor -- an indoor range either in a building with fewer than 50 employees, or having a law-enforcement clientele, would be exempted from the ban. The ban is obviously targeted specifically against the NRA range, and against practically nothing else. This is pure vindictiveness against the organized gun lobby. The ban would serve no public purpose whatsoever.
     
  8. Doc7

    Doc7 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,168
    Location:
    Southern VA
    Yesterday they introduced a bill which would prohibit:
    (iii) any cartridges containing bullets coated with a plastic substance with other than lead or lead alloy cores, jacketed bullets with other than lead or lead alloy cores, or cartridges of which the bullet itself is wholly comprised of a metal or metal alloy other than lead. This definition shall not be construed to include shotgun shells or solid plastic bullets.



    so all-copper hunting bullets will be illegal and then in a few years they’ll come back for all lead bullets too?
     
  9. AlexanderA
    • Contributing Member

    AlexanderA Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    6,866
    Location:
    Virginia
    Yes, presumably that would ban commonly-available surplus AP ammunition.

    The legislature is in a veritable feeding frenzy or orgy of antigun activity. What is being introduced makes no logical sense.

    At this point, what we are seeing has transcended guns. This is a social conflict between two groups that hate each other, and guns are merely the excuse.
     
    alsaqr, LiveLife, tomj44 and 2 others like this.
  10. badkarmamib

    badkarmamib Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2016
    Messages:
    2,166
    Location:
    VA
    https://codes.findlaw.com/va/title-18-2-crimes-and-offenses-generally/va-code-sect-18-2-308-3.html
    It is already law, but only when such ammunition is used in a crime.
     
  11. hso

    hso Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2003
    Messages:
    55,660
    Location:
    0 hrs east of TN
    FOLKS,

    WHEN NOTIFYING MEMBERS OF PROPOSED LEGISLATION PLEASE PROVIDE A LINK TO THE LEGISLATION AND DETAILS ON HOW TO IDENTIFY IT.

    THIS IS IMPORTANT IN CONTACTING THE VA LEGISLATORS TO OPPOSE THE PROPOSED BILLS. WHILE WE WANT TO DELUGE THE LEGISLATORS IN VA WITH CALLS, EMAILS, POST CARDS/LETTERS, AND TIE THEM UP WITH FACE TO FACE MEETINGS TELLING THEM THAT WE ARE OPPOSED TO ANY NEW RESTRICTIONS AFFECTING GUN OWNERS AND THAT WE WILL REMEMBER THEIR ACTION FOR OR AGAINST US, IT IS ALSO IMPORTANT TO GIVE ATTENTION TO EACH AND EVERY PROPOSED BILL AND THE AUTHOR AND SPONSORS TO TELL THEM THAT THAT PROPOSED LEGISLATION IS AS VIGOROUSLY OPPOSED. WE WANT THEM TO UNDERSTAND THAT THEIR NAMES AND DISTRICTS ARE KNOWN EVERY TIME THEY PROPOSE TO TAKE AWAY OUR RIGHTS, THAT WE WILL REMEMBER, AND THAT WE WILL WORK TO REMOVE THEM FROM OFFICE IF THEY MAKE ANY EFFORT TO DENY US OUR RIGHTS.
     
  12. Craig_VA
    • Contributing Member

    Craig_VA Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2007
    Messages:
    476
    Location:
    Arkansas
    Excellent suggestion, hso.

    These are listed on the official Virginia Legislative Information System site at
    https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?201+lst+ALL

    The list is several pages long, starting with House Bills (HB), House Joint Resolutions (HJ), and House Resolutions (HR) then Senate Bills (SB), Senate Joint Resolutions (SJ), and Senate Resolutions (SR). There are already thousands of entries in the data base, many with duplicate or very similar titles. There is link on the left side of the page to search the database.

    Also, once the session is organized and underway, VCDL will maintain a status tracking database at a 2020 Leg. Tracker link in the VA Politics dropdown on the VCDL Home Page. That page will have descriptions of each bill, the VCDL position on the bill, and the committee status and vote status of each. You can get an idea of how complete it is by looking at last year's 2019 Leg. Tracker.
     
    hso likes this.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice