TFred
Regular Member
Just for clarity, they struck out the first "or" that you have in color. That makes it a list, with the last item in the list being the three part "state-governed entity, department or agency".
TFred
-
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.
-
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.
HB 375 Firearms; workplace rule
- Thread starter peter nap
- Start date
TFred
streetdoc
Regular Member
It's joint controlled, preemption should still apply, so the new version of the law will be a big help to us. The County views the Volly Stations as under their control for the purpose of what our actions can be. The fine point of this is "Workplaces" when I asked my EAR question several years ago about this, I was told County/Fire Dept Rules applied to all county property. Not so with this, I work for the Fire Dept, not the Library, Parks & Rec, etc. I'm thinking of having a carry breakfast the first morning after C Shift gets off work and this becomes effective.
They're going home Saturday TFred.
I don't like the wording or direction of this bill but it doesn't affect me one way or the other so I'm sitting it out.
T Dubya
Campaign Veteran
Well, it passed. Who knew?
TFred
Regular Member
I have questions about what this bill finally ends up doing, but I'm going to wait until we see what the Governor does with it before I ask them.
TFred
TFred
TFred
Regular Member
The Governor has returned the bill with one fairly minor recommendation:
(HB375)
GOVERNOR'S RECOMMENDATION
1. Line 19, enrolled, after locked
strike
personal,
This recommendation alters the new text of the bill from this:
"However, no locality shall adopt any workplace rule, other than for the purposes of a community services board or behavioral health authority as defined in § 37.2-100, that prevents an employee of that locality from storing at that locality's workplace a lawfully possessed firearm and ammunition in a locked personal, private motor vehicle."
to this, note strikeout in color:
"However, no locality shall adopt any workplace rule, other than for the purposes of a community services board or behavioral health authority as defined in § 37.2-100, that prevents an employee of that locality from storing at that locality's workplace a lawfully possessed firearm and ammunition in a locked [strike]personal[/strike], private motor vehicle."
This seems to be a good amendment, as it adds in a whole group of local government employees who drive a local government-owned vehicle to and from their home.
I am a little disappointed that the Governor did not recommend a clarification of the exemptions that were finally added to the bill. I've been following gun issues for nearly 4 years now, and I have not the first clue what these blue text exemptions actually cover and do not cover:
"The provisions of this section applicable to a locality shall also apply to any authority or to a local governmental entity, including a department or agency, but not including any local or regional jail, juvenile detention facility, or state-governed entity, department, or agency."
First question: Does this allow school teachers and staff to leave a gun in their car parked in the school parking lot? Remember the secured container addition from last year... that would seem to play a role here.
TFred
TFred
(HB375)
GOVERNOR'S RECOMMENDATION
1. Line 19, enrolled, after locked
strike
personal,
This recommendation alters the new text of the bill from this:
"However, no locality shall adopt any workplace rule, other than for the purposes of a community services board or behavioral health authority as defined in § 37.2-100, that prevents an employee of that locality from storing at that locality's workplace a lawfully possessed firearm and ammunition in a locked personal, private motor vehicle."
to this, note strikeout in color:
"However, no locality shall adopt any workplace rule, other than for the purposes of a community services board or behavioral health authority as defined in § 37.2-100, that prevents an employee of that locality from storing at that locality's workplace a lawfully possessed firearm and ammunition in a locked [strike]personal[/strike], private motor vehicle."
This seems to be a good amendment, as it adds in a whole group of local government employees who drive a local government-owned vehicle to and from their home.
I am a little disappointed that the Governor did not recommend a clarification of the exemptions that were finally added to the bill. I've been following gun issues for nearly 4 years now, and I have not the first clue what these blue text exemptions actually cover and do not cover:
"The provisions of this section applicable to a locality shall also apply to any authority or to a local governmental entity, including a department or agency, but not including any local or regional jail, juvenile detention facility, or state-governed entity, department, or agency."
First question: Does this allow school teachers and staff to leave a gun in their car parked in the school parking lot? Remember the secured container addition from last year... that would seem to play a role here.
TFred
TFred
Interesting question TFred.
Since Public schools are governed by the State Board of Education, I'd say it does not apply to them but Private schools are not governed by the board even though they have to maintain certain standards.
It is a very fine line though.
Since Public schools are governed by the State Board of Education, I'd say it does not apply to them but Private schools are not governed by the board even though they have to maintain certain standards.
It is a very fine line though.
T Dubya
Campaign Veteran
Oh Boy, it's getting late in the legislative year. What does this mean? Is it going to die?
TFred
Regular Member
Yes indeed... private schools are out of the equation for this particular issue, since they are also not a local government entity.
But... I could just as easily argue that local public schools are governed by a local school board, and not the state, so in that case, the exemption would not apply, thus allowing teachers to store guns in their cars!
The legislators did a horrible job on this one, IMHO, it seems to be to be almost too vague and confusing to be enforceable.
TFred
jmelvin
Founder's Club Member
I think I like the governor's suggested modification. The text of the bill as is would limit an employee's legal ability to store a firearm in any vehicle that was not their personal vehicle. This could be troublesome for folks who carpool in someone else's vehicle, have to rent a car for whatever reason or simply use a vehicle that is not personally theirs. As such, the governor's recommendation is a vast improvement.
I do hope that the legislature takes up the issue of providing this employee protection for those of us not in the government sector next year. It's sickening to hear private employers prattle on about the importance of safety in the workplace, while promising immediate termination for any employee who understands that they may need tools to keep themselves safe and chooses to keep them on company property, even in a private vehicle.
I do hope that the legislature takes up the issue of providing this employee protection for those of us not in the government sector next year. It's sickening to hear private employers prattle on about the importance of safety in the workplace, while promising immediate termination for any employee who understands that they may need tools to keep themselves safe and chooses to keep them on company property, even in a private vehicle.
Last edited:
TFred
Regular Member
No, this is one of the standard options available to the Governor for a bill that reaches his desk. This is how we got "secured container" instead of "locked container" for the CHP exemption last year, so it can be a good thing.
The Governor sends back the bill with his recommended change(s), and the General Assembly must decide whether to accept or reject it. I'm not sure on the particulars after that. If they accept it, it's law, if they reject it, I don't know if it goes another round or not.
TFred
Last edited: