So now that those with CHPs are free to carry into university buildings at the vast majority of Virginia public universities, can universities like GMU really claim that they're sensitive areas? Especially since everyone except employees and students are free to carry there.
State agency preemption in 2012!
What happen???????? Was I a sleep? college carry legal in 2012?
BTW - none of this applies if you are student, staff or faculty and get caught.
:banghead:
So who does this benefit?? parents visiting their children?
What happen???????? Was I a sleep? college carry legal in 2012?
As regards GMU, the decision handed down in DiGiacinto v. The Rector and Visitors of George Mason University, 281 Va. 127, 704 S.E.2d 365 (2011) January 13, 2011 does in fact state that the insides of the buildings are in fact sensitive areas.
A goal for us during the next legislative session!
:banghead:
So who does this benefit?? parents visiting their children?
All this nonsense could be eliminated if the courts were to take Article 1, section 13 of the Virginia Constitution seriously and apply it as written. I'd even be in favor of amending it to allow the legislature to regulate possession of weapons by crazy people, noncitizens, and convicted felons having a demonstrated proclivity to violent crime.
non-citizens?
I believe the RKBA is a pre-existing human right that flows from the natural law right to self defence.
I believe that the 2A applies to all that are in this country legally.
.... I'd just like the written Constitution to square with reality, and to treat the Constitution as if it were really the rule we're following. The game is just no fun if the biggest, strongest players can just make the rules up as we go along.
A goal for us during the next legislative session!
Properly worded, yep! Another Stanton bill.........:question:
This alone will be enough to motivate Marsh to live to 110. We've all seen it... he's a man on a mission, a deluded mission, but to his mind, a mission nonetheless.This is a major priority!!!!
It directly benefits all Virginians who hold dear the RKBA and believe that the right to self-defense should not be compromised.
Will be pushing hard to see this flying at the top of the mast head for the next legislative session. The work begins now, no waiting for the session to begin.
I'd just like the written Constitution to square with reality, and to treat the Constitution as if it were really the rule we're following. The game is just no fun if the biggest, strongest players can just make the rules up as we go along.
This alone will be enough to motivate Marsh to live to 110. We've all seen it... he's a man on a mission, a deluded mission, but to his mind, a mission nonetheless.
TFred
All this nonsense could be eliminated if the courts were to take Article 1, section 13 of the Virginia Constitution seriously and apply it as written. I'd even be in favor of amending it to allow the legislature to regulate possession of weapons by crazy people, noncitizens, and convicted felons having a demonstrated proclivity to violent crime. Beyond that, the right to self-defense is more important than eliminating all threats to public safety (many of which are effectively eliminated by intelligent preparation on the part of people who are determined to defend themselves).
I have also always been of the opinion that administrative regulations should be limited in their effect to regulating the administrative agencies. Only the elected legislature should have any power to regulate the behavior of citizens.
Larry Hincker told me today that Tech believes that the “policy” is binding upon students and universities employees, even if it may not be on visitors.
Thus, they could be kicked out of school or dismissed for violating the university policy, which they agree to abide by as a condition of attending school or working there.