One cannot conclude that this regulation is promulgated to protect anyone other than criminals who willingly ignore laws and regulations to harm others.  This regulation ensures that those good people who wish to carry firearms to defend themselves against criminal attack will either have to choose to be disarmed to use public buildings and services for which they pay taxes and then be subject to criminal attack with no effective means of response, or be subject to prosecution for daring to ignore this malicious attempt to make safe spaces for criminals to do their work without the likelihood of being harmed.  The regulation only serves the purpose to ensure a safe zone for criminals to harm those who disregard the laws and regulations of the Commonwealth.  The possession of firearms allow fathers and mothers caring for children, the disabled, or those who are physically small to effectively counter the strength and tactics of criminals who get to choose when they will make their move to cause harm, since those with criminal intent do not care about the lives of their victims.

Governor McAuliffe’s and his staff's desire to bring criminal safe zones to the taxpayer funded buildings and facilities used by Virginia's families is mean spirited and dangerous.  This regulation does nothing to actually ensure that those who enter state agency offices, rest stops, stores, or sparks are actually disarmed.  Beyond this it provides a basis for prosecution not only for the weak in our society who are the most likely to need a tool to respond to a criminal’s attack, but for those who are under specific threat of attack, such as off duty police, the family of police, or abused women and children. 

This regulation and those who proposed it desire to simply wish crime away with words on paper while threatening the good people of Virginia who simply wish to go about their lives peaceably with the threat of fines, jail time, and a criminal record for carrying firearms to respond to criminal attack when they use the public services and buildings that they pay for.  As a result, I oppose this regulation!