Agencies | Governor
Virginia Regulatory Town Hall
Agency
Department of General Services
 
Board
Department of General Services
 
chapter
Regulations Banning Concealed Firearms in Offices Occupied by Executive Branch Agencies [1 VAC 30 ‑ 105]
Action Promulgation of new regulation banning concealed firearms in executive branch agency offices
Stage Emergency/NOIRA
Comment Period Ends 1/27/2016
spacer
Previous Comment     Next Comment     Back to List of Comments
12/15/15  9:56 pm
Commenter: David Eubanks

Recend the Govenors EO and do not allow it to have further impact on our state constitutional rights
 

This proposed regulation will have the opposite of the intended affect by playing into the hands of terrorists, violent criminals, and the criminally insane. We have had no shootings in state agencies and this prohibition on those with a concealed handgun permit, some of whom have active and ongoing threats to their lives, is entirely without any justification and needlessly and recklessly endangers innocent lives.

Disarming good citizens (who are the only ones likely to obey the prohibition) does not make them safer.

The FBI has show that homicides by firearms have been dropping over the last decade so why would we institute a policy that has not been needed to reduce firearm homicides? Why are we instituting  a policy that will do nothing to protect the citizens of our Commonwealth? How does the governor plan on definding my life and the life of my family by removing my right to protect them? Is the governor planning on paying for State Police to stand guard over all executive offices? Where can I securly place my firearm while I am in an executive office, performing official business?

Importantly the Governor has no authority for this regulation. If the General Assembly wanted the Governor to have such power, they would have granted it to him explicitly, as is required constitutionally.

This proposed regulation is a solution for which there is no problem. It endangers state employees, law abiding citizens, and the innocent by making state buildings a safe zone for terrorists, criminals, and the criminally insane to conduct their evil and savage actions.

This regulations should not be approved and the emergency regulation withdrawn.

Please extended the comment period for another 30 days.

Some additional conflics that have been brought to my attention about the hazard to this EO are below

* All but two of the public massacres since 1950 had been committed by criminals and terrorists in “gun-free zones,” which is exactly what this regulation creates
* Off-duty police officers are also prevented from carrying
* Bans in rest stops send a very uninviting message to, and endanger the lives of, interstate travelers it also causes me to be unarmed when I go on vacation because if I stop at a rest area I can not carry. How does this keep me safe once I leave the state and no longer have this restriction.
* The cost of providing additional security to protect everyone who has been disarmed by this regulation will be prohibitive you would need state troopers at every building to offer the security that currently a potential of an armed citizen can be enough.
* The ban won’t hold up in court, due to lack of authority by the Governor and I will support the lawsuit as well as incouraging anyone who is charged to take it to a jury trial and persue jury nullification while waiting for the court to decide it is unconsitutional.
* If parking lots are included in the ban, then citizens will be disarmed to and from their residences and everywhere in between thus making having a firearm that is allowed by state law illegal to have by EO how do you explain the conflict.

CommentID: 44661