I oppose the Commonwealth’s attempt to prohibit firearms throughout properties owned and maintained by the Commonwealth

1) The legal basis and authority to act on this matter is dubious at best.

Virginia Code §§ 2.2-1100(B) and 2.2-1102(A)(1) establish the Department of General Services and allow the Department to prescribe regulations. DGS has been directed by the Governor to issue these regulations.

The proposed regulation is a violation of the public policy of Virginia, and acts without authorization.  The public policy of the Commonwealth is found in the Constitution and statutory law.  Absent from this body of rules by which we all are supposed to abide is an authorization by the General Assembly to prohibit firearms at the “state” level and the Assembly has in fact acted to prohibit local and regional governmental entities from enacting such prohibitive policies, rules, regulations or laws.  The General Assembly has similarly declined to prohibit the open carrying of firearms and thus expressed will of the public in Virginia that both openly carrying firearms and carrying them concealed with a permit are lawful activities and public policy.  

http://www.courts.state.va.us/opinions/opncavwp/0537072.pdf - "A court may not “second-guess the lawmakers on matters of economics, sociology and public policy. . . . Those considerations belong exclusively in the legislative domain.”

2) The purpose of the regulation presupposes conclusions that have no basis in fact, public policy or public safety.

"As stated in the EO, it is the Governor’s desire to protect citizens and state employees from gun violence. The purpose of this regulation is to ban concealed firearms from offices owned, leased or controlled by executive branch agencies. While State employees are already prohibited from carrying firearms through State personnel directives, this regulation will extend that prohibition to members of the public and other non-employee individuals who may enter the premises.”  

The purpose stated is to protect citizens and state employees from gun violence.  Inarticulate in its stated purpose, presumably the regulation seeks prohibit violence committed with firearms, because in the entire recorded history of mankind, not a single gun has ever committed an act of violence upon a person.  As inanimate, non sentient objects, guns do not posses free will, intelligence, consciousness, and they are not self aware.  People however do possess these attributes and should know right from wrong.  The stated purpose of the regulation and the regulation itself are diametrically opposed.  The regulation bans firearms to prevent people committing acts of violence with firearms, yet if such an already unlawful act were to occur, presumably the Commonwealth wants its police with guns to be able to resolve the issue - with a gun.  This is like attempting to prevent the citizenry and state employees by being victimized by acts of medical malpractice by making it illegal to obtain medical care.  The proposed regulation is inarticulate, unnecessarily intrusive and simply is an attempt to punish the uppity citizens at the whim of a tin pot Governor with a Napoleon complex.    

3) the issue the Commonwealth seeks to address seems to protect from seems to not exist.

"Every day, over 60,000 Virginians report to work in state government buildings across the Commonwealth to provide services to their fellow Virginians. Citizens rely on open access to these facilities to address their personal and professional needs. Government facilities are essential to allowing citizens access to their government representatives. Allowing concealed carry in these facilities exposes our state employees and fellow citizens to unnecessary risk.”  

The Commonwealth has not shown any evidence that the 60,000 Virginians working across the Commonwealth have in fact been put at risk or in jeopardy by citizens carrying concealed firearms.  In fact, the opposite is true.  Since 1995, concealed carrying of handguns has been legal for all citizens who met the requirement set forth to obtain a permit to carry a concealed handgun.  The law has been in effect ever since and hundreds of thousands of Virginians and more recently non residents with recognized out of state permits have carried firearms in and around the 60,000 Commonwealth workers and the Commonwealth has not entered a single incident into the record to justify this brazen and cowardly act to take the citizens ability to protect themselves away.  The Commonwealth has completely failed to articulate what risk they’re seeking to mitigate but it does appear that the Commonwealth is seeking to double down on the stupid; within the changes form the pre-emergency regulations, 1VAC30-105-40 

… "Intent is to ensure that the public is subject to the same restrictions as the office employees; i.e. that concealed firearms will not be brought into a State office facility”   

Essentially the Commonwealth has insisted its employees be unarmed so the citizens should be too.  Only the Citizens have not signed an employment agreement with the Commonwealth.  While the Commonwealth, as an employer may set reasonable rules of conduct and expectations of employees, it lacks authority to impose it’s personnel requirements upon the citizens. 

The Commonwealth is attempting to victimize law abiding citizens who seek only to be able to protect ourselves and our families.  

4) Financial impact is outright falsely represented.  

Throughout the proposed regulation available at http://townhall.virginia.gov/L/GetFile.cfm?File=C:\TownHall\docroot\57\4474\7579\AgencyStatement_DGS_7579_v2.pdf it is stated to have “no financial impact”.  How much did the drafting, promulgation and enactment of the emergency order as well as the drafting, proposal and administrative activities associated with this action cost?  Does the Commonwealth assert that all of these activities were carried out on a voluntary basis by state employees who took no money for this regulatory effort?  Similarly, there is a signage requirement and presumably the Commonwealth will be gifted the prohibitory signs by some supernatural beings?  Or, is the Commonwealth simply attempting to mislead the public about the true cost of implementation of this regulation?  

If we cannot trust the Commonwealth to honestly promulgate regulations, accurately assessing the cost, then the Commonwealth cedes the consent of the governed.

5) Enactment of the proposed regulation would create a public safety risk to the citizenry.

It is well established that criminals commit crimes where they have the opportunity.  This premise is borne out by the statistics showing that terrorist attacks, mass shootings and acts by thugs take place where victims are not able to present an effective defense against an attack.  Practically all of the acknowledged mass shootings in the USA have taken place in government “prohibited places” or gun free zones. These prohibited places did nothing to prevent the shootings.  

6) The regulation proposed does not acknowledge prior service, armed forces veterans and other similarly qualified people.  

7) The regulation proposed creates a public health hazard by imposing a failed social policy upon those who have already proven to be the best of the citizens; those who have served, sought and obtained a concealed handgun permit, trained and agreed to the terms set out by the General Assembly of Virginia, only to have the executive branch act to criminalize the act of keeping the Commonwealth safe. 

The regulation, as proposed, has not been fully vetted.  There are serious questions as to the legal viability of the proposed regulation.  It places the citizens squarely in harms way as our country faces an insidious enemy bent on attacking our way of life, our freedom and our well being.  You don’t defend against such an enemy by putting the citizens at greater risk of harm.  This regulation goes too far, and rather than push a bad regulation that will potentially hurt or kill innocent Virginians, this regulation should be shelved and the issue put to the General Assembly for an up or down vote.