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 Proposed
Comment Period Ended on 10/21/2016
spacer
Previous Comment     Next Comment     Back to List of Comments
8/25/16  9:21 am
Commenter: Patricia Webb, Virginia Citizens Defense League

I oppose this illegal regulation
 

Both the United States and Virginia Constitutions reaffirm the right of the individual to keep and bear arms.  Self preservation is an inherent right of all living things and cannot be denied by man nor government.  The State has a duty to protect the rights of the people, not restrict or infringe upon them.

Please consider the following points:

-There have been NO incidents in state buildings where permit holders have accidently or purposely caused harm to others with a firearm.

-The demographic of Concealed Handgun Permit (CHP) holders is the most law abiding group in our nation, even more so than law enforcement.

-The General Assembly passed legislation last session that would have prevented this regulation, but it was vetoed by Gov. McAuliffe.  Passing this regulation is counter to the will of the people you are charged with representing as well as conflicting with both the Virginia and US Constitutions.

-The code section cited gives no authority for this action.

-Creating defense free environments makes mass murder as easy as shooting fish in a barrel.  Recent research has confirmed that criminals and terrorists seek out designated gun free zones for their attacks.  This regulation will endanger people, not protect them.

As a woman, a mother, a business owner and a resident of this state, I insist that you withdraw this proposed rule.  This is more than a solution looking for a problem, this is a dangerous action which can result in severe unintended consequences.

 

CommentID: 50991