Get em while they're hot

https://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?151+sum+SB608

Hope everyone realizes the above is not yet law.


Legislation tracking tool


http://www2.vcdl.org/webapps/vcdl/2015leg.html

McAuliffe will never sign it anyway.

So true, and it's not likely will get enough votes to over ride a veto..

IMHO, the rest of McAuliffe's term will probably be a wash.

Actually...I am making the case to my Dem Rep and Sen that this is a good bill for them to pass.

If I read it correctly it creates a uniform process that requires the VSP to administer and run and they also have to run annual background checks on CCP holders to make sure they still qualify. Isn't that is a tighter standard than we have today? Obviously if you are convicted of a felony you lose your CCP if in VA, but out of state it would only be if VA found out about it or when you renewed up to 5 years later?

ETA: THAT WAS LAST YEAR'S BILL. THAT WAS A TERRIBLE BILL AND WE ARE ALL LUCKY IT DID NOT BECOME LAW. THIS YEAR'S BILLS (HB1359 and SB689) ARE SIGNIFICANTLY BETTER.

Wow, this is the "pro gun" bill that we get? Currently, localities do the background check. Now we're giving it to the VSP which is going to always be more unfriendly to gun owners? Currently the government investigates me every 5 years, now the government is authorized to investigate me AT LEAST every year, but perhaps continually?

AND they photograph me!
AND you have a duty to notify them if you change addresses!

THIS IS A TERRIBLE BILL! I HOPE IT DOES NOT PASS!

With friends like these....

If the VSP has the same instruction as the courts on shall issue what makes you believe they are going to be more unfriendly? You either met the criteria or you don't.

VSP does a background check every time I by a gun through an FFL. Would I rather have them check on me every 5 years, sure. But, I think investigate is different than running a records check and given that they would need to do it annually for every CCP holder how much further than a records check could they go.

V8, I've met you, you're not that ugly, don't worry about the photo.

As far as a change of address is concerned, jut add them to the list of organizations that you notify at some point anyway:
the election board (if I want to vote)
the phone company
the cable company
the power company
the water company
the bank
the IRS
my broker dealer...

Are there a changes we should look for? Ok, list them and let's see if we can make it better. I'll hold off on my email campaign for now.

Well as I noted, OP's post is about last year's bill, so my comments (which you now replied to) are about an old bill which did not become law.

HB1359 and SB689 (this year's bills) were submitted together as identical bills, and the initial version was pretty good.

HB 1359 has not yet been modified in committee, and thus its current version gets the V8 stamp of approval. All it does is remove all references to "five years" and repeals the section on renewal of permits. Those small change effectively make permits "lifetime" permits.

SB689 started out the same way, but has been "revised" in committee. The current version is still better than the bill from last year, but it allows the VSP to run a background check on lifetime permit holders "on a periodic basis, but not less than once every five years." That basically gives them carte blanche to investigate you whenever they want. SB 689 needs to be amended to say "ONCE EVERY FIVE YEARS," that way it doesn't give VSP any discretion.

SB 689 also requires VSP to do a NICS check rather than a generic background check in order to get Virginia included under 18 USC 923(t)(3) so when you buy a gun, you just show your permit, you don't need a NICS check. I haven't made up my mind on that. On the one hand, it's nice to buy a gun by just flashing your permit. On the other hand, a NICS check might disqualify additional people that a generic VSP check won't, including people who shouldn't be disarmed, such as PTSD veterans. Let's not pretend for a second that everyone in the NICS system ought to be there.

SB689 also includes a bunch of language at the end which is already language from another section of the VA code. I have no idea why they felt it necessary to use duplicate language in multiple code sections. Maybe not a fatal flaw, but the repetitive language is confusing, duplicitous, and should be struck.

Ok, so we should watch HB 1359 and potentially SB689 for changes.

2015 Legislative Tracking Tool

Both bills left in committee this year.