TFred
Regular Member
Anyone following today's actions in the Senate of Virginia?
Unfortunately, when they start debating bills on the floor, unless you are watching, it can be difficult to tell what's going on. The LIS provides a window into what happened, but misses the dialog and drama that sometimes goes with the debates.
I was reviewing today's progress for the gun bills (using VCDL's excellent resource, the 2017 Legislation Tracking web page) and noticed a flurry of activity today with HB 1853: Victims of domestic violence, etc.; firearms safety or training course.
From the VCDL Tracking page, "This bill provides that DCJS will provide funding to entities that offer free firearms safety or training courses approved by DCJS to victims of domestic violence, sexual abuse, stalking, and family abuse. This bill will actually make victims safer."
Of course, ANYTHING that enables victims to better defend themselves from criminals is attacked by the gun-hating liberals in the General Assembly. This bill has passed the House of Delegates and is now working its way through the Senate. Reported out of TWO different Senate Committees, today it reached the full Floor. Senator Jennifer Wexton (D - Leesburg) proposed two sets of amendments.
One was adopted, trivial in nature, requiring that information on resources for domestic violence victims be provided to the petitioner for a protective order. The other... well that's why I'm writing this post, it's quite bizarre!
First, the amendment was rejected by a vote of 32-7. ALL 7 votes in favor of the amendment were DEMOCRATS with very poor gun-rights records. I'm guessing they are so angry at this bill, they were trying to poison it in this utterly ridiculous manner. Here is the amendment that was rejected:
Usually the context is pretty important, but in this case, it's really not. Can you even begin to imagine the reaction if this provision had been adopted?
These gun-haters are quite insane.
TFred
References:
HB 1853: Victims of domestic violence, etc.; firearms safety or training course.
Wexton Amendment that was rejected
Unfortunately, when they start debating bills on the floor, unless you are watching, it can be difficult to tell what's going on. The LIS provides a window into what happened, but misses the dialog and drama that sometimes goes with the debates.
I was reviewing today's progress for the gun bills (using VCDL's excellent resource, the 2017 Legislation Tracking web page) and noticed a flurry of activity today with HB 1853: Victims of domestic violence, etc.; firearms safety or training course.
From the VCDL Tracking page, "This bill provides that DCJS will provide funding to entities that offer free firearms safety or training courses approved by DCJS to victims of domestic violence, sexual abuse, stalking, and family abuse. This bill will actually make victims safer."
Of course, ANYTHING that enables victims to better defend themselves from criminals is attacked by the gun-hating liberals in the General Assembly. This bill has passed the House of Delegates and is now working its way through the Senate. Reported out of TWO different Senate Committees, today it reached the full Floor. Senator Jennifer Wexton (D - Leesburg) proposed two sets of amendments.
One was adopted, trivial in nature, requiring that information on resources for domestic violence victims be provided to the petitioner for a protective order. The other... well that's why I'm writing this post, it's quite bizarre!
First, the amendment was rejected by a vote of 32-7. ALL 7 votes in favor of the amendment were DEMOCRATS with very poor gun-rights records. I'm guessing they are so angry at this bill, they were trying to poison it in this utterly ridiculous manner. Here is the amendment that was rejected:
I. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, if any petitioner to whom a protective order was granted under this section uses a firearm to cause bodily injury, including death, to the subject of the protective order while the order is in effect, it shall be presumed that the petitioner acted in self-defense, and the petitioner shall be immune from criminal prosecution or civil action for such bodily injury or death. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, indicting, or otherwise prosecuting the petitioner.
Usually the context is pretty important, but in this case, it's really not. Can you even begin to imagine the reaction if this provision had been adopted?
These gun-haters are quite insane.
TFred
References:
HB 1853: Victims of domestic violence, etc.; firearms safety or training course.
Wexton Amendment that was rejected