Governor to BAN OC in Executive Branch Buildings

[jmelvin]

You're welcome.

 

[mpguy]

Interesting. I've carried to my job for year's with out issue. Wonder if the Department of Veteran's Service is considered a Executive Branch. I haven't carried while on the job. It either stay's locked up in my truck, or in my locker. Will have to investigate this further. Not to look dumb, but according to the link my Department isn't part of the equation. Unless I'm over thinking it. If it is, I guess the way I read it, I can still take it, as long as it stay's in the truck. Would I be correct in that statement?

http://vagovernmentmatters.org/archi...94e76dc49a.jpg

Here is a link to the actual order.

https://governor.virginia.gov/media/...ence-final.pdf

I think it's crap. I think Executive orders are crap. What happened to trusting check and balances?

Further investigation from a link provided earlier in the topic...

http://www.statelocalgov.net/state-va.cfm#Statewide Offices

I don't see Virginia Department of Veteran Services on the list.

 

[Tosta Dojen]

Did I miss a paragraph in Civics 101? :uhoh:

Where does it say (other than in the quoted article) that the Legislative Branch (General Assembly) gives the Executive Branch (Governor) it's powers?

:banghead:

For starters, the Constitution of Virginia, Article V, Section 9:

The functions, powers, and duties of the administrative departments and divisions and of the agencies of the Commonwealth within the legislative and executive branches may be prescribed by law.

See also the Virginia Register of Regulations FAQ:

A regulation is a law promulgated by a state agency. The General Assembly must pass a law authorizing or mandating a state agency to write regulations.

 

[skidmark]

DVS is a state agency under the Virginia Secretary of Veterans Affairs and Homeland Security. http://www.dvs.virginia.gov/dvs/cabinet-veterans-defense-affairs/

Always look to find out who your boss's boss's boss is. Your boss at DVS reports to someone who reports to Commissioner John L. Newby, II, who reports to Secretary John C. Harvey, Jr., who reports to the Governor.

You work at an executive branch agency and EO 50 applies to where you work.

stay safe.

 

[Tosta Dojen]

The GA has gone so far as to pass a law stating that a Governor's Executive Order has the force of law (Cited in one of my previous posts).

With respect, sir, I don't see this citation in any of your previous posts. I see a quote indicating that regulations have the force of law, but an executive order is not a regulation:

A regulation is created, amended, or repealed through a regulatory action. A typical regulatory action goes through a three-step process, which is specified in the state law commonly referred to as the Administrative Process Act or APA. The length of time it takes to complete this process varies, but 18 months is average.

No such regulation has been established; and while Executive Order 50 directs that regulations be proposed, there's still a lot that has to happen before they're in force.

The only thing I've found that's close to what you said is §44-146.17:

Executive orders, to include those declaring a state of emergency and directing evacuation, shall have the force and effect of law and the violation thereof shall be punishable as a Class 1 misdemeanor in every case where the executive order declares that its violation shall have such force and effect.

It's not clear to me whether this provision applies generally to all executive orders, or only to those directing evacuation during a state of emergency. In any case, Executive Order 50 does not declare that a violation constitutes a Class 1 misdemeanor, so it's clearly inapplicable in this case.

Do you have a more direct citation indicating that a person commits a crime by violating the governor's executive order?

 

[Tosta Dojen]

Within 30 days of the date of this Executive Order, the Director of the Department of General Services (DGS) shall issue guidance prohibiting carrying weapons openly in offices occupied by executive branch agencies.

The Director has issued DGS Directive 16 in response to the Governor's order. There's really not much to it. I'm searching for the proposed regulations that would prohibit the possession of concealed arms, but I haven't yet found it.

It is my understanding that the governor believes his power to control the un-concealed carrying of handguns in state facilities comes, at least in part from Code of Virginia 2.2-123; however, it would seem to me that this authority as defined here would be incomplete for what he is attempting to do.

It's even weaker than that. The cited authorities are §2.2-1100(B) and §2.2-1102(A)(1).

 

[Grapeshot]

The Director has issued DGS Directive 16 in response to the Governor's order. There's really not much to it. I'm searching for the proposed regulations that would prohibit the possession of concealed arms, but I haven't yet found it.



It's even weaker than that. The cited authorities are §2.2-1100(B) and §2.2-1102(A)(1).

Now there is an empty basket.

 

[Tosta Dojen]

I further order the Director of DGS, within 30 days of the date of this Executive Order, to propose regulations to ban the carrying of concealed weapons in offices occupied by executive branch agencies

The 30 days are up, so this afternoon I spoke with Rhonda Bishton, the Regulatory Coordinator for the Department of General Services to see what I could find out. After our conversation I was able to locate some information on the proposed regulation banning concealed firearms. It's been formally proposed as a new section of the Virginia Administrative Code, to be numbered 1 VAC 30-105.

The text of the proposed regulation has not been made public. That's because it's being pushed through using the Emergency Rulemaking process rather than the standard process. Because it's an "emergency" regulation, it will be effective immediately upon administrative approval, before its publication in the Virginia Register of Regulations, and prior to any opportunity for public comment.

Let me say that part again, because it's important: We won't get to see the new regulation or comment upon it before it's in force. Raise your hand if you think that wasn't the main reason for ramming it through as an "emergency" regulation.

It's classified as "Emergency/NOIRA" which means that a permanent regulation is being proposed to replace the "emergency" regulation when the latter expires in no more than 18 months. The permanent regulation is subject to the standard rulemaking process, including a public comment period, so we will get an opportunity to speak about the ban -- just not, you know, before they get to enforce it. The proposed permanent regulation might or might not be different from the "emergency" regulation; there's no way to tell yet.

The proposed regulation is currently listed as pending DPB review. According to this chart, that means it's already been vetted by the Attorney General, and will next go to the appropriate Cabinet Secretary (not sure which one) and the Governor for final approval.

 

[Grapeshot]

^ ^ No kiss before or after ^ ^

 

[jmelvin]

The Director has issued DGS Directive 16 in response to the Governor's order. There's really not much to it. I'm searching for the proposed regulations that would prohibit the possession of concealed arms, but I haven't yet found it.



It's even weaker than that. The cited authorities are §2.2-1100(B) and §2.2-1102(A)(1).

The wording of the directive is hard to figure out. In some portions it appears that openly carrying a firearm even on the property outside of a building is prohibited, but then other portions of the directive get back to wording related to actually being interior to a building or a facility. I find it quite humorous though that the whole of this discussion exempts those engaged in hunting, since hunters would most likely be carrying something far more powerful than any common handgun and would likely have their firearm carried in the hand and not simply resting in a holster requiring more steps to put the gun to use for potentially nefarious actions.

Oh well, perhaps some now see that Terry McAuliffe is exactly as billed.

 

[marshaul]

As it stand now, we do not have enough votes in both houses of the GA to override a governor veto.

Yes elections matter - both on a national level and on a STATE level. We must stay motivated and educate all others about the loss of freedoms - antis nick, slice, and chip away from what makes life so dear. It must stop - we must reverse the acts of the antis in office. Throw the bums out!

Maybe if the GOP had something to offer voters other than "not being Democrats", they might motivate voters.

 

[jmelvin]

When "not being Democrats" includes reversing regulations that banned open carry in state parks and state forests, in addition to not issuing executive orders and emergency regulations to bar the carry of openly or discreetly carried firearms in nearly all state buildings and facilities, that's a pretty big deal to me and I'll take it. Granted it's not necessarily additional forward progress, but when the ability to carry a gun for response to a criminal's attack can make the difference in life or death, the change from being able to legally carry in most state facilities versus nearly none is huge. Not all of us are willing to just say "I'll just ignore the laws and regulations and carry anyway."

 

[Repeater]

Emergency Text

The 30 days are up, so this afternoon I spoke with Rhonda Bishton, the Regulatory Coordinator for the Department of General Services to see what I could find out. After our conversation I was able to locate some information on the proposed regulation banning concealed firearms. It's been formally proposed as a new section of the Virginia Administrative Code, to be numbered 1 VAC 30-105.

The text of the proposed regulation has not been made public. That's because it's being pushed through using the Emergency Rulemaking process rather than the standard process. Because it's an "emergency" regulation, it will be effective immediately upon administrative approval, before its publication in the Virginia Register of Regulations, and prior to any opportunity for public comment.

Let me say that part again, because it's important: We won't get to see the new regulation or comment upon it before it's in force. Raise your hand if you think that wasn't the main reason for ramming it through as an "emergency" regulation.

It's classified as "Emergency/NOIRA" which means that a permanent regulation is being proposed to replace the "emergency" regulation when the latter expires in no more than 18 months. The permanent regulation is subject to the standard rulemaking process, including a public comment period, so we will get an opportunity to speak about the ban -- just not, you know, before they get to enforce it. The proposed permanent regulation might or might not be different from the "emergency" regulation; there's no way to tell yet.

The proposed regulation is currently listed as pending DPB review. According to this chart, that means it's already been vetted by the Attorney General, and will next go to the appropriate Cabinet Secretary (not sure which one) and the Governor for final approval.

The so-called Emergency Text is available. For fun, read the AG's letter [strike]approving[/strike] certifying the lawless action.

 

[jmelvin]

"...This prohibition does not apply to law enforcement officers, authorized security personnel, or military personnel, when such individuals are authorized to carry a firearm in accordance with their duties, and when they are carrying the firearm within that authority...."

I guess if there is any consistency here, it is that Governor McAuliffe and his man Christopher Beschler only trust the police with guns when they are acting in their official capacity and will treat them the same as the rest of us scum citizens when they too dare to enter his buildings to approach his majesty's staff.

 

[marshaul]

You're being too charitable. Thanks to LEOSA, "when they are carrying the firearm within that authority" applies at all times. All you have to do is be a more equal animal.

 

[skidmark]

You're being too charitable. Thanks to LEOSA, "when they are carrying the firearm within that authority" applies at all times. All you have to do is be a more equal animal.

"In accordance with his duties" trumps LEOSA every time.

Let's look at some scenarios -

Richmond City cop on break goes to see his girlfriend at the Monroe Building. Is carrying in that case in accordance with his duties? We all know it's not but we all also know nobody's going to push the issue?

VSP Trooper stops by the General Assembly Building after his shift is over to see his cousin (a retired VSP Trooper now working as the metal detector monkey). Is carrying in that case in accordance with his duties? (Remember, the Capitol Police have law enforcement jurisdiction in the building and on Capitol Square.) Same comment as above.

Here's the tricky one - Naval Base Norfolk Shore Patrol delivers prisoner to State Police who have an outstanding warrant against the poor sailor. Then SP hangs around drinking coffee and swapping lies till it's close to then end of his shift? Is carrying in that case in accordance with his duties?

How about the County Fire Marshal who stops by the local ABC Store on the way home? Or the probation/parole officer who hits the cafeteria at DeJarnette MH Center because he knows he will not be charged (and that as cafeterias go, it's not all that bad)?

Explain you answer. Show all your work.

stay safe.

 

[marshaul]

It says "when", not "while". I would read that to apply to any law enforcement officer who gets to carry a gun.

 

[peter nap]

Duh...I can't find the text.

 

[Grapeshot]

Duh...I can't find the text.

Here 'tis:

http://www.townhall.virginia.gov/l/GetFile.cfm?File=C:\TownHall\docroot\GuidanceDocs\194\GDoc_DGS_5849_v2.pdf

 

[Tosta Dojen]

I had some trouble finding things myself. Here are some direct links:

Rulemaking status

Emergency text
Agency Statement
Attorney General certification