Please vote no on HB 394, HB 391, HB 399, HB 400, & HB 77. We no longer want to live in a state that is"tough on crime" without providing proper mental health and meaningful rehabilitation. We believe in public safety AND human rights. Virginia does NOT need the death penalty. We need reform. Focus on root causes of problems using common sense.

As a criminal defense attorney, I strongly support this bill. The reason this bill is necessary can be demonstrated by considering a hypothetical case where a person is charged with aggravated malicious wounding, grand larceny, and DUI 3rd. Each of those offenses are ones where a jury could return a verdict with multiple different grades. Aggravated malicious wounding cases could result in a verdict of malicious wounding, unlawful wounding, or assault and battery. I have seen this happen. Grand larceny could result in a verdict of petit larceny. DUI 3rd could result in a verdict of misdemeanor DUI 2nd or 1st, which is possible if there are issues with the prior convictions or if there is an issue about substantial similarity of out of state convictions. When there are multiple charges and multiple grades at which a verdict may come back, there are times when it makes better sense for the accused to ask for a jury sentencing. In my practice, I have contemplated filing complicated jury sentencing demands that account for various possible outcomes. There are two fundamental problems with this as an option -- the number of permutations increases geometrically in some situations with multiple indictments and lesser included offenses, and there are also circumstances where making such a filing that details this kind of strategy improperly reveals defense strategy to the Commonwealth. There is a reason that the defense presents evidence second, and a lot of that has to do with the sacredness of the concept that the defendant should not have to reveal his strategy prior to the Commonwealth revealing its evidence. I have personally experienced a commonwealth attorney twisting the evidence in response to defense strategy. It is not in keeping with the proper way our system works. This bill still requires a notice to be filed, and this is proper because frankly a jury sentencing is extra work for both defense counsel and prosecutor. The only thing the bill does is creates a common-sense way to deal with the issues I described and also to deal with a scenario where the accused decides even in the last minute that he feels a judge should arrive at a fair sentence for him. This is why we have judges, and I ask this body to pass this bill into law.

Please vote no on HB 394, HB 391, HB 399, HB 400, & HB 77. We no longer want to live in a state that is"tough on crime" without providing proper mental health and meaningful rehabilitation. We believe in public safety AND human rights. Virginia does NOT need the death penalty. We need reform. Focus on root causes of problems using common sense.

Hello, I am M. Lee Smallwood, II, and I am a practicing criminal defense attorney. I happen to be in court several times each year when the clerk administers this oath to the grand jury. It is a painful process to hear such an awkward and antiquated oath being recited. When I saw that this bill had been put forward, I was delighted. The changes suggested will make a small but important impact on improving our criminal justice system.

Please vote no on HB 394, HB 391, HB 399, HB 400, & HB 77. We no longer want to live in a state that is"tough on crime" without providing proper mental health and meaningful rehabilitation. We believe in public safety AND human rights. Virginia does NOT need the death penalty. We need reform. Focus on root causes of problems using common sense.

I SUPPORT HB 174. Marriage equality is long overdue. I SUPPORT HB 640. It's the least we can do to provide restitution to someone who was wrongfully incarcerated. I SUPPORT HB 766. Sexual abuse should absolutely be taken into account when adjudicating for a child's best interest and no child should be under the custody of someone who abused them. I SUPPORT HB 81. It's disgraceful that someone who suffered enough to attempt or die or suicide would ever be treated like a criminal, and this kind of stigma is a barrier to getting help that would prevent suicide. I OPPOSE HB394. It was a joyous occasion in 2021 when Virginia abolished the death penalty, and we should never go back to the days that we still had that.

I am commenting today on behalf of The Justice & Witness Action Network – Virginia of the United Church of Christ. Our denomination affirms equal marriage rights for couples regardless of gender and declares that the government should not interfere with couples regardless of gender who choose to marry. We support passage of HB174 to ensure that the right to marry for all Virginians remains protected by law.

As Unitarian Universalists, we affirm the inherent worth and dignity of all people as a core principle. Few things are more relevant to worth and dignity than the respect of one's community in their choice of a life partner and the full and equal participation of that joined couple in the community. On one of their happiest days, no human should be confronted by the obstacle of another who would deny them their civil right and rob them of the dignity of that moment of acceptance. We support this long overdue measure to bring clarity and assurance to same sex couples seeking to exercise their constitutional right to marriage.

Cmon, people. If one wants to get married, let them get married! Love is love.

Hi there, I'm Natalie from Social Busy Bee, your partner in the exciting world of Instagram growth. I've discovered something phenomenal for skyrocketing your Instagram popularity and I'm thrilled to share it with you! Social Growth Engine introduces a groundbreaking service that takes your Instagram engagement to new heights. It's effortless: - Zero in on producing unforgettable content. - Extremely budget-friendly at a mere $36/month. - Completely safe (no password needed), incredibly powerful, and Instagram's best friend. I've experienced remarkable results firsthand, and I'm sure you will too! Amplify your Instagram presence right now: http://get.socialbuzzzy.com/instagram_booster Best wishes, Natalie at Social Busy Bee"

Hi I am writing to you on behalf of The Well Connection UK, a media and publishing company. We could easily get virginia.gov featured in various publications such as magazines, online blogs and news sites. This would undoubtedly help virginia.gov with publicity, reputation, domain authority and organic search engine rankings. We have a wide range of options including completely free collaborations, sponsored posts, guest posts and banner ads. If this sounds of interest, please reach out to the senior business development manager, Anita at info@thewellconnection.co.uk and whatsapp +447395206515 (GMT) Kind regards Clifton Junior Outreach Assistant

Comments Document

Apologies for submitting attachment which was not submitted correctly last Thursday on HB 858. Testimony Opposing Virginia “Medical Aid in Dying” Bill HB 858/SB 280 One of the most frequently repeated claims by proponents of assisted suicide laws is that there has not been “a single documented case of abuse or misuse.” To the contrary, I refer you to two resources describing problem cases. The first is from the Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund, Oregon and Washington State Abuses and Complications. The second is a journal article by two New York medical doctors, Drs. Herbert Hendin and Kathleen Foley, Physician-Assisted Suicide in Oregon: A Medical Perspective (2008). Data from states where assisted suicide is legal show that all people who request assisted suicide have disabilities, even if some don’t think of their impairments that way, and that unmet disability related needs are their reasons for wanting to die. The top five reasons Oregon doctors give for their patients’ assisted suicide requests over all reported years are not pain or fear of future pain, but psycho-social issues that pertain to disability. Three of these (losing autonomy, losing dignity, burden on family) could be addressed by consumer-directed in-home personal care services, but the law operates as though the person’s reasons don’t matter, and nothing need be done to address them. (See attachment)

Hi there, I'm Natalie from Social Busy Bee, your partner in the exciting world of Instagram growth. I've discovered something phenomenal for skyrocketing your Instagram popularity and I'm thrilled to share it with you! Social Growth Engine introduces a groundbreaking service that takes your Instagram engagement to new heights. It's effortless: - Zero in on producing unforgettable content. - Extremely budget-friendly at a mere $36/month. - Completely safe (no password needed), incredibly powerful, and Instagram's best friend. I've experienced remarkable results firsthand, and I'm sure you will too! Amplify your Instagram presence right now: http://get.socialbuzzzy.com/instagram_booster Best wishes, Natalie at Social Busy Bee"

Hi I am writing to you on behalf of The Well Connection UK, a media and publishing company. We could easily get virginia.gov featured in various publications such as magazines, online blogs and news sites. This would undoubtedly help virginia.gov with publicity, reputation, domain authority and organic search engine rankings. We have a wide range of options including completely free collaborations, sponsored posts, guest posts and banner ads. If this sounds of interest, please reach out to the senior business development manager, Anita at info@thewellconnection.co.uk and whatsapp +447395206515 (GMT) Kind regards Clifton Junior Outreach Assistant

Unlimited FREE Buyer Traffic On Autopilot Fully-automated software for SET & FORGET traffic 24/7 Ultra-fast SAME DAY results 100% free traffic and it always will be Click on link ----> https://instantrealtraffic.com/go

Hey there, Natalie from Social Buzzzy , your guide in the exciting world of Instagram growth. I've stumbled upon something extraordinary for skyrocketing your Instagram popularity and I'm thrilled to share it with you! Social Growth Engine unveils a revolutionary service that propels your Instagram engagement to new heights. It's a breeze: - Concentrate on crafting unforgettable content. - Extremely affordable at a mere $36/month. - Utterly reliable (no password needed), incredibly powerful, and the ideal Instagram companion. I've experienced outstanding results firsthand, and I'm sure you will too! Amplify your Instagram presence this instant: http://get.socialbuzzzy.com/instagram_booster To your success, Natalie

I'm Heath, Founder of CaseConnector.io. We're experiencing an overflow of cases from our Client Acquisition Program and see a potential fit with your firm's expertise. Let's discuss further? Reach out at https://caseconnectors.com or my personal email heathd@caseconnector.io Best, Heath Find me on LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/heathdonald

Comments Document

Dear Chair Tran and Members of the Committee: On behalf of the Product Stewardship Institute, please accept the attached written testimony in support of HB 745 Mattress Stewardship Program. Thank you, Scott Cassel Chief Executive Officer/Founder Product Stewardship Institute

H ACNR Nat Res VaLCV Legislative Positions -- We encourage you to SUPPORT HB199, HB745, HB968, HB985. HB 199 (Krizek) This legislation would: Remove the provision in Virginia’s Brownfield program that only permits federal funds to fund the program. Virginia’s Brownfield program provides a $500/kWh incentive for solar projects on former coal mines and a $100/kWh incentive for solar projects on brownfields. Reasons to SUPPORT HB199: This simple fix will allow the Commonwealth to appropriate funds to this program. These modest incentives will help offset the slightly higher cost of projects in these locations. The more projects that are sited on former coal mines and brownfields means less impacts to important natural resources like farms and forests. HB 745 (Laufer) This legislation would establish a mattress stewardship program to network of convenient and free collection sites for post-consumer mattresses, defined in the bill, that will facilitate higher rates of recycling and materials recovery for post-consumer mattresses. Reasons to SUPPORT HB745: Product stewardship programs are one of the best tools to reduce litter and increase recycling. Product stewardship puts responsibility on producers to develop recycling systems for their products. Mattresses contain high-value recyclable materials that can be recovered and used to create new products. According to the Mattress Recycling Council, more than 50,000 mattresses are discarded in the U.S. each day and more than 75 percent of a mattress can be recycled. HB 968 (Lopez) This Legislation Would: Create the Virginia Climate Innovation Authority to finance clean energy projects, greenhouse gas emissions reduction projects, and other qualified projects through the strategic deployment of public funds in the form of grants, loans, credit enhancements, and other financing mechanisms. Reasons to SUPPORT HB 968: Creation of the Virginia Climate Innovation Authority would: Accelerate the adoption of proven clean energy technology and greenhouse gas reduction projects to expand access to untapped markets and to bring benefits to historically underserved communities. Catalyze access to federal funds included in the Inflation Reduction Act, such as the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF), a $27 billion commitment to fund “green banks” and other investment vehicles. Use public dollars to leverage private investment. HB 985 (Tran) High polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon; prohibits pavement sealants that contain, civil penalty. This legislation would: Prohibit the use of toxic high-PAH pavement sealants. Reasons to SUPPORT HB985: The Chesapeake Bay Program has prioritized polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) as the second most important toxic contaminant. PAHs are a class of chemicals that are the byproduct left over from burning coal, oil, gas, or wood. They are cancer-causing chemicals, and human exposure can come through breathing in, ingesting or absorbing through the skin. Pavement sealants with high PAH levels degrade, ultimately releasing dust and fine particles laden with carcinogens into homes, waterways, the soil, and the air. Stormwater runoff from PAH coatings continue to be highly toxic to fish and aquatic organisms months after their application. Low PAH sealants are cost-competitive and in regular use throughout the country.

YES on HB 858. This bill provides an OPTION for those with terminal illnesses who are found eligible by two doctors to end their lives gently and on their own terms. Isn't that what we all wish for? It cannot be used by someone with a disability or a mental illness and there are safeguards to prevent anyone from being coerced into it (which hasn't been found to happen in states where these laws are in place). Your personal beliefs prevent you from using it for yourself? That's fine, you don't have to. Please look beyond the usual party lines and make this law for the few Virginians who need it. Thank you.

Comments Document

See Attached.

Comments Document

Honorable House Members: Please take the time to review the attached "The Ethics and the Dangers" concerning Physician-Assisted-Suicide (PAS). Thank you, Nathan A. Rowe, APRN, PMHNP-BC, CEN Virginia Director American Academy of Medical Ethics

Dear Chair Sickles and Committee Members: I beg you to vote NO on HB 858. The bill’s fundamental wrong is to promote suicide—doubly wrong when we already have an epidemic of suicide. But its provisions also open the door to coercion, abuse, and lethal harm of our most vulnerable citizens. From falsified death certificates and overlapping roles to lack of Board review transparency and more, the bill is very, very dangerous. For example, the same provider can receive both of the oral requests, select a capacity reviewer (IF the provider feels it’s needed), approve the suicide request, fill the prescription (if the provider also is a licensed pharmacist), and even sign the death certificate, which must be falsified to hide the fact that the real cause of death is suicide by overdose/poisoning. It is hard to imagine a combination of provisions more dangerous than that. This clearly would allow bad actors to manipulate and abuse vulnerable persons who do not consent to assisted suicide. The danger would be especially high in settings like hospitals or long-term care centers that may have the provider, patient, pharmacy, witnesses, and even capacity reviewers under one roof. The risk of abuse is astonishing and must not be allowed. Falsified death certificates in particular are a huge red flag and are unspeakably dangerous because later no one will be able to determine how people actually died. To require lying and falsification of official documents is totally unethical and a betrayal of the public trust. Meanwhile the Board's findings on compliance will remain secret "[e]xcept as otherwise required by law." This means that in cases of concern or controversy, we may never be able to determine what happened, justice may be denied, and future patients of the providers or entities may be placed at tremendous risk. I have emailed each of you a more detailed list reviewing additional dangerous provisions. I urge you to take time to read that email in full. Suicide is always wrong because it is a form of taking innocent human life. Condoning the taking of innocent human life damages society, entrenching a mindset that sees taking innocent human life as a solution to suffering and difficulties. The harm caused by expanding that mindset must not be underestimated, especially when we already see increasing attacks on innocents breaking out in public places, and we already have some voices promoting the idea of involuntary euthanasia. I implore you to take all these threats seriously and vote NO to this appalling bill. Health care providers should never be dealers in death but always life, healing, and life-affirming care. And we have the best palliative care the world has ever seen. There is always a better path than suicide, even for the terminally ill.

As an older Virginian who has witnessed the needless suffering of terminally ill individuals unable to make end-of-life decisions with dignity at home, I am reaching out to you, a valued member of the Education and Health committee. I urge you to consider voting in favor of the end-of-life decisions bill HB858 to pass through the committee. Allowing individuals the choice to stay in their homes during such a challenging time is integral to Virginia's commitment to empowering its citizens to make decisions about their own lives. I implore you to recognize the significance of this legislation in preserving the liberty and autonomy of Virginians. Sharing this plea, I draw upon the desire to ensure that when the time comes, I have the empowerment to make such decisions within the comfort of my Richmond home, avoiding the necessity of doing so in a distant hotel room out of state. I respectfully acknowledge the committee's pivotal role in shaping policies that profoundly impact the lives of Virginians. Your thoughtful consideration and support for this bill would not only address a critical need but also stand as a testament to Virginia's dedication to the well-being and freedom of its citizens. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Hb858 vote yes. Terminally ill people deserve bodily autonomy and deserve to not live the rest of their life in pain of they dont want to

Comments Document

Sharon Quick, MD, MA (Bioethics)--Reasons to Oppose Virginia HB 858 I am President of the Physicians for Compassionate Care Education Foundation (PCCEF), an organization without religious or political affiliation. We advocate for the terminally ill, who often have compromised capacity to choose, making them vulnerable to abuse. I have expertise in pediatric anesthesiology, critical care, and medical ethics. On behalf of our Virginia members and as a physician residing in Washington State , where physician-assisted suicide was legalized in 2009, we urge you to oppose HB 858 which is the most radical, dangerous policy of its kind in the nation. Summary: Medically-assisted suicide laws inevitably violate (rather than uphold) patient autonomy, create (based on subjective, error-prone criteria) a class of marginalized patients from whom the standard of medical care is withheld, allow lethal drugs to unnecessarily substitute for good palliative care and pain control, disproportionately prey on those with mental health problems and disabilities, and destroy the foundation of medical ethics, creating distrust among patients and the health care profession. Oversight is inadequate to enforce the law or detect abuse, and the bill contains multiple conscience violations. This bill is a set-up for elder abuse. Please see the attached document for a discussion of the problems with medically-assisted suicide in general and a more extensive, but not exhaustive, list of the specific parts of this bill that make it particularly reckless and dangerous.

My name is Ian McIntosh, Director of Disability Outreach for the Patients Rights Action Fund (PRAF), a leading national organization fighting assisted suicide legislation across the country. Assisted suicide is suicide and any active participation in causing the death of a person is malpractice. Assisted suicide is suicide by any acronym proponents choose. But to counter course on the terminological war waged by professional assisted suicide activists, plainly, suicide was also known as self-murder. And in a healthcare system concerned with true choice and autonomy, the just thing to do when irrational action meets compromised thought is to act and think on behalf of the vulnerable and rescue them from their wrong decision. And yet, in our broken healthcare system, where mistrust between patients and doctors (and doctors and doctors) increases year over year, jurisdictions with assisted suicide legislation steers people with disabilities towards assisted suicide instead of suicide prevention solely on the basis of an immutable characteristic; That is discrimination. Professional assisted suicide organizations like Compassion and Choices and Death with Dignity are not -- I repeat -- not disability rights organizations. If they were a national disability rights organization, they would fight for...disability rights! If they were a disability rights organization, records would catalogue efforts fighting for health equity and there would be a word-of-mouth reputation identifying them as champions for those causes and concerns that actual disability rights organizations champion; They wouldn't face public rejection in the way the Alzheimer's Association rejected C&C's "educational" relationship approach in what's surely one of the clearest examples of how unlike assisted suicide is to real end-of-life care, every bit as much how unlike these professional assisted suicide activist organizations are to actual disability organizations:. From the Alzheimer's Association website: "Their [Compassion and Choices] values are inconsistent with those of the Association. We deeply regret our mistake, have begun the termination of the relationship, and apologize to all of the families we support who were hurt or disappointed...As a patient advocacy group and evidence-based organization, the Alzheimer’s Association stands behind people living with Alzheimer’s, their care partners and their health care providers as they navigate treatment and care choices throughout the continuum of the disease. Research supports a palliative care approach as the highest quality of end-of-life care for individuals with advanced dementia." I believe with new information comes new conclusions. I believe that disability rights are the domain of disability rights organizations and lawmakers of good will who turn data into policy that protects civil rights. No national disability rights organization with a position supports assisted suicide. All with a position, oppose it. Please side with those organizations who have championed the civil rights of the disability community and take the time to find out why they oppose this insidious legislation and the "work" of professional assisted suicide activists. As a Canadian emigre to the US, the thought of seeing Virginians in the thousands come under this eugenical boot is terrifying. Please oppose HB 858

Comments Document

Please consider the attached 2-page testimony from a disability perspective in opposition to this bill.

I am a practicing physician who has held a Virginia medical license since 1984 (#0101037516). I respectfully oppose the amendment proposed in HB 858, which would provide exemption for physicians who wish practice medical aid in dying (MAID) in Virginia. MAID is euphemism for physician-assisted suicide (PAS), a practice and ethos that is out of step with the long history of the medical profession, which runs counter to majority opinion in all religions, and is ignorant of the sustained condemnation of the practice by both the American College of Physicians (2017) and the American Medical Association (2018 and 2023). Physician-assisted suicide inevitably leads to active euthanasia, as the Canadian program bears witness. It places the vulnerable, marginalized, exploited and aged at risk of coercion and manipulation. The practice is toxic to society and under a PAS paradigm, race-based healthcare disparities will be augmented rather than mitigated. What we administer to our patients, for sickness or health, well-being or death, we administer to society. I urge NON-PASSAGE of this bill.

I believe that everyone should have the option when they are faced with definitive demise to choose how they leave behind this world and their loved ones. Giving people the dignity to say “I am ready” and to allow their loved ones to gather before the time is near to say one final goodbye is far better, and a far greater mercy than forcing them to wait anxiously and in agony for death to finally take them. Although this may not remove the pain of loss, nor will it eliminate the sorrow that will inevitably follow for those left behind, this option can alleviate the mental agony and fear of wondering when, and worrying if they’ll be able to say one final goodbye. I am in full support of MAID because we should all have the option if faced with imminent death to leave when we choose and when we are ready. This is a choice, not a requirement. Those who wish to continue to fight through their anguish have the option to do so, but for those who wish to have control over what will inevitably happen will have that availability with dignity.

As an end of life doula, I've had the privilege of serving some of Virginia's finest men and women as they journey through what is perhaps the hardest part of their lives. Every case is different but many clients suffer greatly during the last days/weeks of their existence on this earth. These fathers, mothers, brothers, daughters, friends all have unique personalities, fascinating stories, and individual needs. Every once in a while, I get calls for people who have declined to a state of total suffering and ask the doctor, the nurse, me, sometimes even their loved one to die. They beg. If they were a pet, the vet would be gently telling the owner that it's the humane thing to do. But here, a suffering person pleads in desperate pain to end it, and it cannot be done. The only recourse is to hasten death on their own via VSED: Voluntarily Stopping Eating and Drinking. In a doula role, I've supported several clients through this, and it was 4-15 long and agonizing days of hunger, thirst, and bodily suffering. They did not die in dignity or peace. Caregivers, as well were tormented as they watched their loved ones suffer despite continuously providing comfort care. Ultimately the intent and result of VSED and Medical Aid in Dying are the same, just much greater suffering in VSED. Only the laws in Virginia can dictate and change that experience for our loved ones, and how humane we are legally allowed to be with them. HB858 also comprehensively and appropriately addresses the critical topics that I've seen pop up through my experiences with VSED, such as not precluding people who are dysphasic, deaf, or have communication disorders as having capacity, provisions of wills/contracts, prohibiting acts of coercion, intimidation, and falsifying/destroying documents of patient's request as a Class 2 felony, as well as immunity of healthcare providers. This is well-written and extremely well thought out. I strongly encourage the passage of HB858 as a humane and compassionate act to all future Virginia patients who find themselves in this tragic misfortune, and in honor of those who've sadly gone before. Amy Nixon, Comforting Hands End-of-Life Doula Services, 757-987-5991 amy@comfortinghands.com

Comments Document

As a licensed physician in VA, DC, and MD, I'm submitting testimony in support of HB858: medical aid in dying.

Comments Document

I am writing as a board-certified Hospice and Palliative Care physician, but mainly as a 71-year-old who has seen the power of hospice to alleviate suffering and hopes that it is still available when I transition from physician to patient, and then inevitably to end-of-life patient. This bill is not the Oregon paradigm— it is the Compassion and Choices paradigm, much more coercive. We need patient-centered care, not activist-centered care. I was moved by last weeks's Senate testimony, but in every case I could not help but think: "Why were they unable to get good hospice care?" Palliative sedation, legal everywhere, can lessen suffering better than MAID, because it does not require self-administration. The best way to improve end-of-life care is to support expansion of the Medicare Hospice Benefit so that patients and caregivers have more support. In Oregon, the availability of MAID has not impaired hospice care because conscientious objection is respected. So 55% of hospices there do not allow their staff to be present for ingestion of MAID drugs, and 16% do not allow any involvement at all. That would not be possible under HB 858, which requires not just tolerance but affirmation of MAID. Since a core principal of hospice is neither to delay nor accelerate a natural dying process, I can say with confidence that the vast majority of hospice doctors, nurse practitioners, and nurses find MAID not only unnecessary but abhorrent. Compassion and Choices used to claim that they supported hospice, but this is no longer credible. Under HB 858, if I as a hospice doctor have a patient request for accelerated death, which is not at all uncommon, am I free to explore the patient's sources of suffering and recommend alternatives to MAID? Or would that be considered "undue influence" and therefore a Class 2 felony? And would a patient's spouse arguing against MAID also become a felon? Is MAID to be a last resort, as still recommended by one of its principal supporters, Dr. Timothy Quill, or is it now to be a first resort, replacing hospice, based on the expertise of Compassion and Choices? Under this bill, there is no escape from complicity with MAID, even with the secular rationale that it is not the best care available to the patient. When hospice care can compete fairly with MAID and not be compromised by MAID, it's not even close. In Oregon, after 25 years, less than 1% of deaths are from MAID. Do we want to risk the care of the other 99% in bowing to some abstract principle of absolute autonomy? I have attached an article from Ezekiel Emanuel, the principal author of the Affordable Care Act, and definitely not a member of the "religious right." He observes that "Legalizing euthanasia and [physician-assisted death] is really a sideshow in end-of-life care— championed by the few for the few, extensively covered by the media, but not targeted to improve the care for most dying patients who still suffer." I completely agree. This should be a nonpartisan issue, it's far too important not to be. If it narrowly passes on strict party lines, or even if it narrowly fails, most of you will not have given it sufficient thought. So please read this bill carefully, and learn enough about hospice to compare it fairly with MAID. I am happy to connect with any Delegate or Senator, on either side of this issue, to answer any questions. William R. Anderson, MD wrandersonmd@icloud.com

No one should be denied the right to die with peace and dignity intact. It is cruel and inhumane to prolong suffering against a person's wishes.

Comments Document

I am writing today to offer my strong support for the passage of HB 858, the Medical Aid in Dying Act. I know you are very busy, so I will try and be brief.

Dear Chair Sickles and Members of the House Committee on Health and Human Services, I am a now-retired physician, currently living in Woodville (Rappahannock County). I practiced medicine for thirty-five years in Washington, DC, specializing in the treatment of HIV/AIDS. In the 80’s and early 90’s there was no effective treatment for HIV, and it most commonly resulted in death. During this period my practice averaged one death per week. When we think of death we have images of gently passing away at home, surrounded by our family. However this is not always the case. There are “good” deaths and there are “bad” deaths. With AIDS I frequently saw the bad deaths: patients unable to breath from Pneumocystis pneumonia, lying in pools of diarrhea from cryptosporidium diarrhea, or in severe pain unresponsive to narcotics. In these circumstances, when I had no treatment available for the condition causing their suffering, I did feel the obligation to help them end their suffering. Given my experiences I am a supporter of Medical Aid in Dying. I would hope that a physician today would be able to aid patients at the end of life, and do so within the constraints of the law. I believe that SB 280 is well written and provides an appropriate framework to allow physicians to provide compassionate care at the end of life. Douglas Ward, MD Woodville, VA

Dear Chair Sickles and members of the House Committee on Health and Human Services, I was raised and currently reside in Norfolk, VA, and I practiced Internal Medicine and Gastroenterology here in Norfolk for 30 years, retiring in 2008. I have been a Community Faculty Member at EVMS since 1975 and am still active, interviewing medical school applicants almost weekly in season. From both my personal and professional perspectives, I support passage of the VA End-of-Life Option Act. Having seen many patients, friends and my mother over these years suffer needless pain and suffering in their final days of life, I have sincerely hoped that Virginia would join the other states in our country that offer this option to control their final time on this earth. The Hippocratic oath, which I swore to uphold, compels me to do no harm, to heal and to help eliminate suffering. I call on your and your colleagues to enable physicians to be of service to their patients by having this option. A majority of physicians and Virginia citizens join me by being in favor of allowing the doctor to go beyond the excellent care given to hospice patients now available by allowing the patient and the doctor to use medication to end the patient’s life. The strict requirements for protocol in this bill assure that this approach is given when no other measures can help, with a proper waiting period, when the patient is of sound mind and can decide independently and when another physician agrees with the approach. I’m sure you are familiar with the other arguments both for and against taking this measure, and I trust after careful deliberation your committee and the General Assembly will enact this compassionate approach to aid the dying patient. Edward L. Lilly, MD, FACP One Colley Avenue, Apartment 1509 Norfolk, VA 23510 757-440-5535 (home) 757-438-7715 (Ed cell)

BILL NUMBER – HB 858 Dear Committee Chair Sickles and Members of the House Committee on Health and Human Services, I reside in Midlothian and having practiced medicine for 30 years, I have experienced too many end-of-life events. Often the prolonged pain and suffering for patients and their families or caregivers becomes overwhelming and robs them of any quality of life. In addition, as doctors, nurses, and hospitals are conditioned to heal patients, so many tests and procedures are performed which have no chance of improving one’s condition, while seriously raising the cost of care and depleting family financial resources as well as government assistance programs. The Medical Aid In Dying option in those states that have legislated it has been well proven to offer great peace of mind for patients and families, even for those who never make that choice. I strongly urge the passage of Bill HB 858. Sincerely, Robert H. Perkins MD (ret) dotandtin@gmail.com (774) 212-1007

Chair Sickles and members of the House Committee on Health and Human Services, As a Gerontologist and Family Caregiver, I have seen countless examples of individuals and loved ones barely existing, with no quality of life. I have also witnessed first hand healthcare professionals challenging an individual's DNR when said individual has diminished capacity. We live in a state with very few options for productively dying. And even those limited options are often challenged or ignored by healthcare professionals. We need legislation with some teeth that supports dying on our own terms. Jay White <info@gerojay.com>

Dear Chair Sickles and members of the House Committee on Health and Human Services: I write in support of House Bill 858 which proposes medical aid to the dying. I am a citizen of Norfolk, a registered voter, and a retired physician. I am board-certified in psychiatry and neurology. Early on, I vowed to respect the natural inevitable, rhythms of life, i.e. birth, life, and death. I further vowed as a physician to do no harm. In my opinion it is a failure of these vows to allow pain to continue or to interfere with patient autonomy in a terminal situation. Both responses would interfere with life’s normal course and cause harm physically and mentally. Thank you for considering these thoughts. Larry Bernert MD (retired) 1 Colley Ave Apt 404 Norfolk, VA labjr@cox.net 757-620-2580

Dear Chair Sickles and members of the House Committee on Health and Human Services. As a physician who obviously cares deeply about my relationship with patients I want to refer to a portion of the modern version of the Hippocratic Oath. “ I will remember that there is art to medicine as well as science, and that warmth, sympathy, and understanding may outweigh the surgeon's knife or the chemist's drug.” Medical Aid In Dying (MAID) is very much consistent with the Hippocratic Oath that we as physicians take. When everything that is tried to improve our patients’ quality of life fails, the question arises when do we then turn to warmth, sympathy and understanding. When a patient is fully competent mentally with a predicted life expectancy of 6 months or less, has exhausted every possible modality to give them relief of their suffering, it is then time to respect a patient’s wishes if they are no longer able to cope with their illness. Should a patient decide to end their life with medical assistance, the proposed law requires two health care professionals, as a safeguard, to evaluate the patient to assure they are fully competent to make and understand their decision. If it is determined in the affirmative it is certainly the “warmth, sympathy and understanding” that is due the patient. I ask all members of the State Legislature if this was you, a parent, a spouse or a child would you not want to help them end their suffering if all possible treatments had failed? I urge you to give this legislation strong consideration with an open mind and a sympathetic heart. KENNETH OLSHANSKY, M.D. Cell: 8046901635 olshanskyken@gmail.com

Dear Chair Sickles and members of the House Committee on Health and Human Services. As a physician who obviously cares deeply about my relationship with patients I want to refer to a portion of the modern version of the Hippocratic Oath. “ I will remember that there is art to medicine as well as science, and that warmth, sympathy, and understanding may outweigh the surgeon's knife or the chemist's drug.” Medical Aid In Dying (MAID) is very much consistent with the Hippocratic Oath that we as physicians take. When everything that is tried to improve our patients’ quality of life fails, the question arises when do we then turn to warmth, sympathy and understanding. When a patient is fully competent mentally with a predicted life expectancy of 6 months or less, has exhausted every possible modality to give them relief of their suffering, it is then time to respect a patient’s wishes if they are no longer able to cope with their illness. Should a patient decide to end their life with medical assistance, the proposed law requires two health care professionals, as a safeguard, to evaluate the patient to assure they are fully competent to make and understand their decision. If it is determined in the affirmative it is certainly the “warmth, sympathy and understanding” that is due the patient. I ask all members of the State Legislature if this was you, a parent, a spouse or a child would you not want to help them end their suffering if all possible treatments had failed? I urge you to give this legislation strong consideration with an open mind and a sympathetic heart. KENNETH OLSHANSKY, M.D. Cell: 8046901635 olshanskyken@gmail.com

As a physician who is a former Canadian, I have attended the deaths of many patients during my 24 years in medicine. I have grieved at many funerals. Palliative Care and Hospice provide excellent services to our patients in the Commonwealth, and there are no significant barriers to accessing end-of-life care for patients from all walks of life. Medicaid and Medicare provide these services to patients who have fewer resources, and commercial insurance does the same. This is not an issue of the HAVES vs the HAVE-NOTS. When I had patients tell me that they wanted to end their lives, I have ALWAYS been able to meet them in their moment of need with medicine and therapy to wrap comforting care around them to ease their suffering. When patients want to end their lives because of the horrors of pain, we ALWAYS have ways to help. I have had patients, friends, colleagues and co-workers commit suicide, and I have wept with their families. WITH THE WIDE-AVAILABILITY OF FENTANYL AS A STREET- DRUG, INDIVIDUALS WHO CHOOSE TO COMMIT SUICIDE CAN DO SO WITH MINIMAL BARRIERS AND WITH MINIMAL SUFFERING. Individuals who want to commit suicide do so without the "help" of a physician every day in this country. As a Canadian turned Virginian, I can tell you the stories of Canadians being told by healthcare workers that they are a burden to society; that they should consider assisted suicide. It is not a matter of IF our most vulnerable patients are advised to commit suicide by healthcare providers, it is a matter of WHEN. Abuses will happen. The same thing happens in Oregon and Washington State. I did not train for 15 years (college, medical school, residency, fellowship) to kill patients. I trained for 15 years to save patients in their most vulnerable moments of need. When patients in Virginia choose to die with dignity, hospice and palliative care provide the right care at the right time. My cell phone is 434 401 8769 and my email is markdavidt@icloud.com Please don't hesitate to reach out to me if I can help in any way. Mark D. Townsend, MD, MHCM, Fellow of the American College of Cardiology

Dear Chair Sickles and Members of the House Committee on Health and Human Services. I support Senate Bill 280. Watching my mother, father, and aunt suffer and die from cancer was excruciating. My father's decline was particularly rapid; he went from being able to walk to the bathroom to being bedridden in a matter of weeks. I was able to give him morphine while he was in hospice at home, but eventually, it became less effective, and he experienced breakthrough pain. He developed bed sores but was too proud to complain. I will never forget the moment he took his last breath. The cancers that killed my parents were not hereditary. However, I understand that if we live long enough, the chance of developing cancer is around 40%. If I am diagnosed with cancer at some point in my life, I do not want to experience the same suffering that my loved ones did. I would like the option to reduce my suffering and not wait for the disease to take my life painfully and slowly.

As a healthcare provider in Virginia for over 40 years I have seen the sadness and agony of watching family members and patients suffer awaiting painful death when there is no longer hope. A patient should be able to make the choice for themselves how they will die and avoid painful suffering. This law has been passed in many states, as citizens of Virginia we should not have to leave our state to receive assistance in dying. Thank you for voting yes for this bill

HB858 Written Testimony: Margo Figgins, 2/1/24 My name is Margo Figgins. I am a resident in Virginia’s Fifth District and support the provision of Medical Aid in Dying (MAID) as defined in HB858. It is too often assumed that hospitalization and its extreme measures to prolong a life, and hospice care with its palliative measures to manage pain, are sufficient options for arriving at one’s last breath. But they are not. As a hospice volunteer, I witnessed conditions that palliative care could not adequately address and that resulted in tortured deaths. There are cases in which intractable suffering exists, wherein effective palliative treatment is impossible. Consider, for example, the person dying of emphysema. This illness is a hopelessly slow process of suffocation. There are no palliative interventions to make gradual suffocation tolerable, let alone peaceful. Another consideration needed for the terminally ill patient: Their fear of dying alone. Having accepted the fact of a terminal diagnosis, there were patients I sat with who were terrified of not knowing when that moment of death would arrive, of not having family or other loved ones with them when it did, and wishing they could experience the peace of knowing someone close to them – not an anonymous “Eleventh Hour” Hospice Volunteer – was holding their hand and assuring them that they were loved and would be long remembered. What could be more important in a democracy than one’s choice to author the closing lines of life’s final chapter – a life that represents the sum total of the choices made? Every person deserves a death consistent with their beliefs and their values throughout. For the terminally ill patient to have someone else’s beliefs and values imposed on the end of their life is an egregious offense to the autonomy they have exercised up to the moment of their death. They deserve the choice of conditions that ensure the comfort and dignity they desire. As your constituent, and someone committed to a responsive healthcare system that offers adequate options to the terminally ill person, I urge you to support Medical Aid in Dying as articulated in HB858.

I want this right at the end of my life. I am 80 and in good shape. But the last thing I would ever want is my family remembering me bed-ridden and slowly dying. That is not me. Thank you for supporting this bill. It’s long overdo!

Medical aid in dying is compassionate care for people who are suffering and the families who love them. Please pass this bill so that Virginians have the option to choose when they end their suffering and can do it at home.

I am one of your constituents, and at 61 years of age have concerns about future available heath related options. I am in support of compassionate care and fully support HB 858 because I want that choice if ever needed in the future. This is something that is very important to prevent unnecessary suffering for both the individual as well as their family as I’m sure you can appreciate. I hope you will support HB 858! Respectfully, Patricia McCormick Charlottesville, VA

I work with the dying. About 1/3 of the deaths I have witnessed have involved writhing suffering, despite Hospice's best efforts. Those with terminal illnesses are all too aware of the possibility of protracted suffering over which they have NO AGENCY, and this leads to an understandable avoidance of the fact of death's arrival. This avoidance, based in fear, prevents the dying from saying what needs to be said, completing the documents that need completing, stating the intentions that need stating. Too often, death "surprises" folks in Hospice and their families, and the result is family fracture, arguments, missed work, protracted grief. WITH AGENCY over the disease which is killing them, patients seem to translate that sense of control to other aspects of their final days. A prepared death results in so much less harm to society, and increasing access to prepared deaths is in the best interests of the Commonwealth. As a reminder: Pursuing, prescribing, and ingesting the medication is entirely optional, and is only available to those who are already dying. Disability is not a terminal disease. Mental health diagnoses are not terminal diseases. Patients in those categories would not be eligible for a prescription.

I strongly endorse House Bill 858. Medical aid in dying for terminally ill people is a proven medical practice that 7 out of 10 Virginia residents support implementing. This would allow a terminally ill, mentally capable adult with a prognosis of six months or less to live, to request from their doctor a prescription for medication they can decide to self-ingest to die peacefully in their sleep. It is completely optional; no one can be forced to use it, no doctor can be forced to participate, and at least two doctors must be consulted. The option is only available to an adult who is able to make an informed health care decision and is able to take the medication themselves. This is an incredibly personal issue for me. A peaceful death should not be illegal, and no one deserves to endure unnecessary, unbearable suffering at the end of their life.

Hearing Date: February 1, 2024 Bill Number: HB 585 Dear Chair Delegate Hope I am the Rev. Dr. Fred A. Soltow, Jr. I am a retired Lutheran Clergy person who served the church for 45 years. During the course of my ministry I witnessed first hand the passing of numerous people who would have welcomed the discussion of choice if Medical Aid in Dying had been an option. Medical Aid in Dying (MAID) as presented in this bill is an option, not a requirement. It is an option in the same manner that radiation, chemotherapy, stem cell replacement, and other medical procedure can be offered to patients with a terminal diagnosis. Patients have choices to make during their care and when faced with the end of their lives. Medical Aid in Dying should be one of those choices that is offered to a terminal patient with the input and the approval his/her medical team. My mother spent the last three years of her life in a nursing home hooked up to a breathing machine because she had COPD. She was in pain and feared the day ahead as yet another day of pain and suffering. As a family, we stood by her side in our pain as we watched our mother in her pain. As a family we prayed that she would leave this world of pain and misery and pass into a new life of peace, love, hope and joy. My mother and my family would have welcomed, with open arms, the opportunity to discuss Medical Aid in Dying as an option to relieve her pain and suffering on the threshold of a new life beyond this one. I do not know where the conversation would have taken us, but the option to have that conversation would have been a blessing for all. Rev. Dr. Fred A. Soltow, Jr 1301 S Providence Rd North Chesterfield, Va.

I completely support Medical Aid in Dying as a voluntary option for terminally ill, mentally competent individuals. No one should have to suffer needlessly. Having Medical Aid in Dying allows a person to feel in control and thus relieve mental anguish as they navigate the end of life. Having Medical Aid in Dying should be available to all Virginians on a completely voluntary basis. Thank you.

Please support this bill. It provides a humane option for terminally ill, mentally competent individuals the option to end their life peacefully. It is completely voluntary. History has shown no abuse or coercion.

In an attempt to be brief: HB519: Hope I'm reading the title of this incorrectly, but with the far-right extremists out there I fear I am not. ABORTION CARE IS A NECESSARY PART OF HEALTH CARE AND SHOULD NEVER, NEVER, NEVER *EVER* BE CONSIDERED "UNPROFESSIONAL CONDUCT." If you vote for this, I don't vote for you. HB609: Children do much better when they are wanted children. It is ridiculous to attempt to control the sexual behavior of others by restricting access to birth control ... or indeed even at all. Everyone has a right to affordable, safe, effective means of preventing unwanted pregnancy. HB858: I hope very sincerely to see a right to physician assisted euthanasia at the end of life enacted in this state. I am a practicing veterinarian and perform this every day. It is very sad that human beings should have to suffer and linger when there is no more hope at the end of life when we would never treat an animal in this manner. I have also lost my husband to brain cancer, and while I don't believe he would have chosen that option, I believe others should have this right and the means available.

I am a primary care physician who has practiced in Virginia since 1986. – first in private practice and now as medical director of the Moss Free Clinic in Fredericksburg. I believe there is a lot of unnecessary suffering among terminally ill patients, because of lack of access to medical aid in dying. It is a small number of people who are appropriate for, or would choose to, foreshorten their dying process with the aid of medicines prescribed by their doctor, but I see this as the ultimate in patient autonomy and they should be the ones making this decision – and not have greater suffering forced upon them by the philosophical and religious beliefs of politicians and conservative medical organizations. The objection from some doctors that they are healers and not in the business of ending lives overlooks that these people are not healable. Are dying anyway. I see my duty as a doctor to minimize suffering. The evidence from states where medical aid in dying is legal already, shows the safeguards are effective in stopping people from being coerced into ending their lives. Or doing it capriciously. I urge you to support the cause of legalizing medical aid in dying in Virginia and support HB 858.

Over the past four years I have spent hundreds of hours educating people on the importance of advance care planning and explaining what medical aid in dying (MAiD) is and is not. If I told my Mother's story it would take at least 30 minutes, so, suffice it to say she wanted out so desperately due to the pain and suffering from multiple diseases that she attempted suicide with knitting needles. That action ultimately forced a move from assisted living to a nursing home where she spent her final two months sitting in front of the nurses' station kicking and screaming at every passerby "HELP ME, PLEASE KILL ME". Why did her life have to end this way? Mom's story is typical of both friends and family members whose worst nightmares were serving time on the "other death row". The observance of severe neglect at even the best rated nursing homes coupled with their pleas for a way out of life, left me emotionally distraught for days due to anger and sadness. I still get teary whenever I think about what I witnessed and my inability to do anything about it. If I were given the opportunity, I could fill a book with hundreds of end-of-life horror stories. There must be an alternative to this sad state of affairs. Please vote YES for the forwarding of HB 858. Once passed, the decision to use the law should be between the patient and the prescribing physician.

Honorable Committee: My name is Nathan Rowe, and I am a practicing Psychiatric Nurse Practitioner with a long history of working with mental illness not just as an advanced practice provider, but as an emergency and intensive care nurse as well as a paramedic over the past thirty years. Prior to being a medical provider, I am also a survivor of childhood cancer (1993) therefore can speak from one who faced a deadly disease early in life that presented as hopeless. Currently I work in a busy psychiatric practice in Southwest Virginia as well as a co-Director alongside Dr. Thomas Eppes and Dr. Jim Avery in the Commonwealth of Virginia for the American Academy of Medical Ethics (AAME). The AAME has a mission to promote the interests of medical educators, medical practitioners and scientists, the care and well-being of patients, the protection of public health, and the betterment of the medical profession, as well as to protect and promote the historicalvalues that have provided the longstanding foundation for Western healthcare.1 I am providing written testimony to briefly state an opposition to HB858. The National Council of Disability: Safeguards and Their Limitations The National Council on Disability (NCD), which is described on their website as “An independent federal agency committed to disability policy leadership since 1978”3 released a report to the President on October 9th, 2019, titled “The Danger of Assisted Suicide”. This report outlined at least six key issues that they found to be problems even with proposed “safeguards” of what is described as Physician-Assisted-Suicide. SAFEGUARDS AND THEIR LIMITATIONS: VERBATIM • Insurers have denied expensive, life sustaining medical treatment but offered to subsidize lethal drugs, potentially leading patients toward hastening their own deaths. • Misdiagnoses of terminal disease can also cause frightened patients to hasten their deaths. • People with the disability of depression are subject to harm where assisted suicide is legal. • Demoralization in people with disabilities is often based on internalized oppression, such as being conditioned to regard help as undignified and burdensome, or to regard disability as an inherent impediment to quality of life. Demoralization can also result from the lack of options that people depend on. These problems can lead patients toward hastening their deaths—and doctors who conflate disability with terminal illness or poorquality of life are ready to help them. Moreover, most health professionals lack training and experience in working with people with disabilities, so they don’t know how to recognize and intervene in this type of demoralization. • Financial and emotional pressures can distort patient choice. • Assisted suicide laws apply the lowest culpability standard possible to doctors, medical staff, and all other involved parties, that of a good-faith belief that the law is being followed, which creates the potential for abuse.4 Recenently Canada (who has laws such as PAS) are expanding to mental health patients who I am committed to treating. Unfortunately these bills are known to expand on a slippery slope. Let us in Virginia say NO to bills that allow providers to kill; please empower us to heal. Say No to HB858. 1 https://ethicalhealthcare.org/ 2 https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/medical-aid-in-dying-slippery-slope 3 https://beta.ncd.gov 4 https://beta.ncd.gov/report/the-danger-of-assisted-suicide

I am a nurse who has lived in the US for over 30 years, 22 in Canada and 8 in Germany. I have seen the health care from both sides. I took care of my elderly parents in my home for 12 years until they qualified for hospice and both suffered immensely before they died. I’ve seen nursing home horror stories. I just want to live my last years in peace and quiet without worrying who will take care of me when I can’t anymore and am bedridden. This bill passage can help so many when they know there is no more hope of living a quality life. On the practical side-it will help with the issue of SS running out, not enough nursing home placements and also the improvement of the quality of life for the caretakers out there. Please pass it

Honorable Committee: My name is Nathan Rowe, and I am a practicing Psychiatric Nurse Practitioner with a long history of working with mental illness not just as an advanced practice provider, but as an emergency and intensive care nurse as well as a paramedic over the past thirty years. Prior to being a medical provider, I am also a survivor of childhood cancer (1993) therefore can speak from one who faced a deadly disease early in life that presented as hopeless. Currently I work in a busy psychiatric practice in Southwest Virginia as well as a co-Director alongside Dr. Thomas Eppes and Dr. Jim Avery in the Commonwealth of Virginia for the American Academy of Medical Ethics (AAME). The AAME has a mission to promote the interests of medical educators, medical practitioners and scientists, the care and well-being of patients, the protection of public health, and the betterment of the medical profession, as well as to protect and promote the historicalvalues that have provided the longstanding foundation for Western healthcare.1 I am providing written testimony to briefly state an opposition to HB858. The National Council of Disability: Safeguards and Their Limitations The National Council on Disability (NCD), which is described on their website as “An independent federal agency committed to disability policy leadership since 1978”3 released a report to the President on October 9th, 2019, titled “The Danger of Assisted Suicide”. This report outlined at least six key issues that they found to be problems even with proposed “safeguards” of what is described as Physician-Assisted-Suicide. SAFEGUARDS AND THEIR LIMITATIONS: VERBATIM • Insurers have denied expensive, life sustaining medical treatment but offered to subsidize lethal drugs, potentially leading patients toward hastening their own deaths. • Misdiagnoses of terminal disease can also cause frightened patients to hasten their deaths. • People with the disability of depression are subject to harm where assisted suicide is legal. • Demoralization in people with disabilities is often based on internalized oppression, such as being conditioned to regard help as undignified and burdensome, or to regard disability as an inherent impediment to quality of life. Demoralization can also result from the lack of options that people depend on. These problems can lead patients toward hastening their deaths—and doctors who conflate disability with terminal illness or poorquality of life are ready to help them. Moreover, most health professionals lack training and experience in working with people with disabilities, so they don’t know how to recognize and intervene in this type of demoralization. • Financial and emotional pressures can distort patient choice. • Assisted suicide laws apply the lowest culpability standard possible to doctors, medical staff, and all other involved parties, that of a good-faith belief that the law is being followed, which creates the potential for abuse.4 Recenently Canada (who has laws such as PAS) are expandinging to mental health patients who I am committed to treating. Unfortunately these bills are known to expand on a slippery slope. Let us in Virginia say NO to bills that allow providers to kill; please empower us to heal. Say No to HB858. 1 https://ethicalhealthcare.org/ 2 https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/medical-aid-in-dying-slippery-slope 3 https://beta.ncd.gov 4 https://beta.ncd.gov/report/the-danger-of-assisted-suicide

My husband suffered immobilizing back pain for most of early 2019. In June, we received the diagnosis: metastatic cancer had invaded his spine. He died one long, agonizing month later, unable to move from the sofa in our den. Had he been the family pet, we could have legally saved him that miserable month. Obviously, moving somewhere that permitted a compassionate choice was out of the question. Please approve HB858 and permit those like my husband to have an option to end the pain when the end is so imminent. Thank you.

Dear Chair Sickles and Members of the House Committee on Health and Human Services My name is Julie Hastings and I live in Chesapeake. I provided testimony in person last year, and am heartbroken to be unable to make it in person this year. Please accept this written testimonial in support of SB280, an act to support medical aid in dying. When my father became ill in 2021, we searched for any doctor who could give us a definitive diagnosis and a treatment plan. When we received a diagnosis of Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) and Corticobasal Degeneration (CBD), the months forward were clear: He would lose his ability to use any muscles to his extremities, then the disease would affect his ability to eat, move his eyeballs, and eventually he would either suffocate or starve to death depending on which muscles went first. He died from starvation. Hospice was wonderful but in the end, they couldn’t manage all of his pain. He was suffering from muscle spasms and cramps that would pull him into a sitting position with guttural moans so deep they still give me nightmares. A 73-year-old man — who grew up in a farm town in Ohio, a devout Catholic, raised two children, worked hard every day of his life, gave to everyone he knew, always had a smile on his face and a kind word for everyone — in the end he couldn’t communicate his needs to us, his doctors, or even his Priest during weekly visits. My dad begged for a merciful death when he could still talk. His hospice doctor said that while they would do their best to keep him comfortable, getting him to DC, where Medical Aid in Dying was available would be almost impossible. The thought that he could have self-administered medication that would put him to sleep followed by a peaceful death — on his own terms — would have been a dream, but was an impossible one in Virginia. My dad did not want to die; my dad was living an incredible life. But as he said in the letter he left for me after his death, “simply being alive is not the same as living.” Disease took away his control over his life and death; having an option in the manner of his death would have given him peace. I urge you to report favorably on HB858, Medical Aid in Dying to give Virginians this option.

Chair Sickles and members of the House Committee on Health and Human Services: My name is Wayne Swatlowski and I live in Richmond, VA. My involvement as a volunteer with Compassion and Choices is a result of my personal experience. I’m an ordained Catholic priest and served in clerical ministry for 15 years before resigning and marrying. I now minister as a hospice visiting lay volunteer. In both of these positions I have been with people during their dying hours. For some, their transitions have been peaceful and relatively pain free. For others they have been marked by physical and emotional suffering for the patient and loved ones and by a loss of the highly personal pieces that make up quality of life for them; an inhumane final passage which could have been avoided for some if medical aid in dying had been an option. I support HB.858 so that dying individuals can be in charge of their own end of life care in order to ensure a more humane and compassionate transition for all eligible Virginians. Please vote yes on SB280 today. Wayne Swatlowski Richmond, VA gravski@aol.com

Comments Document

Dear Chair Faviola and members of Education and Health Committee, I am a retired physician resident in Henrico and I have practiced Cardiology for 50 years, starting in 1972 at the Veterans Hospital and the Medical College of Virginia. I strongly support SB280. At the beginning of my medical career I could not imagine any measure that would hasten a patient's death. During my long career I have witnessed many patients struggle with their pain and suffering in a prolonged slow death when curative and palliative treatments have failed. I have also seen my younger brother plead with his son to let him go when he was suffering multiple organ failure and facing mutilating surgery. My late colleague, Dr. Latane Ware, a very conservative physician who was honored with a citation by this legislature became an ardent advocate of patient autonomy in decisions regarding their own life after one of his close friends became involved in a murder suicide because he could not bear the suffering of his wife. Dr. Walter Lawrence, former Chairman of Oncological Surgery at VCU mentored hundreds of young surgeons and treated thousands of patients with cancer until his death at age 96. At the urging of these 2 eminent physicians the Medical Society of Virginia withdrew it's opposition to Medical Aid in Dying and joined several medical organizations in a similar stance. Today most of the U.S. public as well as physicians support patient autonomy in matters of life and death and MAID is allowed in 11 U.S. jurisdictions including the District of Columbia. I have come to strongly support this bill if it includes appropriate safeguards including the benefit of appropriate pain management, palliative care and hospice care. Just the knowledge that one has control over one's pain can provide immense relief with few patients actually exercising the option. This is borne out by the experience in other States where this is allowed. I believe it is the rational and conservative position. It can prevent much pain and save unnecessary loss of life. Best regards Zubair U. Hassan MD, FACC (em.) 200 Brookschase Lane Henrico, VA 23229

Comments Document

Dear Chair Hope and members of the House Committee on Health and Human Services, Subcommittee on Health, I am reaching out in support of House Bill 858 (being heard tomorrow in the Health Subcommittee). This bill would authorize access to Medical Aid in Dying (MAID) in Virginia for those who are terminally ill and of sound mind who wish to use this medical management tool during their end-of-life care. I am currently a 4th year medical student at Virginia Tech Carilion School of Medicine. In addition to being a future family physician in Virginia, I was also a caregiver for my mother during her 4 year battle with lung cancer, which had spread to her bones and brain. Given the nature of her disease, and having witnessed her own mother's painful final days combating this very same disease, my mom was very interested in pursuing Medical Aid in Dying. She wanted the autonomy and assurance of a painless death, something that I think all patients deserve access to given the vast medical advancements we are privileged to enjoy in the U.S. Unfortunately, the only jurisdiction near us at the time of her illness which had legally authorized Medical Aid in Dying was Washington, D.C. and we could not afford to relocate there from Virginia given the cost of housing (nor did we particularly want to leave beautiful Virginia). It is inhumane that we let one's zip code dictate the ease of suffering at the end of life… Virginians benefit from excellent academic medical institutions offering the best medical care across every specialty except for palliative medicine, which is hamstrung by the current legal status of MAID. I have seen many patients pass peacefully, but I have also seen many who have suffered unnecessarily. I hope you will consider supporting the bill which would provide patients the liberty they deserve in making choices about their care and which mirrors legislation that has been enacted in other states safely for many years. If you have any questions about Medical Aid in Dying, or would like to connect with physicians who offer this service in other jurisdictions please don’t hesitate to let me know. With gratitude for your service, Lauren Canary Roanoke, VA P.S. I have attached a picture of my family before my mom's passing. I advocate for MAID in her memory since she, like so many other late Virginians, cannot be here to do so herself. Their voices deserve to be heard and considered too.

My name is Brian Carlton, I live in Charlottesville, VA and I am here to show my support for SB280/HB858; Health care; decision-making; end of life; penalties. I am a retired Certified Financial Planner and formerly a licensed nursing home administrator (worked in 5 different homes around the state). I want to share two personal events in my life involving end of life situations: My father died of pancreatic cancer in Culpeper VA at the age of 67. He worked 35 years as an engineer at IBM and he and my mother raised 7 children. Dying of cancer is a traumatic experience, one filled with angst and pain. I witnessed his last month of life lying in a hospital bed in our family home living room. His suffering took a great toll on him and my mother. He knew the end of life was near but it was a prolonged, uncontrolled event. I wish he would have had the choice in those final weeks to end his life peacefully by his own hand. He could have called all his children together, said the proper goodbyes and had a “good” death. That was not to be - he did not have a choice. I worked in many nursing homes around this state in my first career as a nursing home administrator. People don’t like to think of these places as “the place you go to to die”. I tried to make the facilities as happy and life promoting as possible. I do recall though that there were always a handful of people who were suffering and near the end of life. It is an impactful situation when you are holding someone’s hand and they are begging you to help them end their life. I could see it in their eyes that they were ready to go and they did not want to prolong the impending suffering that was in store for them. If they only had a choice! Choice! That is exactly what medical aid in dying is! It is not for everyone, but for those who see and feel impending suffering and death and want to avoid the suffering part (and not put their families through it!), they deserve that choice. I want that choice in the future if I end up in an end of life suffering scenario. Please.

Testimony before the Virginia State House of Delegates Prepared & Submitted: 31 January 2024 Date of Hearing: 01 February 2024 Bill Number: House Bill 858 – Medical Aid in Dying Dear Members of the Health and Human Services Committee: I wish to inform members of this committee that I, along with a majority of other Virginians, support the right for terminally ill individuals to have the option to end their lives if and when their suffering becomes unbearable. Delegate Hope’s bill provides that choice, with over a dozen safeguards included to ensure that coercion does not occur, and that anyone who makes the decision to end their life can do so only if they are deemed mentally capable. The history of similar legislation in other states indicates that there have been no substantiated cases in which these laws have been misused. If enacted, this law would allow anyone to change their mind at any time. Indeed, in many prior cases, persons who have asked for and received the drug that they are considering taking have ultimately chosen not to use it. I want to live in a state that cherishes life. However, I also believe that the freedom to end one’s life should be available to everyone, in limited and controlled situations, if and when the prospect of enduring needless pain and suffering cannot be avoided, and when all hope for survival beyond six months has been lost. Thank you, James Beasley Woodbridge, Virginia

Dear Chair Sickles and Members of the House Committee on Health and Human Services, My name is Shannon Hibbard and I am writing to urge you to vote yes to HB858, which would give Virginians the right to use Medical Aid in Dying. For me, this is a subject I am very familiar with. In April of 2021, my father, Dr. David Hibbard, used Medical Aid in Dying in Colorado, one of the 11 states/district which has legislation in place. To be able to support my father’s choice to end his severe suffering was one of the most profound ways I could show my love for him and his decision. My father had an immense affinity for life. He was one of the first Peace Corps volunteers in 1961, he was a mountain biking enthusiast, and he loved his career as a medical doctor, being one of the last to make house calls. When my father was diagnosed with Parkinson’s in 2007 and later leukemia, he wondered what the last few months of his life would be like. He was a staunch supporter of palliative care and finding ways to make the last stages of life easier. Not only was my father a doctor, but he was the Director for Hospice in Boulder, Colorado. Given his work with hospice, he also was all too familiar with pain that was not responsive to medication or other treatment; seeing patients in such pain—while knowing what likely awaited him given his prognosis—gave him great fear about what his last months and days would be like. Prior to legislation being introduced that would enable Medical Aid in Dying, he considered alternate means to end his life if suffering became unbearable. Those conversations were gut wrenching to have, leaving us feeling hopeless. Thankfully it did not come to that. My father became one of the lead medical activists in Colorado to pass legislation in 2016. The last few months of my father’s life were extraordinary, both in how much I cherished my time with him and also how much I saw him suffer. He was taking narcotics every two hours, yet he would still physically change colors from the pain he was experiencing. I sincerely hope no one ever has to witness a loved one go through so much pain and know that there is nothing that any doctor can do, as your loved one is in fact dying and has less than six months to live. Instead of continuing through months of unrelenting pain, my father was able to take control of his life, to use Medical Aid in Dying medication to pass into the next world peacefully. He was in his home of 50 years, surrounded by flowers, photos of a life well lived, and his family who told him it was okay to go, that we loved him indefinitely and supported his decision. Every person should have this choice available, should they meet the stringent requirements to use Medical Aid in Dying. This legislation provides safeguards and has a history of safe use. No patient--nor doctor or pharmacist--is forced to use or be part of this law. But everyone should have the choice. I thank you for your time, and my father certainly thanks you for your consideration. Shannon https://www.dailycamera.com/2023/04/07/guest-opinion-devin-hibbard-our-fathers-empowered-death/ https://www.compassionandchoices.org/stories/hibbard

Regarding HB 858 January 31, 2024 Dear Chair Hope and Members of the House health and Human Services - Health Committee I am a now-retired physician, currently living in Woodville (Rappahannock County). I practiced medicine for thirty-five years in Washington, DC, specializing in the treatment of HIV/AIDS. In the 80’s and early 90’s there was no effective treatment for HIV, and it most commonly resulted in death. During this period my practice averaged one death per week. When we think of death we have images of gently passing away at home, surrounded by our family. However this is not always the case. There are “good” deaths and there are “bad” deaths. With AIDS I frequently saw the bad deaths: patients unable to breath from Pneumocystis pneumonia, lying in pools of diarrhea from cryptosporidium diarrhea, or in severe pain unresponsive to narcotics. In these circumstances, when I had no treatment available for condition causing their suffering, I did feel the obligation to help them end their suffering. Given my experiences I am a supporter of Medical Aid in Dying. I would hope that a physician today would be able to aid patients at the end of life, and do so within the constraints of the law. I believe that HB 858 is well written and provides an appropriate framework to allow physicians to provide compassionate care at the end of life. Douglas Ward, MD

I am Dr. Angela Herring, a retired Newport News Family Physician, and an acute leukemia survivor. I have had four months in the hospital with three bone marrow killing chemotherapy treatments and am in remission. I ask that you support passing a law in Virginia (HB858) that would allow me that option and let Virginia join the 10 states and the district of Columbia that already have such a law. Oregon, the first has shown there is no abuse or problems since the 1990s-almost 30 years. As a physician I have had terminal patients in hospice who asked me for enough medication to end their suffering and I could not provide that relief for them. The Medical Society of Virginia changed their stance last year to join with the Virginia Academy of Family Physicians from opposed to “engaged neutrality” which means it is up to the individual doctor and individual patient to decide. Polling results from CNU (Wason Center) for two recent polls show 70% of Virginians support MAID with support across political parties, religions and ages. In the event the leukemia returns I would like the option of Medical Aid in Dying as do not want to go through that pain and suffering again. Please support a bill that would allow me that option. Thank you. Angela Herring, M.D. Newport News, VA

Dear Chair and Members of the House Committee on Health and Human Services - Health: I am writing today to offer my strong support for the passage of HB 858, the Medical Aid in Dying Act, which will be heard on Thursday, February 1, 2024. In July 2022, I was diagnosed with metastatic pancreatic cancer, and my world was turned upside down. My doctors told me that the average pancreatic cancer patient lives 8 to 11 months after diagnosis although many die sooner than that. Only 1% of people with my disease are alive 3 years after the cancer is found, and almost none are cured. As a Virginia resident who had been working for years on legislative outreach for Medical Aid in Dying, I suddenly realized that my own life-threatening diagnosis meant a move to DC was in my future to be able to use their Death with Dignity law. I found it absurd that the choices of Virginia legislators made it impossible for me to continue to live in Virginia where I’ve spent most of my adult life and that, in addition to dealing with a cancer diagnosis, I also had to start dealing with moving. Knowing that Medical Aid in Dying would be available to me once I moved to DC gave me some sense of control over a very uncontrollable illness that has no cure. As I worked to structure my move, finding both a suitable rental and a cooperative doctor, I suddenly realized that months had passed, and I’d surpassed the timeframe when I was told I would die. This complicates my decision-making. I really don’t want to move to DC but feel that I must to avoid months of suffering once treatments stop working or the side effects become intolerable. Since I have no idea when that will happen, it’s become a constant concern that I don’t wait too long and then become stuck in a state that will not honor my wishes. Twenty years ago, I watched my ex-husband die of esophageal cancer. He spent the last several months of his life in bed, worrying that he would choke to death as some esophageal cancer patients do. I don’t want the end of my life to look like his did. Don’t deny this end-of-life option to Virginia residents. It’s legal basically to poison me with chemotherapy drugs that eventually my body will be unable to handle but illegal in this Commonwealth to let me die on my own terms rather than waiting through months of physical and emotional suffering. I should not have to leave Virginia to achieve bodily autonomy and do not see how anyone who has watched a loved one suffer through a lingering death could vote against this legislation. Please think about this as you vote. Sincerely, Barbara Green Falls Church, Virginia

February 1, 2024 Support HB 858 Dear Chair Hope and Members of the House Committee on Health and Human Services- Health: I support HB858 because I want the option of medical aid in dying, if I am diagnosed with a terminal disease. This bill is about compassion and providing terminally ill adults, body autonomy and the right to make the best decision for themselves. Medical aid in dying forces no physician or pharmacist to participate in the practice of aid in dying I want my physicians, health care professionals and pharmacist to know they will not be prosecuted if my terminal disease progresses at the end of my life. Having the option to consider my symptoms, and discuss medical aid in dying with my health care team, allows me to support my personal values of a gentle death and a peaceful passing. Watching a loved one suffer due to unmanageable symptoms in hospice care, is a common experience for families. I do not want the memories of my death to be traumatic for my family. Hospice is wonderful and they help patients as much as the law allows, but, in Virginia they cannot help people who want medical aid in dying. Please consider 70% of Virginians support medical aid in dying across all categories; age, gender, religion, race and political affiliation. Terminally ill adults in treatment, try to stay alive. When treatments no longer work, they are faced with a decision to stop eating and drinking in order to die. Starving to death is a very in- humane option, which is legal in Virginia. I do not want to move to D.C. but I will be forced to leave Virginia, like many other terminally ill adults, in order to have the option of medical aid in dying. Please vote for HB858, so the State of Virginia will allow me to have a peaceful passing. Thank you for your time and consideration on this timely bill. Every day, terminally ill adults pass without the option of medical aid in dying. Perry Patterson Virginia Beach

Comments Document

On behalf of Compassion & Choices Action Network, I'm submitting written testimony in support of HB858: medical aid in dying.

Chair Tran and Members of the House Committee on Health and Human Services; Subcommittee on Social Services: Thank you for the opportunity to offer testimony before you today. I am here to urge you to vote yes on HB Bill 858 . I live in Norfolk and am one of the state organizers for Compassion and Choices. In 2004 I became a caregiver for my sister who died from lung cancer that metastasized to her brain and spine. She treated and looked for remission as long as there was any hope. Once it became clear nothing was going to work for her, she suffered. Every day was another blow to her autonomy, her independence and the dignity of life as she had lived it. Once death is inevitable, modern medicine can keep people alive a long time. If this is their choice, they deserve every intervention possible. But, if someone is at peace with their death, why not give them final control of their lives - to relieve their suffering and be allowed to pass at the time and place that will bring them and their families the greatest comfort. In the work I do, I frequently hear people express that they are at peace with the fact they are dying, but are terrified of what they and their family will have to go through in the final days and weeks or even months before death. They want to die while they are still “themselves”, not being a burden to their families, not using precious dwindling resources and not some diminished shell of themselves. No one will ever be forced to use this option, but it will bring great comfort to many. Some may use it, but for others, just knowing it is available may be enough. For the people of Virginia who want self control over their end of life, please pass House Bill 858, Medical Aid in Dying. Thank You for your consideration.

In July 2022, I was diagnosed with metastatic pancreatic cancer, and my world was turned upside down. My doctors told me that the average pancreatic cancer patient lives 8 to 11 months after diagnosis although many die sooner than that. Only 1% of people with my disease are alive 3 years after the cancer is found, and almost none are cured. As a Virginia resident who had been working for years on legislative outreach for Medical Aid in Dying, I suddenly realized that my own life-threatening diagnosis meant a move to DC was in my future to be able to use their Death with Dignity law. I found it absurd that the choices of Virginia legislators made it impossible for me to continue to live in Virginia where I’ve spent most of my adult life and that, in addition to dealing with a cancer diagnosis, I also had to start dealing with moving. Knowing that Medical Aid in Dying would be available to me once I moved to DC gave me some sense of control over a very uncontrollable illness that has no cure. As I worked to structure my move, finding both a suitable rental and a cooperative doctor, I suddenly realized that months had passed, and I’d surpassed the timeframe when I was told I would die. This complicates my decision-making. I really don’t want to move to DC but feel that I must to avoid months of suffering once treatments stop working or the side effects become intolerable. Since I have no idea when that will happen, it’s become a constant concern that I don’t wait too long and then become stuck in a state that will not honor my wishes. Twenty years ago, I watched my ex-husband die of esophageal cancer. He spent the last several months of his life in bed, worrying that he would choke to death as some esophageal cancer patients do. I don’t want the end of my life to look like his did. Don’t deny this end-of-life option to Virginia residents. It’s legal basically to poison me with chemotherapy drugs that eventually my body will be unable to handle but illegal in this Commonwealth to let me die on my own terms rather than waiting through months of physical and emotional suffering. I should not have to leave Virginia to achieve bodily autonomy and do not see how anyone who has watched a loved one suffer through a lingering death could vote against this legislation. Please think about this as you vote on HB 858. Barbara Green Falls Church, VA

In July 2022, I was diagnosed with metastatic pancreatic cancer, and my world was turned upside down. My doctors told me that the average pancreatic cancer patient lives 8 to 11 months after diagnosis although many die sooner than that. Only 1% of people with my disease are alive 3 years after the cancer is found, and almost none are cured. As a Virginia resident who had been working for years on legislative outreach for Medical Aid in Dying, I suddenly realized that my own life-threatening diagnosis meant a move to DC was in my future to be able to use their Death with Dignity law. I found it absurd that the choices of Virginia legislators made it impossible for me to continue to live in Virginia where I’ve spent most of my adult life and that, in addition to dealing with a cancer diagnosis, I also had to start dealing with moving. Knowing that Medical Aid in Dying would be available to me once I moved to DC gave me some sense of control over a very uncontrollable illness that has no cure. As I worked to structure my move, finding both a suitable rental and a cooperative doctor, I suddenly realized that months had passed, and I’d surpassed the timeframe when I was told I would die. This complicates my decision-making. I really don’t want to move to DC but feel that I must to avoid months of suffering once treatments stop working or the side effects become intolerable. Since I have no idea when that will happen, it’s become a constant concern that I don’t wait too long and then become stuck in a state that will not honor my wishes. Twenty years ago, I watched my ex-husband die of esophageal cancer. He spent the last several months of his life in bed, worrying that he would choke to death as some esophageal cancer patients do. I don’t want the end of my life to look like his did. Don’t deny this end-of-life option to Virginia residents. It’s legal basically to poison me with chemotherapy drugs that eventually my body will be unable to handle but illegal in this Commonwealth to let me die on my own terms rather than waiting through months of physical and emotional suffering. I should not have to leave Virginia to achieve bodily autonomy and do not see how anyone who has watched a loved one suffer through a lingering death could vote against this legislation. Please think about this as you vote.

Comments Document

I am writing in support of SB 280/HB 858 which would legalize Medical Aid in Dying in Virginia. Perhaps the most important and often overlooked aspect of this bill is it is It is 100% voluntary – from the patient initiating the conversation with their doctor to the second or third doctor needed to sign off on a patient’s prognosis and mental stability to the doctor writing the prescription to the pharmacist filling the prescription – no one is required to participate in the process and can remove themselves at any time. This is just an option for those who want it, like my dad. My dad, George Vasiloff, a Marine Corp Veteran and Virginian wanted the option to die peacefully instead of suffocating or choking to death as is often the case with ALS. …and he’s not alone. For two years in a row, a Christopher Newport University Poll has found 7 in 10 (70%) Virginians support Medical Aid in Dying. This spans a majority of every gender, age group, race/ethnicity, region of the Commonwealth, and size community. Three-quarters (77%) of Catholics agree this should be an option in Virginia, as do majorities of protestants (56%) and other Christians (64%). Eight in ten (79%) of Democrats support Medical Aid in Dying as do more than one-half (56%) of Republicans in Virginia. In this tense political climate, it’s refreshing to find an issue on which both parties can agree.

Please support Delegate Hope's HB 858 to allow an adult diagnosed with a terminal condition to request an attending health care provider to prescribe a self-administered controlled substance for the purpose of ending the patient's life. The bill requires that a patient's request for a self-administered controlled substance to end their life must be given orally on two occasions and in writing, signed by the patient and one witness, and that the patient be given an express opportunity to rescind their request at any time. Those whose religious beliefs condemn this practice should NOT be imposing their beliefs on everyone else. My husband's grandmother in a nursing home would beg me to put a pillow over her face and sit on it, something she wouldn't dare ask family members for fear of distressing them. For them she put on a brave face and said things were fine, but everyday for her was full of meaningless suffering and loss of the autonomy she cherished so dearly. She lived to help others, to be useful. All I could do was wring my hands and say that one day a lawmaker will make a bill that will make this possible. She was ready to get off the bus, she'd led a good life, loved and been loved and now had had enough. Thank you, Delegate Hope, for introducing this bill in the Virginia Assembly.

Please support Delegate Hope's HB 858 to allow an adult diagnosed with a terminal condition to request an attending health care provider to prescribe a self-administered controlled substance for the purpose of ending the patient's life. The bill requires that a patient's request for a self-administered controlled substance to end their life must be given orally on two occasions and in writing, signed by the patient and one witness, and that the patient be given an express opportunity to rescind their request at any time. Those whose religious beliefs condemn this practice should be imposing their beliefs on everyone else. My husband's grandmother in a nursing home would beg me to put a pillow over her face and sit on it, something she wouldn't dare ask family members for fear of distressing them. For them she put on a brave face and said things were fine, but everyday for her was full of meaningless suffering and loss of the autonomy she cherished so dearly. She lived to help others, to be useful. All I could do was wring my hands and say that one day a lawmaker will make a bill that will make this possible. She was ready to get off the bus, she'd led a good life, loved and been loved and now had had enough. Thank you, Delegate Hope, for introducing this bill in the Virginia Assembly.

Comments Document

See attached testimony in opposition to HB 858.

Please do not pass this bill. As a wife to my husband of 49 years, his recent diagnosis of Altzheimer's has been difficult, however, loving him for 49 years does not give me the right and is not the compassionate thing to do - end his life. We have three adult children and 9 grandchildren who also love their father and grandfather. They are grateful for every single moment they have with him. We also believe each one of us were created in the image of God and to kill intentionally any person, is an act against the Almighty......God have mercy on your souls should you pass this legislation out of committee.

My name is Laura, and I’m your constituent. Gun violence prevention is my top priority. Please support hi. Safety legislation that is brought up for a vote. These are the bills I support. Thank you for your time.

I am opposed to all of these unconstitutional and anit-american gun laws and regulations. There is no room for more gun laws and regulations in this state.

Contrary to how certain government officials treat it, the second amendment is written using plain, easy to understand language, and insists that government has no right to take away the right for ordinary people like us to defend ourselves, as the constitution and bill of rights do not simply give people rights, but protects them from government manipulation and control. It’s incredibly disappointing and a tragedy that people choose to commit acts of violence with these rights, but restricting those who wish to exercise their rights peaceably due to those who wouldn’t follow these rules in the first place is incredibly naive. I, as well as every other person in the United States, deserve to protect my family with the best technology available. While some people look at certain defense weapon setups as a “why do you need that” situation, 1) I have the right to defend myself with the best tool available, and so I will choose that every time, 2) why do you “need” anything other than basic necessities (fast car, Gucci clothes, etc)? The government has no place in deciding what I “need”, 3) people with the intent to harm will not care what laws govern peaceful people, so what would limiting the victim’s access to proper tools do? You may think that by “banning” or otherwise restricting access to a certain thing would mean that all of the “bad” things would magically go away, but they will not. Evil has always and will always exist, and I have every right to defend myself from it using the best tool available wherever I, or my family, choose to go. Restricting access on certain properties (the government isn’t actively protecting me everywhere), requiring certain training (who is paying for this?), limiting certain types of firearms (go ahead and define “assault weapon” in plain language please), and restricting ammo purchasing (I thought you wanted us to train; how does this help then?) are all means that end up hurting the average person and helping those who wish to hurt others, as the rest of us will be left in a position to insufficiently defend ourselves. I urge you to understand that while, yes, it is awful that evil people commit horrific acts, this right ultimately allows me to protect myself and my family from these evil people as well and as evil will always exist (we certainly like to delusion ourselves into believing that we live in a utopia, but we do not), I will protect my family accordingly. The government has no right to restrict this. Leave the peaceful citizens alone, more firmly punish those who hurt others, and help communities where this is an issue to prevent the upbringing of more evil people.

I oppose these bills that are attacking the rights of law-abiding gun owners.

Many of these gun laws are unfair to law abiding citizens and do not affect criminals. These gun laws should be vetoed.

Leave law abiding citizens alone.

These bills infringe on the rights of the United States citizens given to us by the second amendment. The only thing these bills will accomplish will take the firearms out of the hands of law abiding citizens, while criminals will still have access.

I do not support any bill that removes any right from law abiding citizens to protect themselves from those who WILL NOT abide by these laws. These laws ONLY give CRIMINALS the upper hand.

There are approximately 47 bills regarding gun control between the House and Senate. Rather than fix issues that actually protect and enhance the lives of Virginians, many of these bills seek to disenfranchise and reduce the safety of the citizens in this great Commonwealth. Firearms are so fundamental to the founding and continued existence of our free society that they are listed just second to the freedom of speech in amendments to the constitution. It is plainly clear to all that countries and states who have banned or severely restricted firearms that violence does not end with their banning. Unjust deaths are not prevented. It simply ensures that law abiding citizens are left defenseless from those that wish to harm them, whether that be individuals or an organization. I write this knowing that it will be completely disregarded by the bills authors, but in hopes that others feel galvanized to speak up against unjust actions made in the name of progress. To those who wish to protect themselves with firearms while simultaneously stripping them from the common man, may you take heed of the Virginia state motto.

A lot of these laws contradict one another. I can’t support them. Both of our parties have failed us.

I oppose all of these blatantly unconstitutional bills and wish our elected officials would actually get to work on fixing things that matter to Virginians.

These proposed laws will do nothing but make more victims out of citizens that are exercising their 2nd amendment rights. Criminals do not care about these restrictions, these laws are merely an extension of the culture war. They are meant to punish anyone that the Northern Virginia and big city politicians don’t like. While violent criminals continue to arm themselves, the law abiding citizens of The Commonwealth would be left without defense. These laws are feckless and meant only to virtue signal. One with even a basic understanding of our constitution would see these as exactly what they are: illegal and Un-American.

There is no acceptable reason to infringe upon the Constitutionally-protected (both US and Virginia's Constitutions) rights of Americans and Virginians. None of these bills purported to reduce gun-related violence actually seem to prioritize the reduction of causal effects of overall violence. Many of these are merely attempts to curb the rights of the People to keep and bear arms, because our legislative bodies are full of corrupt, weak, and contemptible individuals. Show us the bills for addressing the root causes of violence: mental health, income inequality, social instability, lack of education and educational opportunities, drug & human trafficking, or employment & wages (this list is not all-inclusive).

Time and time again it has been proven that criminals do not care about or follow restrictive firearm laws. Virginia already has some of the most restrictive firearms laws in the country ("B+" rating from Giffords), more unconstitutional infringements upon law abiding citizens is not the answer. We need to address the root causes (access to mental health resources for example) and not throw bandaids at it by punishing responsible, law abiding, gun owners. I oppose these bills and urge you to do the same.

As a fellow Democrat, it’s important to acknowledge the complexities surrounding gun ownership and the Second Amendment. 1. Self-Defense: Firearms can be a crucial tool for individuals to protect themselves, especially in high-crime areas or situations where law enforcement response times are slow. 2. Sport and Recreation: Many Americans enjoy shooting sports like hunting, skeet shooting, and target practice as a recreational activity, fostering a sense of community and skill-building. 3. Cultural Tradition: Gun ownership is deeply ingrained in American culture, with a rich history of hunting and marksmanship passed down through generations. 4. Economic Impact: The firearms industry contributes significantly to the economy, generating jobs and revenue through manufacturing, sales, and related services. 5. Civil Liberties: Upholding the right to bear arms is fundamental to preserving individual freedoms and safeguarding against government overreach. 6. Empowerment of Marginalized Communities: For historically marginalized groups, owning firearms can serve as a means of empowerment and protection against hate crimes or discriminatory violence. 7. Emergency Preparedness: In times of natural disasters or civil unrest, responsible gun owners can help maintain order and protect their families and communities. 8. Deterrence of Crime: Research suggests that the presence of armed civilians can deter potential criminals and reduce overall crime rates in certain contexts. 9. Veterans and Law Enforcement: Many veterans and law enforcement officers transition to civilian life with a continued appreciation for firearms, utilizing their expertise for civilian defense and security. 10. Balanced Approach: Instead of blanket gun control measures, we can advocate for comprehensive solutions that address root causes of violence, such as mental health support, poverty reduction, and community intervention programs.

I oppose the proposed firearms legislation put forward by this legislature and any legislation that violates the 1st, 2nd, and 4th, amendment rights of any Virginian. The desire for safer communities, a more united nation, and healing for our public health is something that we all can share in but these bills do not achieve that. Rather, they regulate and penalize. They unconstitutionally restrict the rights of the many in the name of safety and serve only to harm our rights. I would be doing a disservice to our state and my fellow citizens if I did not also provide potential solutions or remedies to the violence we face. First, we as communities need to promote voluntary storage facilities for those who are experiencing hardship and are concerned about suicide. Ideally making it easier to put firearms safely out of reach when suicide risks are greater. To do this it would need to be a system at the lowest level with minimum government involvement besides funding and partnership with local ranges. We would also need to reach out to those in our lives who are in a bad place and encourage the use of these facilities. Second, we should promote a culture of safe handling and respect for firearms through school courses and community organizations because assault weapons or not suicide, or accidents only take one bullet from a single action firearm. Lastly and more broadly we should focus on the issues surrounding the violence. Whether it is drugs and organized criminal activity or the mental health crisis as it has become known we should be working to fix these issues first. I.e. legalize weed, adapt police training, and push to root out organized crime, promote common social values and family cohesion, increase freedom, physical activity, and discipline in the school system.

These firearms bill are either redundant or unless in any meaningful way. If you care about reducing violence, please focus on criminals. Please stop trying to disarm families and law abiding citizen from protecting themselves.

Please stop infringing on our god given right, protected by the constitution of the United States (which you all have sworn to uphold and protect), to keep and bear arms. Responsible gun owners are not the problem in America’s gun violence epidemic. We follow the law. Criminals don’t. We use our firearms to protect ourselves, loved ones, and community. Chipping away at this right we have makes us more vulnerable to becoming victims of gun violence, not protect us from it. These laws only serve to empower those with evil intentions. Rather, might I suggest harsher penalties for those who commit senseless acts of violence with firearms instead of going after the good men and women of the commonwealth who wish only to use their firearms for lawful purposes.

Dear House of Delegates, I'm writing to you today as a concerned citizen. The introduction of bills aimed at heavily regulating firearms, is not warranted or wanted by the people of Virginia. Our nation stands at a crossroads, where the desire to address gun violence intersects with the constitutional rights affirmed by the Supreme Court. The Second Amendment's protection of the right to bear arms is not just a legal directive but a reflection of our commitment to individual freedom. In this context, the proposed regulations, while motivated by a commendable desire to reduce violence, raise significant concerns about their effectiveness and the potential consequences for law-abiding citizens. Research, including findings published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology, suggests that the relationship between strict gun laws and the reduction of gun violence is not as straightforward as one might hope. Cities with stringent gun regulations continue to face challenges with gun-related crimes, indicating that those intent on violence often find ways to circumvent the law. This reality prompts us to question whether new restrictions will achieve their intended goal or merely place additional burdens on those who seek firearms for legitimate purposes, including self-defense. Moreover, the abundance of firearms in the United States presents a logistical challenge to the enforcement of such regulations. With more guns than people in the country, the task of significantly reducing the availability of firearms to criminals, without infringing on the rights of law-abiding citizens, is daunting. It is within this complex landscape that I urge you to consider the broader implications of the proposed gun control measures. The parallels drawn with other contentious issues, such as the regulation of women's healthcare, highlight the potential for policy decisions to inadvertently infringe upon individual freedoms and deepen societal divisions. Such outcomes not only detract from the intended goals of enhancing public safety but also risk alienating segments of the population whose support is essential for the advancement of our collective well-being. I respectfully ask that you consider the potential consequences of the proposed gun control measures, not just for the immediate future but for the legacy we leave for generations to come. It is my hope that, together, we can find a way to address the challenges of gun violence in a manner that honors our values, respects our freedoms, and genuinely enhances the safety and well-being of our communities.

STOP INFRINGING OUR RIGHTS. Get rid of every single gun control bill that is here and START ENFORCING THE LAWS WE ALREADY HAVE. Stop trying to turn law abiding citizens into criminals. I am disgusted that all of these nonsense bills have even made it this far. You can have these laws in Northern Virginia where everyone hates guns but don’t force this garbage into the rest of the state. GET RID OF ALL OF THIS GARBAGE and keep your noses out of everyone’s business. More government is not the answer.

The second amendment is very clear in its intent that these rights “shall not be infringed”. Removing/ restricting law abiding citizens right to self defense and protection against unwitting organizations and persons is not only more harmful, but a clear violation of the rights this country was founded on.

Dear Honorable Members of the House of Delegates, I write to you today as a concerned citizen, deeply invested in the well-being and safety of our communities, and as someone who values the principles upon which our nation was founded. The issue at hand, the introduction of bills aimed at heavily regulating firearms, is one that I believe warrants a thoughtful reconsideration in light of its broader implications. Our nation stands at a crossroads, where the desire to address gun violence intersects with the constitutional rights affirmed by the Supreme Court. The Second Amendment's protection of the right to bear arms is not just a legal directive but a reflection of our commitment to individual freedom. In this context, the proposed regulations, while motivated by a commendable desire to reduce violence, raise significant concerns about their effectiveness and the potential consequences for law-abiding citizens. Research, including findings published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology, suggests that the relationship between strict gun laws and the reduction of gun violence is not as straightforward as one might hope. Cities with stringent gun regulations continue to face challenges with gun-related crimes, indicating that those intent on violence often find ways to circumvent the law. This reality prompts us to question whether new restrictions will achieve their intended goal or merely place additional burdens on those who seek firearms for legitimate purposes, including self-defense. Moreover, the abundance of firearms in the United States presents a logistical challenge to the enforcement of such regulations. With more guns than people in the country, the task of significantly reducing the availability of firearms to criminals, without infringing on the rights of law-abiding citizens, is daunting. It is within this complex landscape that I urge you to consider the broader implications of the proposed gun control measures. The parallels drawn with other contentious issues, such as the regulation of women's healthcare, highlight the potential for policy decisions to inadvertently infringe upon individual freedoms and deepen societal divisions. Such outcomes not only detract from the intended goals of enhancing public safety but also ***risk alienating segments of the population whose support is essential for the advancement of our collective well-being.*** Constituents see this robust effort to "see what sticks" as a weakness within our party. Comparatively imbalanced with the diverse range of issues and concerns that we face everyday. A waste. As we move forward, I encourage you to approach this issue with a balanced perspective, one that recognizes the need for effective strategies to combat gun violence while also safeguarding the constitutional rights and freedoms that define our nation. The path to meaningful change is complex, requiring a nuanced understanding of the issues at hand and a commitment to policies that truly serve the best interests of all our citizens. In closing, I respectfully ask that you consider the potential consequences of the proposed gun control measures, not just for the immediate future but for the legacy we leave for generations to come. It is my hope that, together, we can find a way to address the challenges of gun violence in a manner that honors our values, respects our freedoms, and genuinely enhances the safety and well-being of our communities.

You guys need to stop attacking our 2nd amendment and get help for these kids growing up with identity crisis’s . You coming after law abiding citizens is appalling and the fact that your leaning towards becoming the despicable state of California is saddening. If the president can have security which uses firearms that even the normal civilian can’t have this raises the issue of how can a civilian defend against a tyrannical government with a featureless 10 round ar-15 ? Keep this up and we know exactly what your end goal is.

As a left leaning voter and citizen of Virginia, these new restrictions on our right to bear arms are sickening. Stop proposing so many bans and limits, and maybe a realistic bill, like the safe credit, won’t be universally protested. If you actually want to quell gun violence, keep focused on affordable mental and physical healthcare, improving the education system, and reducing income inequality. While the right may not support these real improvements, I cannot in good faith support or vote for any politician who supports banning or restricting the rights of law abiding citizens in our beautiful commonwealth. Thank you.

The 2nd amendment states "shall not be infringed". All of these bills are infringement and are therefore unconstitutional. Should we pass laws that people must pass a test before they can have freedom of speech? What about pass a test before you can vote? What about if someone does not have training they will be slaves again? Name one other right outlined in the constitution where a citizen has to jump through hoops before they can use that right? I oppose all of these bills as they will do more harm than good. I can understand wanting to keep people safe but gun control does the opposite. These bills will only make it harder for law abiding citizens to exercise their rights while criminals will still ignore the law. Criminals will still get illegal guns or weapons and will commit more crimes since they know the public is unable to defend themselves. Benjamin Franklin once said: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." You writing bills saying "give up your rights and guns and we will protect you". Well ask the Native Americans how that worked out for them. Ask a Jewish person who was under Nazi control how that worked out for them. Well Hitler's first step was to take away the guns from the public so they could not protect themselves and over 6 million people lost their lives. Since you do not know history you are writing bills which will doom us to repeat it. You know 75 years ago when you could just buy a gun in a catalog and it was shipped to your house we did not have this issue. In the 60s and 70s when people would have a gun in their truck at school or take one in for show and tell we did not have a gun issue. This is a mental health issue. Deal with mental health and you will fix the public safety issue. Zero of my guns have killed people because guns do not kill people. People kill people. Look at Ukraine and Israel for just one form of example why we need LESS gun control. All of these gun laws are unconstitutional and should be thrown out. Do the right thing and let us law abiding citizens have their rights as outlined in the constitution. Do not pass laws which infringe on our rights. If the 2nd amendment falls, the 1st will follow . When the 1st and 2nd fall the 13th will fall and our country will be lost and we will be back in chains.

I am very opposed to the vast majority of these bills. I am a legal gun owner with my CHP. Many of these bills heavily restrict my right to bear arms in a legal capacity. I don’t understand why I should be punished for doing everything legally and correctly only to become a felon in the coming months through these legislations

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Whether or not a person chooses to exercise this right is up to them. Otherwise, it shall not be infringed.

You guys make it harder and harder to vote Democrat every single cycle. Complete ban on Semi Automatics more or less making the state even stricter towards guns then states like Maryland? I oppose all these even the "herp common sense derp" ones because the states party has made it clear they don't give a crap about anything but putting hollow wins for politicians because hhheeeyyy punishing law abiding gun owners is a whole lot easier then creating jobs or reducing crime. If these bills die before getting to the governors desk, especially the bans, then I will gladly continue to vote DNC. But if Youngkin has to veto these and you make me say something I never thought I would "Thank god Youngkin won" then I look forward to blindly going down the ticket in 2024 and checking "R" on everyone. Thank you for taking the time to read this.

I do not support more legislation infringing on my 2nd Ammendment rights. Please fund more enforcement for the proactive enforcement of existing laws and regulations pertaining to firearms.

I oppose this legislation.

First off, knives are a basic tool with myriad uses and have been around since ancient history. Any limitation on them is so insulting, and insane. We are not children. It is infuriating that money was spent to even write that down. The fact that I would need a right to carry a knife spelled out is not something our forefathers could have possibly anticipated, since it’s a simple tool. A screwdriver is exactly as deadly as any knife. I would know, I’ve been an ICU nurse for nearly a decade and I have seen people stabbed with both. Matter of fact, a hammer would be a superior concealed weapon with more lethality than either. Second, many of these new gun laws make sense. Many of them do not. I do not want stalkers, domestic abusers, or drug dealers buying guns. A waiting period and proficiency training is fine, although I believe it to be unconstitutional I would comply. However it appears we are going to make it illegal to purchase specific parts for guns, to build your own serialized and registered firearm, and to concealed carry in many public spaces. I also see a poorly defined and overly restrictive “assault weapons” ban. The most insane is the ban on parents having firearms in the home at all. That is unacceptable. The latter group of laws are an infringement based on the opinions of the woefully uninformed. I should not lose my right to responsible ownership, maintenance and concealed carry with a permit due to the lobbying of a group that has failed to due the due diligence to learn about the rights they wish to throw away for all of us. I have a concealed carry permit. It has saved my life of nearly saved my life multiple times. The police can be great, but they are minutes away when seconds count. For instance, as I was leaving a restaurant in the city I was targeted by 2 men with illegal guns. I did not know them, we had never interacted, but suddenly there was a gun pointing at me from a car circling around me in the parking lot. Without escape available, I drew my pistol in response. The car stopped circling and left, giving me time to alert law enforcement before there were any holes in me. If I come face to face with a mass shooter, as so many do, I prefer to be armed. The organization of mothers pushing for these laws can define the law of their household. But not mine. Learn from the past for gods sake. We do not need and will eventually not accept increasing restrictions and price hikes allowing only the wealthy and connected to be armed. Governor, I ask that you veto these laws which only restrict law abiding citizens. You are the person elected in part because you are the option on the ballot who would not let this stand. So don’t. To those in support of these laws: every right you surrender is one you can never recover without 10 times the struggle it took to get to the place where you were able to throw it away. Learning from your mistakes is not viable when you codify them into law. You are making several mistakes. You can’t restrict and underfund the police department and make personal defense harder at the same time. That is advantageous to no one. It is not how things work in this world where evil people exist, no matter how deep in the sand your head is. And the next time you’re grunting and sweating, tearing a box open like a fucking caveman you might want to try a knife before adding more legislation An armed society is a polite society, let’s keep it that way.

The ridiculous litany of gun control measures under consideration will do nothing to effectively reduce crime and violence, and will only further restrict the rights of law abiding firearms owners.

We dont need MORE laws regarding firearms, we need to enforce the laws that are already on the books. If enforcement is done then these laws are redundant and not necessary. Don't pass more laws just for the sake of passing laws. They do nothing but make law abiding citizens confused and they dont do anything to stop problems.

I am writing to express my great concern, to the legislatures that continue to ignore their oath of swearing to protect and uphold the rights of the citizens as protected by the United States Constitution and the Virginian Constitution. "The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED". You beaurcrats do not grant that right to he people, it is God given. While you grandstand and ateemlt to make laws to hurt the everydayaw abiding American citizen, you turn a way and do nothing in these bills to punish criminals committing crimes. It is already illegal to murder people. To grandstand and think that any of these bills would stop someone from murdering or harming another person is laughable. Quite literally. You pander screaming about these firearm safety bills while you walk around with security and people with "guns" to keep you safe. Start enforcing the existing laws against criminals who commit crimes vs trying to turn law abiding people, who take training, are serious about protection of family, themselves and others, and trying to disarm them and make them criminals. Or we will vote you out! Uphold your Oath or be prepared for the consequences your actions lead to by the American people. Regards Mr. Harris

These anti gun laws are an infringement on all Virginian's 2A rights.

I am opposed to additional new laws or further regulations placed on firearms or other means of self defense, or which limit the ability to conduct commerce or carry such items. Not only does the constitution make it clear this is a violation of my rights, it does nothing to address or reduce the actions of criminals.

All infringements on the second amendment are acts of treason and should be treated as such. Acting in favor of such infringements makes you a traitor to this nation and th commonwealth.

All Virginians want our families to be safe from gun violence. However, passing such broad restrictions on firearms commonly used for self defense is not the answer. The updated definition of assault weapons and the associated prohibitions do little to nothing to stop criminals who are willing to illegally buy or steal firearms. There are plenty of firearms out there for criminals to access, with well over 400 million guns in civilian ownership in the United States. It is too late to round them all up. These bills will disproportionately affect those citizens who go out of their way to follow our commonwealth's laws; the people who are unlikely to commit a violent crime in the first place. The solutions to gun violence that stand a chance at working are community-oriented interventions that decrease poverty, drug use, gang activity, combat mental illness, and advocate for the safe storage of firearms. Sociologists know these factors correlate strongly with ALL types of violence. On average, two-thirds of firearms deaths are suicides, an assault weapons ban won't do a thing about those. Of the remaining 1/3 of firearms homicides, more than half are drug, gang, or domestic violence related. Let's pass bipartisan legislation that addresses these underlying problems, instead of preventing average Virginians from protecting themselves with firearms that are already ubiquitous.

I am Opposed to any limitations on the Second Amendment and any restrictive firearm laws. We have adequate, if not already overbearing, laws on the books now and should not be creating more laws restricting all the aspects of firearm use, sales, and any other aspects of the right to bear arms.

These firearm laws are mostly reactionary to the media response on firearms. This is a major infringement on the 2nd amendment and needs to be stopped.

An inordinate focus on the control of firearms only serves to infringe the rights of the law-abiding citizen in defense of his life and property. The State should instead focus on the apprehension and incarceration of individuals engaging in criminal behavior and associated misuse of firearms.

Any law that infringes on my Gods-given right to own and bear arms is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Any law passed that infringes this right will be answered with a lawsuit.

Hello. There are a plethora of bills that were proposed, which would clearly violate the second amendment rights of many law abiding citizens. First of all, considering concealed carry should be permit-less carry, it is counterproductive to increase the requirements for concealed carry. Restrictions on where law abiding citizens can lawfully carry their now “permitted” firearms is asinine, as well as the proposition of a bill that would make it a penalty to leave a firearm in your car. You would essentially be disarming a large number of people who wish to follow these unlawful order in a day and age where the democratic agenda is to act like there are mass shootings on a daily basis. Effectively disarming the majority and increasing the requirements and legal loopholes to carry is such a vulnerable state to be in and I hope we’re smart enough to avoid that. Restrictions on “Plastic firearms and unfinished frames etc” is not only terrible literature that does nothing to explain, but it is a direct violation of the 2nd amendment considering you have a federal right to make firearms for personal use, which would include additively manufactured parts. Wait periods are also a horrifying thing to think of, considering how many times it has been proven to be a terrible idea, keeping guns out of the hands that need them most to protect themselves and their families. “Assault firearms” and anything to do with them is nonsense considering the blatant inability to define said “assault weapon”. People who don’t understand guns, shouldn’t be making laws on guns. A shorter barrel does not make it more lethal, in fact it lowers the muzzle velocity, causing less force on impact and penetration, in turn causing less collateral damage. Any sort of “assault weapons” bills are targeting law abiding citizens who have every right to use the modern advances in firearm technology just as police officers and military. The only people these bills are effecting are the already law abiding citizens. The criminals who got their hands on said weapons illegally aren’t going to be making sure that their ALREADY ILLEGAL WEAPONS are fully compliant with state laws and regulations before they go commit another crime. In no way shape or form should someone need to disadvantage themselves in a life or death situation because political members with an armed security detail don’t feel the need for a gun. Why would I want to limit myself to a firearm that is going to be inadequate in home defense, or one that does not have a high enough capacity to protect myself from the ever growing threat of home invasion and the increased trend of multiple home invaders breaking in armed. If it was you alone in your house with 6 armed intruders who most definitely must have checked their local laws and firearm regulations and made sure their firearms aren’t violating any rules before they break into your house, would you want to limit yourself to a low capacity firearm that is going to be extremely difficult to use effectively in a high stress situation, or are you taking a rifle which for reasons that don’t make sense, must have a 16 inch barrel, with a larger capacity magazine, and a stock that you can use to safely brace the firearm to prevent stray shots and provide more accurate fire. Personally I’m going to take anything and everything I can get in a situation that means life or death for me and my loved ones EVERY SINGLE DAY OF THE WEEK. Focus on the mental health crisis.

Gun laws do not prevent firearm homicides, based upon gun control organization's own data (Giffords) •No correlation between strict gun laws and firearm homicide incidents •.07 coefficient of determination (AKA R2) where .90 is a strong association •There likely would be a weak association showing gun laws driving the firearm homicide rate higher if Washington, DC was given a score and ranked by Giffords.

Hello, The right to own and bear firearms is intrinsic in the very nature of the founding of the United States. We must remember the spirit of the 2nd Amendment and the right of all civilians to own and bear arms. Firearms are the great equalizer and can allow and individual to defend themselves when they previously could not. Gun violence and the mental health epidemic are closely interlinked and one cannot pass restrictive firearm laws and expect gun violence to go away. Gun bans and the use of restrictive purchasing requirements, magazine limits, waiting periods, and red flag laws have been shown not to be effective in stemming gun violence. I urge anybody reading this message to say "NO" to 2nd Amendment restrictions.

I strongly, along with many fellow Virginians oppose any villainous disarmament bills disguised as "public safety". The second amendment clearly states "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" and out of touch elitist politicians who enjoy the luxury of armed security are choosing to ignore the constitution and force us to rely on sub-par police protection. The same people who want to defund the police want to disarm us. Embracing the second amendment is what is keeping our crime rates low compared to New York and California. We have seen the blatant disregard that criminals have for these so-called laws; emboldened criminals who are not afraid of the consequences and innocent law-abiding people who are forced to live in fear because a bunch of tyrants are letting power corrupt them. I do not want to live in fear and neither do the rest of us. In addition; a lot of counties and cities have declared themselves as second amendment sanctuaries to protect the rights of free individuals from the overreach of tyrannical politicians. These bills are a Trojan horse that will lead to more crime. You anti-gun politicians should be ashamed of yourselves; give up your private security and train yourselves. Then you will change your minds; because in the end, nobody is coming to save you. I would rather have a fighting chance against armed assailants than die waiting for help to arrive. These bills are pure evil

These all seem like infringements that will do nothing to curb any crime. Further they will only create criminals out of everyday law abiding folk. These are laws that seem to be targeting victimless crimes.

I oppose all of these selected bills since I firmly believe they are in conflict with the Second Amendment of the US Constitution. The Second Amendment clearly states that it shall not be infringed upon. Any and all proposed legislation that would place limits on how, where, and when responsible citizens arm themselves runs afoul of that. Our founding fathers correctly held the belief that all people have a natural born right to arm and protect themselves and that the government has no authority to interfere with that. While I agree with the sentiment of reducing violence among our society, gun laws only harm the law abiding citizen and leave criminals who already have a disregard for the law to still be armed. If our elected officials who proposed these bills actually cared about addressing our violence problem, they would focus more on addressing the root causes of violence and crime. More worthwhile pursuits in my opinion would be focused on addressing socio-economic problems that plague disadvantaged communities, creating a more robust and well-equipped mental healthcare system, and overhauling our educational systems to setup our children for better success in life. Thank you all for your time.

I'm against any unconstitutional law, and any law that strips Americans of their rights. These laws are an attack on the 2nd ammendment and hold NO facts in stopping crime. They are a punishment on law abiding people and in no way will make virginia a safer place.

I oppose all these unconstitutional, dangerous, and pointless laws.

HB113 | Sullivan | Handguns; possession, purchase, or transportation by persons convicted of certain drug offenses. HB1174 | Sickles | Assault firearms; age requirement for purchase, penalty. HB1195 | Hayes | Firearms; waiting period for purchases, penalty. HB12 | Jones | Handguns; firearm locking device required for sale or transfer, child safety warning required. HB1235 | Zehr | Concealed handguns; protective orders. HB1424 | Hope | Firearms; valid permit to purchase, penalties. HB1462 | Laufer | Firearm in unattended motor vehicle; civil penalty. HB158 | McClure | Firearm locking device; required for sale or transfer of firearm. HB16 | Garrett | Firearm or explosive material; carrying within Capitol Square and the surrounding area, etc. HB173 | Simon | Plastic firearms and unfinished frames, etc.; manufacture, import, etc. prohibited, penalties. HB175 | Simon | Assault firearms; carrying in public areas prohibited, penalty. HB183 | Simon | Firearms; storage in residence where minor or person prohibited from possessing is present, penalty. HB2 | Helmer | Assault firearms & certain ammunition, etc.; purchase, sales, transfers, etc., prohibited. HB22 | Jones | Auto sears; definition, prohibition on manufacture, importation, sale, etc., penalty. HB270 | Reid | Commonwealth Comprehensive Gun Safety Program; established, etc. HB319 | Helmer | Firearms instructors & safety prog.; removes reference to NRA & U.S. Concealed Carry Assoc. in Code. HB35 | Clark | Firearm safety device; expands definition of device. HB351 | Clark | Firearm; locking device required for purchase, households where minor resides, penalty. HB362 | McClure | Firearms; purchase, etc., following an assault and battery against an intimate or dating partner. HB454 | Callsen | Firearm/explosive material; carrying w/in Capitol Square or bldg. owned or leased by Commonwealth. HB46 | Bennett-Parker | Firearm; transfers to another person from a prohibited person. HB466 | Helmer | Concealed handgun permits; reciprocity with other states. HB791 | Henson | Pneumatic guns; Class 6 felony to possess. HB797 | Hope | Concealed handguns; demonstrated competence for a permit, firearms instructors and safety programs. HB798 | Hope | Firearms; purchase, possession, etc., following an assault and battery or stalking violation. HB799 | Hope | Concealed handgun permit applications; fingerprints required by local governments. HB861 | Hernandez | Weapons; carrying into hospital that provides mental health services. HB945 | Lopez | Firearm safety device; expands definition of device. SB100 | Ebbin | Plastic firearms and unfinished frames, etc.; manufacture, import, etc. prohibited, penalties. SB2 | Deeds | Assault firearms & certain ammunition, etc.; purchase, possession, sale, transfer, etc., prohibited. SB210 | Perry | Auto sears; prohibition on manufacture, importation, sale, etc., penalty. SB273 | Subramanyam | Firearms; waiting period for purchases, penalty. I oppose all these bills.

I oppose this bill as it seeks to infringe on the Consitutionally proctected rights of lawabiding citizens to protect themselves from criminals, criminals who do not follow the law. This bill makes it harder for someone to keep themselves safe and is primarily a solution in search of problems to fix. Virginia has one of the lowest crime rates in the country and even less gun related crimes being committed year over year. This is not due to gun control laws, in fact as gun control laws increase, s o does the rate of violent crimes. Criminals are not afraid of police, they are afraid of armed citizens. The subject of this bill has already been defeated in courts, passing this into law will only subject the Commonwealth to more lawsuits to have it repealed costing us more in taxes. Enough of our taxpayers money has been wasted in politicians attempting to pass "feel good" bills to try and prove they are doing their job. I urge the legistature to focus on enforcing and imposing stricter penalties for those that break our exsiting laws over creating new laws that only serve to pe nalize the law abiding citizens.

I am a Norfolk resident and member of Virginia Moms for Change. I support HB861. Guns and other weapons should not be present in facilities providing mental health services and care. I appreciate the exception in the bill for law enforcement and military personnel. This legislation will make hospitals and other care facilities safer.

I was born in Henrico county and vote in every election. Guns are currently the #1 killer of our children under the age of 18. I am writing to show my support for these bills because gun violence prevention is my top priority. Please support gun safety legislation that is brought up for a vote! Thank you so much for your time.

My name is Laura Sledge and I am your constituent. Guns are currently the #1 killer of our children under the age of 18, and gun violence prevention is my top priority. Please support gun safety legislation that is brought up for a vote. Here are the bills I support. Thank you for your time.

Please support HB 318, HB319, HB351, HB362, HB585, HB602, HB637, HB791, HB797, HB798, HB798, HB799, HB 861, HB16, HB45 Let's keep our children and other innocent bystanders safe!

Hello, My name is Hayley Redmond Cilley. Guns are currently the #1 killer of our children under age 18, and I am calling because gun violence prevention is my top priority. Please support gun safety legislation that is brought up for a vote! We need safer communities for all, but especially for our children.

Everything we can do to keep our children and communities safe must be of the utmost priority. Our country has blood on its hands and state and federal leaders must open their eyes and hearts to pushing forward for what’s best for us as a society- that does not include firearms, ammunition, and hate. Mental health is but one part of the issue at hand here and it’s critical we solve the gun violence epidemic in a bipartisan and comprehensive fashion. I support all efforts to improve mental health services and school and community safety including eliminating access to automatic weapons, increasing the purchase age and increasing background check and screenings.

As a voter and active community member I support the right to responsible gun ownerships. For that reason I support that part of HB35 and all of HB1195. I also support HB861, as well as HB916 which establishes a Substantial Risk Order Reporting System so that government officials are better able to track incidents and determine appropriate legistlation. I support HB945, expands definition of a firearm safety device so that even more responsible gun owners may benefit from the tax credit.

Keeping guns out of mental health facilities will keep those people in these facilities safer. I'm with the League of Women Voters of Virginia and we urge you to support this bill.

As a lawful firearm owner and concealed carry holder in multiple state, I urge you to oppose these unconstitutional bills. These bills will do nothing but infringe on our rights and do nothing to punish those who use firearms in an unlawful manner. Here are a few examples of why these bills are bad: HB 270 and HB 1195 - what problem does this solve for? Virginia has an "instant check" system and this bill makes that moot. HB 319 and HB 797 - reducing the places where someone can get trained on how to safely and effectively use firearms is counterintuitive. If anything, the number of firearm training locations should be increased to maximize the safe operations of firearms. HB 362 and HB 798 - misdemeanors should never deprive an individual of their rights guaranteed by the Constitution. HB 861 - this is another attempt to reduce a person's ability to protect themselves. Rather than take away the rights of lawful American citizens, please focus on punishing actual criminals and, if need be, make those penalties more harsh. All of these bills are intended to make law-abiding American citizens less able to protect themselves. They do nothing to impact the criminal or mentally unstable element of society and those are the people who commit violence whether that be with firearms, knives, hammers, or their bare hands. As legislators, you need to focus on stopping the bad buy and maximizing the freedoms and liberties of the good guys. These bills are anti-American and should be opposed vehemently.

I am a volunteer with Virginia Moms for Change, a gun violence prevention group, and we support these bills.

I support these bills.

Please oppose HB175, which should be called the "scary looking gun prohibition bill". Does nothing to advance safety and in unconstitutional per Bruen. Please oppose HB270, which is a back door gun show ban, a callous disarming of women facing domestic abusers, and puts the Commonwealth in the business of buying legal firearms. Please oppose HB318, which imposes civil penalties on manufacturers and distributors in one of the most highly regulated industries in the country for end user behavior. Additionally, it is terribly worded, adding civil liability for even things like safety devices. Please oppose HB24/861. a "facility that provides mental health" services could include any emergency room. Think about where our ER's and trauma centers are. HB319 and HB797 are comical on their face. One cannot credibly claim that training programs from the National Rifle Association are inadequate. This is politics, plain and simple. HB799 is a solution in search of a problem. 10 years ago the fingerprint req't was eliminated - what's changed? This is an attempt to add friction to people trying their best to comply with an already intrusive process. Please support HB1230, which puts defenders closer to our children when time is of the essence and creates an effective deterrent. Please support HB1235, which enables women to protect themselves against abusers and rapists while a protective order is in place. Please support HB1325, which eliminates paperwork made unnecessary.

Apparently, you all think your authority comes from you; is deserved by you; and should be used to further your agenda in disarming law abiding citizens. SCOTUS decisions in Heller and Bruen have already decided the fate of your bills. You are likely going to get sued, your bills will lose and you will have done nothing whatsoever but waste taxpayer time and money on a frivolous pursuit. Which brings me to question what, exactly is the end result? Is it to weaponize laws against law abiding citizens in lawfare? Maybe you think we will run out of money or out of steam in defending our GOD GIVEN RIGHTS. Good luck with that, you will need it. The US Constitution has been argued multiple times regarding gun rights and clearly you either do not care about the rulings; about the Constitution as ratified and adopted by Virginia; nor the views of your constituents. You neither deserve, nor are owed, any kind of allegiance from us. WE DO NOT serve YOU. As a matter of fact our government, across the entire United States, is actually opposite your entitled, two-tiered justice, elitist hypocrisy; which is to say YOU SERVE US! Your lawfare tactics; constantly thumbing your nose at our RIGHTS because 'scary gun bad,' is not going to go in your favor. We are well aware of your marxist ideologies and how much you hate your country and how you believe that the rights of the individual are outweighed by your need to subjugate. We are well aware of your continuation to craft laws carving out, little by little, more power for yourselves and less freedom for us. God will not judge us for standing against you. You took an oath to support, protect and defend the Constitution. You have an opportunity, to simply admit you are wrong and turn away from this course of action. Impaling yourself because you'd rather do that than admit you are wrong is not the way to go. I understand an admission of wrong action will come with a swath of angry people jeering and cheering against you, however, redirecting course is still a better option than trying to force your constituency to rely on 'government,' to help which is tantamount to murder. The national average police response is around 12 minutes to a crime scene, coupled with the fact that SCOTUS has ruled many times that a law enforcement officer has no duty to place him/herself in harms way to protect anyone (DeShaney vs. Winnebago and Town of Castle Rock vs. Gonzales, and Warren vs. District of Columbia), and all you have done is place criminals at the top of the food chain offering up your constituency as nothing more than their next meal.

As a parent, I support these common-sense gun reform bills.

Tilting at windmills: The debate on whether an AR-15 is a military or non-military firearm is moot The anti-gunners panties are in a tight wad over AR-15s because they don’t like black guns, especially if those guns have various cosmetic features, such as a bayonet lug. You know - the scourge of drive-by bayonetings going on in Chicago? So, the anti’s latest tactic is to scream (that’s pretty much their main mode of communication) that an AR-15 is a weapon of war and should not be owned by anyone but the military, government agencies, and the police. So, if citizens don’t need so-called “weapons of war”, why exactly would the police and government bureaucrats need them? <Crickets chirping quietly in the background> Armies have not used AR-15s in war, so it’s hard to call one a weapon of war. The M-16/M-4 is superior for that purpose with its semi-automatic, burst, and fully automatic selector switch. That said, could one fight a war with an AR-15? Sure. AR-15s have a lot in common with their M-16/M-4 cousin. AR-15s use the same mid-power cartridge and the same 20 or 30-round magazine as the M-16/M-4. And the really scary issue for the antis is the AR-15 LOOKS LIKE an M-16! But all of this is totally moot. The Second Amendment and Article 1, Section 13 of the Virginia Constitution both protect the right of the People to own and carry bearable weapons of war! Even the Supreme Court back in 1939 in US v Miller made it clear that any weapon of use to a militia (think “weapon of war”) is protected by the Second Amendment. And American history and tradition back up that right. From the beginning, Americans have owned and carried weapons in use by the military: from muskets to revolvers, to pistols, to pump and semi-automatic shotguns, to lever-action, bolt-action, and semi-automatic rifles, and, to a lesser degree, both fully-automatic rifles and pistols. So, to my anti-gun friends: I am tired of arguing with you about whether an AR-15 is a sporting gun or a “weapon of war.” Call it what you want, but it is protected by the Second Amendment either way.

I ask the subcommittee to oppose the passage of these bills.

I, Carolyn Kochard, on behalf of Virginia Moms for Change support the above bills because data shows that these laws help reduce gun-related deaths.

Dear Members; What part of 'shall not infringe' do you not understand ? Donald Trump on the ballot and let's go Brandon. My congressmen Bobby Scott and my delegate Cia Price do NOT represent me ! Thank you John Zielanski

I moved to Virginia 15 years ago after I retired. I chose Virginia because of the reasonable, common sense gun laws, among other reasons, as compared to where I came from. I am an avid competitive shooter and hunter and made Virginia my home on that basis. I pay considerably more in taxes, with the exception of real estate, to support my state and county governments and ask and get little in return. In the last 8 years the state of Virginia has enacted a myriad of new firearms regulations that do nothing to prevent crime or make us safer. The new laws being considered will have the same effect. Your focus should be on crime and how to punish criminals, not law abiding taxpayers exercising their constitutionally guaranteed rights. Where I live we realistically have a 25 to 45 minute response time for fire, ambulance and sheriff’s deputies. We have an excellent sheriff’s department and volunteer corps of fire and first aid responders but sheer numbers of staff and size of our county make it what it is. People need to be self reliant and not have to worry about being punished for inadvertently breaking an ineffective gun law. Again, your focus should be be on crime and how to punish criminals and not law abiding citizens. Thanks for your time.

Virginia residents have a right to bear arms and that right is protected by the U.S. Constitution. Any bill that aims to infringe on that right should automatically be disallowed. If bills such as these were to pass anywhere in the country, the politicians who introduced them and supported them should be publicly identified as the cause for why someone was killed in one of the gun free zones they created. When a victim of abuse and assault is taken to a hospital, disarming that victim and every friend or family who visits should be a crime in itself. Simon and Hernandez should have to explain exactly why their bills are justifiable. They will not have any data to show all the violent crimes that have taken place by Virginian's legally carrying lawfully owned weapons. Even if they did, it would never warrant disarming all Virginians in hospitals or give them the authority to tell a single Virginia resident what that resident may or may not carry. Vote NO on these bills.

I think there should be a law that allows us, the citizens of Virginia, to remove officials from office who violate their constitutional oath to protect our 2nd amendment and other constitutional amendments. I cannot for the life of me understand what the point is of swearing into office as servant to the public and take an oath only to turn around and purpose laws under the guise of reducing crime that further restrict already law abiding citizens. These laws will never EVER stop criminals, it will never EVER slow or stop people with nefarious intentions and only limit already law abiding citizens. Frankly I grow so tired and more and more disappointed in certain officials in office that don't keep their oath and just lie to the public that gun control stop criminal. IT DOES NO WORK, armed law biding citizens scare criminals from making people into victims because it creates uncertainty to the criminal's actions not knowing if people are armed would they other wise take criminal actions. Why is it people who support gun control fail to make connects to the correlations that place with security are less likely to be targeted for that very reason, because the person would face resistance to their actions. I do not support any of these gun control bills, I do support the pro gun bills and will not comply with any of these gun control bills should they pass as they are unconstitutional and violate my rights as a US citizen.

Please quit making new laws when we don’t enforce what is on the books now. Target criminals not the everyday law abiding citizens of Virginia!

As a 20 year Virginia constituent, I urge you to OPPOSE the following gun-control bills. As a whole they do nothing to increase safety of the public, ignore actual crime stats & root causes and focus solely on infringing upon rights of law-abiding Virginians, actually making us LESS safe in our ability to defend ourselves from violent criminals. Multiple bills flagrantly violate the Supreme Court rulings in the Heller v DC and Bruen v NYSRPA cases which established clear historical and Constitutional thresholds which must be met for ALL gun control laws. These bills also violate the Virginia State Constitution's sections related to keeping and bearing arms. As legislators you took an oath to UPHOLD those Constitutions, not marginalize or cut apart the Rights contained therein. * HB 175, Simon, unconstitutionally prohibits the carry of certain firearms in public * HB 270, Reid, creates a three day waiting period for a firearm purchase, making a mockery of Virginia's "instant check" system and breaking a promise to Virginia's gun owners * HB 318, Helmer, ridiculously makes the firearm industry liable for criminal misuse of firearms; are car makers or alcohol companies liable for DUIs which kill people? Are knife makers held liable for murders or robberies using a knife? * HB 319, Helmer, greatly reduces the number of places where concealed handgun permit holders can get training. A solution in search of a problem * HB 362, McClure, takes away gun rights for misdemeanor battery in a nebulous "dating relationship." Misdemeanors should never take away basic, protected civil rights for any reason * HB 797, Hope, greatly reduces the number of places where concealed handgun permit holders can get training and increases requirements to get a permit. A solution to a non-existing problem * HB 798, Hope, takes away gun rights for a misdemeanor conviction of a simple assault, assault and battery, and stalking * HB 799, Hope, requires fingerprinting for getting a concealed carry permit. Permits are only revoked for any reason at a minuscule rate of one-tenth of one percent! A solution in search of a problem. * HB 861, Hernandez, prohibits firearms in hospitals, unconstitutionally violating the rights of people to be able to protect themselves * HB 1195, Hays, creates a five day waiting period for a firearm purchase, making a mockery of Virginia's "instant check" system and breaking a promise to Virginia's gun owners * HB 1462, Laufer, creates a $500 civil penalty and towing for an unattended vehicle where a handgun is visible, punishing good people for what criminals do

As a constituent, I urge you to OPPOSE the following gun-control bills: * HB 175, Simon, unconstitutionally prohibits the carry of certain firearms in public * HB 270, Reid, creates a three day waiting period for a firearm purchase, making a mockery of Virginia's "instant check" system and breaking a promise to Virginia's gun owners * HB 318, Helmer, ridiculously makes the firearm industry liable for criminal misuse of firearms * HB 319, Helmer, greatly reduces the number of places where concealed handgun permit holders can get training. A solution in search of a problem * HB 362, McClure, takes away gun rights for misdemeanor battery in a nebulous "dating relationship." Misdemeanors should never take away basic, protected civil rights for any reason * HB 797, Hope, greatly reduces the number of places where concealed handgun permit holders can get training and increases requirements to get a permit. A solution to a non-existing problem * HB 798, Hope, takes away gun rights for a misdemeanor conviction of a simple assault, assault and battery, and stalking * HB 799, Hope, requires fingerprinting for getting a concealed carry permit. Permits are only revoked for any reason at a minuscule rate of one-tenth of one percent! A solution in search of a problem. * HB 861, Hernandez, prohibits firearms in hospitals, unconstitutionally violating the rights of people to be able to protect themselves * HB 1195, Hays, creates a five day waiting period for a firearm purchase, making a mockery of Virginia's "instant check" system and breaking a promise to Virginia's gun owners * HB 1462, Laufer, creates a $500 civil penalty and towing for an unattended vehicle where a handgun is visible, punishing good people for what criminals do Let me know how you are going to vote on these bills.

As a constituent, I urge you to OPPOSE the following gun-control bills: * HB 175, Simon, unconstitutionally prohibits the carry of certain firearms in public * HB 270, Reid, creates a three day waiting period for a firearm purchase, making a mockery of Virginia's "instant check" system and breaking a promise to Virginia's gun owners * HB 318, Helmer, ridiculously makes the firearm industry liable for criminal misuse of firearms * HB 319, Helmer, greatly reduces the number of places where concealed handgun permit holders can get training. A solution in search of a problem * HB 362, McClure, takes away gun rights for misdemeanor battery in a nebulous "dating relationship." Misdemeanors should never take away basic, protected civil rights for any reason * HB 797, Hope, greatly reduces the number of places where concealed handgun permit holders can get training and increases requirements to get a permit. A solution to a non-existing problem * HB 798, Hope, takes away gun rights for a misdemeanor conviction of a simple assault, assault and battery, and stalking * HB 799, Hope, requires fingerprinting for getting a concealed carry permit. Permits are only revoked for any reason at a minuscule rate of one-tenth of one percent! A solution in search of a problem. * HB 861, Hernandez, prohibits firearms in hospitals, unconstitutionally violating the rights of people to be able to protect themselves * HB 1195, Hays, creates a five day waiting period for a firearm purchase, making a mockery of Virginia's "instant check" system and breaking a promise to Virginia's gun owners * HB 1462, Laufer, creates a $500 civil penalty and towing for an unattended vehicle where a handgun is visible, punishing good people for what criminals do Thanks Garry Dudley

It continues to puzzle me as to why the General Assembly continues to hamper the rights of law abiding gun owners with silly legislation (some of which is clearly unconstitutional) verses addressing the actual underlying problems. Until you do so, you'll continue to look like the political hacks and stooges that you are, beholden to party marching orders rather than what's good for the Commonwealth and it's citizens. Truly sad indeed!

Keep your hands off legally owned guns. Do more to get the bad gun guns. Why do not see the laws on the books get enforced? Uphold your oath of office and protect us from bad guys,illegals, and others.

I am writing to inform the tone deaf and those in this assembly that while they dither and equivocate over Constitutional "God given Rights" of a Free People, codified into law, 16,250 innocent children are "murdered", put to death, mutilated, in the state of Virginia each and every year and each and every new session of this Legislature 16, 250 more innocents die at the hands of the inaction of this body as a whole. And we thought the Germans of the 30's were criminal for their actions with deliberate DEATH and maiming. The crime of murder in any form is a serious crime and just because it is "legalized" it is still a Sin again against humanity and the People of Virginia, who apparently foot the bill for this atrocity. Just as you should not be legalizing "Firearm Control" murder is still a unjustified morally and should be rejected as normal. If there are still anyone on the Democrat side of this body that understands morality and stands up for LIFE and LIBERTY of the People, consider well how and what you vote in favor of. May the punishment of this heinous crime be published and stopped before another thing is done, legally or illegally in this body. Sincerely, Peter Buckingham 301-646-5300 Crozet, VA 22932

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

HB35 - promotes actual firearms safety without imposing upon the rights of innocent gun owners for the crimes of others. Absolutely worth the support of the legislature. HB1230 - a step in the correct direction, towards making schools LESS of a soft target, LESS attractive to mass-murderers compared to how they are now. This permits some of the people we never needed to worry about in the first place to be armed against the possibility of someone wanting to murder them in a place which was previously a victim-disarmament zone. HB1235 - this shouldn't even be a QUESTION to support it. A protective order is a mere piece of paper, and it is well known that such a piece of paper has failed miserably in defending some people from their attackers. Permitting them to carry is the ONLY proper choice. HB1321 and 1325 do not earn my support or disapproval. ALL other bills being proposed for this day's consideration should be rejected - HB175 - ANY prohibition on so-called "assault firearms" is AT BEST meaningless and worthy of opposition for that reason alone. Add to that the fact that owners and users of these firearms are overwhelmingly peaceful VA citizens innocent of any wrongdoing and this bill CANNOT be passed. HB270 - more nonsense restrictions on so-called assault weapons" and standard-capacity magazines, which are unConstitutional on their face under both the US and VA Constitutions. Nuke this proposal. HB318 - proposes to hold "firearms industry members" responsible for crimes committed by third parties due to govt's inability or unwillingness to enforce EXISTING laws already covering the crimes detailed in this bill. This is a prima-facie attempt to execute lawfare against retailers and manufacturers innocent of any actual wrongdoing. Nuke it. HB319 - a petty attempt to remove NRA and USCCA instructors and ranges from certification at what they are literally the class-of-the-world in doing, teaching firearms safety and the legalities of carry, because the proposer doesn't LIKE those groups. The mere PROPOSAL is incredibly childish and unprofessional. Nuke it. HB362 - if you want to forbid ownership or possession of someone for a violent crime, that crime needs to be a felony. Period. And you'd better be able to JUSTIFY it being a felony crime. Nuke it. HB797 - another childish and unprofessional attack on the groups best-suited and -capable of instruction in actual firearms safety. NUKE IT. HB798 - see comments for HB362. NUKE IT. HB799 - This is tiresome. See comments for HB319 and 797. NUKE IT. HB861 - the only people who need to be restricted from carrying a weapon into a hospital already ARE prohibited from even TOUCHING one. Your inability or unwillingness to deal with that does not justify more laws. NUKE IT. HB916 - VA has had laws covering the issues of emergency TROs for YEARS already. So-called "red flag" laws are an abomination, violating most of the Bill Of Right and leaving someone you claim is a threat in the position to act on that threat. NUKE IT. HB945 - Not incredibly offensive, just wholly unnecessary. Nuke it. HB1195 - Any waiting period is Constitutionally-impermissible. A right delayed is a right denied, and the state seeks to delay here. NUKE IT. HB1386 - VA has no power to set workplace rules like this. NUKE IT. HB1462 - seeks to re-victimize victims of crime AND to make it impossible for people not a threat to anyone to carry outside of victim-disarmament zones. NUKE IT.

As a dedicated advocate for the Second Amendment and a lifelong Virginian, I am compelled to express my deep concerns over the direction of recent legislative efforts surrounding firearm laws. I have always placed a high value on security, freedom, and the principles of logical, effective policy-making. It has become increasingly apparent that in the wake of tragic incidents, there is a tendency among some lawmakers to resort to knee-jerk reactions, such as proposing bans or stringent registration requirements for firearms the list goes on and on. While these measures are often presented as solutions to reduce crime, they fail to address the root causes of violence and, instead, serve only to infringe upon the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens like myself. The proposal to ban or mandatorily register firearms under the guise of public safety is not only ineffective but also a clear violation of our Second Amendment rights. Such actions presuppose that restricting the freedoms of the majority, who are responsible and law-abiding, will somehow prevent the criminal actions of the few. This is not only a flawed premise but also a dangerous overreach that undermines the foundational liberties upon which our nation was built. Moreover, the creation of firearm-free zones and the push for restrictive gun laws are misguided attempts that offer a false promise of safety. History and evidence have shown that criminals do not adhere to such regulations; instead, these zones often end up as soft targets, inadvertently putting innocent lives at greater risk. In light of these considerations, I urge you and your colleagues in the Virginia House and Senate to: Stand firmly against the ineffective and reactionary proposals to ban or mandatorily register firearms. Reconsider and rescind policies that establish firearm-free zones, recognizing their failure to protect and their potential to harm. Focus on realistic, effective solutions that address the underlying causes of violence without compromising the rights and freedoms of Virginia's citizens. Our commitment to the Second Amendment is not a matter of political convenience but a fundamental principle that ensures our liberty and security. The right to bear arms is intrinsic to the American way of life, providing individuals the means to defend themselves, their families, and their freedoms. There are many egregious bills pending. firearm lock requirements, storage requirements, waiting periods, the list goes on and on I remind you democrats that you swore an oath to defend the constitution all these laws you are considering are contrary to the constitution itself and will be challenged and defeated because of the post bruen Supreme Court decisions. I am confident that with thoughtful consideration and a commitment to the principles of our Constitution, we can forge policies that genuinely enhance public safety without infringing upon our cherished liberties. I, alongside countless Virginia patriots, assert that we will not comply with laws infringing on our Second Amendment rights. This stance is rooted in a deep respect for the Constitution and the freedoms it guarantees. Thank you for your attention to my concerns and for your ongoing service to the people of Virginia. I trust that you will approach this issue with the gravity and respect it deserves, recognizing the importance of preserving our constitutional rights in all legislative actions.

None of the gun control bills being put forward will stop a single criminal event. Not one. They are designed to punish and harm Virginians exercising their natural right to self defense and are in conflict with the US and Virginia constitution. Stop. This is not in the best interest of Virginians.

The gun control bills being heard today all have one thing in common, that is to disarm the honest, law abiding citizen. There is no other reason and they will have no other effect. Gun control as a method to curb crime has failed everywhere it has been implemented. Gun control to advance tyranny , subjugation and genocide has succeeded. Please vote NO on these Unconstitutional bills.

A pro-gun vote is a vote for freedom. All the anti-gun bills are just solutions in search of problems. They thicken the code of Virginia and add nothing of value. Please, do NOT fatten the code for no reason. - Thank you

Dear committee I am writing to respectfully but firmly implore you not to advance gun control bills HB 175, 270, 318, 319, 362, 797, 798, 861, 1195, 1462. These bills will not stop or reduce crime. They will only strip the rights from law abiding citizens. One example is HB 1195, which creates a 5 day wait period. A right delayed is a right denied; if someone in danger needs a firearm to protect themselves, they are in more danger as they now have to wait. Not only is this unfair in light of Virginia's instant check system, but a court ruled against it. HB 318 Makes the firearm industry liable for the actions of criminals. This is unfair. You would not sue Ford if someone misused one of their products. You also have 2 bills that would limit training and the amount of certified instructors. This is insane as it goes against gun saftey: you WANT people to be trained on proper firearms use. You have bills that limit where one can carry, which is Unconstitutional under Bruen. You have bills that punish people if a firearm if left in their car in sight. Why not go after criminals? And it's not fair to punish people with only misdemeanors. As for the dating partner? That is problematic as a jilted partner , or and partner, can make a false statement about the other person. None of these bills will deter criminals nor will they do anything to address the saftey of people or the mental health issue. The better course of action would be to address mental health system. I DO want to see the following pro gun bills passed: HB 35, 945, 1230, 1235, 1325. These bills help people in crisis and even encourage safe storage of firearms without punishing people. I like the bill that offers tax credits for trigger locks/ safes . It's an incentive to encourage people to secure their firearms when not in use/ unattended. This is a great way to keep children safe and even puts some money back in people's pockets. I like the bill that turns an order of protection ( for the person that needs it ) into a concealed carry for a limited time. This will help vulnerable people protect themselves when they need to be able to do so. There are many things that can be done to make people safe, but not at the expense of freedom and constitutional rights. I am urging you to say Nay to the anti gun bills and Yay to the pro gun bills. A better course of action would be to fund and train police, enact harsh penalties for criminals, address the mental health system ( as the governor has said ) and pass pro gun legislation to both protect the Second Amendment and to encourage safe storage, increase the availability of training instructors, and allow people to protect themselves. And this also includes commonly-owned firearms such as AR15 and AK pattern rifles. Commonly-owned firearms such as these are protected under the Bruen decision. Thank you Mr Raymond Pezzoli

Article 1 section 13 is a restriction on you, in order to protect the civil rights of all citizens but especially the minority. Whether it’s a racial minority or a religious minority or a political minority, we all have rights that cannot be taken away just because some group is in a majority. Even if it weren’t a right or a civil liberty, you would have to repeal article 1 Sect 13 of the Virginia constitution in order to have the authority to prohibit me from being armed, and not just with a firearm but armed in anyway I see fit. Gun control doesn’t work, we see the results in countless examples so this isn’t a new idea and it’s been proven to fail and actually harm the citizens. Gun control started with racist after the civil war and it continues today to be the same racist elitist ideology that says you’re not smart enough or responsible enough to protect yourself, you must have the government protect you, which of course is ridiculous because the police cannot be everywhere nor would we want that many police in our society Many victims will testify that being unarmed or having a waiting period or a background check did nothing to stop their attacker and only effected their ability to protect themself which lead to them being victimized by a criminal Murder is illegal, people are still murdered Speed limits are in place, people still speed Laws do not stop or prevent crime, the only thing that any law will do is establish a punishment AFTER you are caught, not before. There are no minority reports, there are no pre cogs you cannot stop a crime before it happens, the intended victim is the only one that can stop the crime when it happens and the only way to do that is to be armed

As a constituent of one of the Delegates of the Assembly, but not of your committee, I write to express my opposition to each/all of the anti-2A bills in this collection. Individually and collectively, they punish Virginia citizens who intend to comply with them, and fail to so much as deter those with criminal intent. While this is true of nearly all laws, these are a particularly vile assault on the innocent. I do not find any of you deplorable, for you have not yet cast a vote - but if you vote to send these bills onward (and I'll know, within hours...) then I will find you so, and will become your political enemy. I cannot wield a lot of power as an 80-year-old individual constituent, but that which I can, I will.

I am a member of VA Moms For Change, a gun violence prevention group and I support these bills

When Democrats violate the Covenant between the PEOPLE and the US Constitution as well as the VA Constitution they are acting lawlessly and undermining the commitment toward good Government agreed on for over 200 + years. Seems Democrats didn't learn anything from the Civil war. The mentality of the "Tyrant" and the "Slave Holder" still exists among the Demo-rat Party, removing statues and trying to hide and rewrite history is not good government. Oaths, integrity, and Good Government, mean nothing to this Cabal of Evil minded men and women. We the PEOPLE need and demand good government not a patch work or illegal laws we are expected to "obey" while the "perps" that pass them have no consequence for breaking Constitutional law or good Government. The Demo-rat Party needs to be dismantled and the "ignorant" ejected from the Virginia legislature at once and for all. Peter Buckingham Crozet, VA 22932

Comments Document

OPPOSITION to HB12 - Jones OPPOSITION to HB23 - Laufer OPPOSITION to HB158 - McClure OPPOSITION to HB183 - Simon SUPPORT of HB289 - Wiley OPPOSITION to HB351 - Clark OPPOSITION to HB585 – Mundon King SUPPORT of HB756 - Walker OPPOSITION to HB791 - Henson OPPOSITION to HB861 - Hernandez SUPPORT of HB872 - Earley SUPPORT of HB1141 - Cordoza OPPOSITION to HB1174 - Sickles SUPPORT of HB1198 - Scott

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED

I am writing in support of HB 12, 23, 158, 183, 351, 585, 791 and 861. I also write in opposition to HB 289, 756, 872, 1141 and 1198. There is ample evidence that minimal restrictions on firearms has resulted in countless deaths and injuries. Sensible restrictions on access to lethal weapons are sorely needed at this time. In fact, the Supreme Court, in deciding on the right to bear arms, has also stated that “Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. [It is] not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.” If, unfortunately, assault-style weapons continue to be manufactured and owned, their access must be limited by age. In that case I would support HB 1174. Thank you for your attention to these comments.

I am a member of the Charlottesville Coalition for Gun Violence Prevention and the Charlottesville Center for Peace and Justice. I support all the gun safety bills: 12 23 158 183 351 585 791 861 1141 1174 I oppose these bills: 289 756 872 1198

. Not constitutional under Bruen and disarms visitors, family, and staff. Opposed

Please stop wasting your time and my money on bills that have proven to be have zero impact on public safety, Please refer to Maryland, California, and the other states that already have these laws

Good afternoon, I am writing to implore you to STOP with all of the gun control bills. You are punishing law abiding citizens, who now have their RIGHTS THAT SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED, infringed. And the criminals who do NOT follow these laws but who they are directed at, are not affected. Please enforce ALL of the laws that are presently in the books and prosecute those people breaking the laws and stop letting them out on bail and bond through the Soros DA’s.

HB23 and HB861 Law abiding concealed carry individual are not the problem, and criminals who do not obtain guns legally will not follow this law either. HB12 and HB158 Already exist on the federal level why waste time and money on these bills HB791 who in their right mind would make a child or teenager a felon for bringing a BB-gun into a school, how often does this even happen for this to be considered. HB1174 This bill is unconstitutional at best! How can a man or woman b considered an adult at the age of 18, join the military at the age of 18, and not be allowed to purchase a weapon at the age of 18. Not to mention all other irreversible life changes that are allowed from birth to age 18. Please vote no to all of theses bills and any other unconstitutional gun control bills that come in front of the committee. Concerned constituent.

In reference to all of the above proposed house bills…. In short there is NO need for any more restrictions of any type on the purchase (to include locations of ffls in reference to schools and forcing purchasers to buy locks when they already safely store their firearms), carry, storage, and use of any type of firearms. It is extremely clear that more restrictions do not do anything to stem the flow of violent crimes which may or may not involve firearms (using DC, Chicago, NYC etc as examples, where very strict firearms laws have done nothing to lower violent crime). Instead, we need to focus on allowing law enforcement to aggressively enforce the numerous existing laws, demand commonwealth attorneys offices hold criminals responsible and ensure long prison sentences on offenders. As a citizen of the commonwealth for my entire life, and a local law enforcement officer for over 2 decades I can tell you from personal experience simply adding restrictions and more laws is worthless and simply slows down the system. As they say when seconds count, the police are only minutes away…. Do not place any more restrictions on residents of the commonwealth who are forced to live in increasingly dangerous localities due to the legal changes of the past 5 years, which allow offenders to go unpunished or under punished. Simply because you do not like firearms does not mean that others should not have lessened access to purchase, use, and carry the firearms of their choice. Thank you for your consideration

Comments Document

I would like for the Commonwealth of Virginia to have Constitutional Carry as the law of the entire state , our right as stated in the constitution of the united states and the constitution of the Commonwealth of virginia as written by our founders gives each citizen the right to keep and bear arms with no exclusions, to be secure in their persons, unless that right has been forfeited,. Exercising this right should never lead to forfeiture of this right.

Comments Document

I would like for the Commonwealth of Virginia to have Constitutional Carry as the law of the entire state , our right as stated in the constitution of the united states and the constitution of the Commonwealth of virginia as written by our founders gives each citizen the right to keep and bear arms with no exclusions, to be secure in their persons, unless that right has been forfeited,. Exercising this right should never lead to forfeiture of this right.

For HB12 and HB158: Already covered by federal law, no additional expense should be put on the FFL or the consumer. For HB23 and HB861: You are adding restrictions on personal protection and safety while not ensuring my safety and that of my family. I have been to hospitals in the commonwealth over the last few years, the security provided couldn't stop a squirrel from running through the hospital, much less someone with mal-intent. If you want the citizens to rely on the government for safety, then provide, otherwise don't restrict it. For HB585: You want to prevent FFLs from being within 1.5 mile radius of a school, yet smoke shops or other convenience stores that have vaping products are allowed, with the latter being a much bigger problem in our schools, yet no restrictions. It is silly to assume an FFL poses any danger to a school and I have yet to hear of any incident involving an FFL and a school. Most home based FFLs do not have long term storage. Please educate yourself before trying to implement "feel good" laws. We have other major issues with our schools that need to be addressed, i.e. teach retention, giving teachers more power for discipline, parental involvement/non-involvement, allowing for greater choice of subjects and stopping teaching to a test where our children learn nothing. For HB183: Another "Feel good" law. There have been multiple examples of minors protecting their family over the last several years. But, how would this law have stopped someone like the Sandyhook shooter, who killed his mother and took her safe keys? It wouldn't have. Just like it wouldn't stop a home invade killing the owner and using their safe key/finger print to access a firearm. For HB1174: At the outset this is unconstitutional, but if you want to effect real change in regard to this, open it up to an expanded background, where the applicant/purchaser that is under the age of 21 must consent to a check of their juvenile record in order to purchase, specifically looking for violent crimes. If this were in place, it may thwart some from attempting to buy, while those that continue and consent it would flag in the system, like it does when a felon attempts to buy a firearm at a gunshow. There is much more that needs to go into this, i.e. at what point when the applicant has an established adult history can they purchase after having violent crimes on their juvenile record, 25? 21? I implore every law maker to due their due diligence when it comes to rights stated in both the Virginia Constitution and the US Constitution. Do not be beholden to your donors and ram "feel good" laws through our legislature. When someone spouts statistics to you, take a moment and do you own research, look at the source material, anyone can make states lean in their favor by changing a few words or omitting parts of a study. You must work for the all the people, those you agree with and disagree with and look at all the information, not just what your donors give you. Thank you for your time.

This is absolutely egregious. A home-based FFL is an enterprise that is cleared at a higher level of proficiency and familiarity with firearms issues than any authority VA - the FFL holders are cleared and backed by the ATF. Further, an FFL, home-based or otherwise, is an enterprise in the business of safe transfer of weapons to individuals after doing criminal checks on the prospective buyer. The location near a school is irrelevant - it does not constitute a threat to a school simply because an FFL is nearby. This is a bad faith argument, and false equivalence. It’s a thin veneer. Simply put, it’s been proposed by people who do not like private ownership of firearms, and schools were picked because (deceptively) because they are evenly districted and spread through the state - after all, they’re supposed to be, to allow children access to education without having to travel unreasonably far. This also means that selecting schools as the criteria for a “no home FFL bubble” means you effectively throw a blanket over the industry. This has nothing to do with the safety of children. I find this frankly offensive and dishonest. Show me evidence where an FFL near a school has caused a problem? More than that, show me a single instance where the location was any sort of relevant. You cannot. Because it’s not true. It’s false equivalence. Let me be clear. I am a liberal person. But part of being liberal means remembering that fear mongering and bad faith, secretive agendas hurt progress. They turn people against it. Drop this frivolous nonsense. Stop making us look like idiots, please. Your crusade against portions of the bill of rights (because come on folks, we know what it is, it’s misguided) opens up very dangerous precedents for other bad faith actors to whittle down the contents of the other amendments. Read a history book. Please.

I do not support these bills. I request you vote NO on them. HB 12, Jones, requires a locking device and informational stickers to be included with every handgun sold. Federal law already covers this and it is an unnecessary expense for gun dealers. HB 23, Laufer, prohibits guns in hospitals and emergency rooms. Not constitutional under Bruen and disarms visitors, family, and staff. HB 158, McClure, requires a locking device and informational stickers to be included with every handgun sold. Federal law already covers this and it is an unnecessary expense for gun dealers. HB 183, Simon, requires all firearms in a home be secured if there is a minor in the home. Current law already covers 14 and under. 15, 16, and 17-year-olds have used guns to save lives by stopping home invasions or violent attacks on family members. HB 585, Mundon King, prevents home-based gun dealers from operating within 1.5 miles of a school. Unconstitutional and a solution to a non-existent problem. Home-based gun dealers don't have signs outside of their home generally. The customer has to be invited in. Convenience stores that have liquor, tobacco products, and vaping products are open to the public and within 1.5 miles of schools, yet there is no concern about that. HB 791, Hanson, makes BB gun possession on school groups a FELONY. Another solution to a problem that doesn't exist. HB 861, Hernandez, prohibits guns in hospitals and emergency rooms. Not constitutional under Bruen and disarms visitors, family, and staff. HB 1174, Sickles, makes it illegal for anyone under 21 to purchase any kind of firearm. A Virginia court has struck down part of the Universal Background Check law because it made it impossible for 18, 19, and 20-year-olds to purchase a handgun. Other states have also struck down such prohibitions under Bruen.

Constitutional issues when made political do no justice to representatives or their constituents. Dishonesty to the public erodes any ability for trust and assumptions based on party affiliation close down civil discussion. Some representatives run for office for gun control matters and get voted in but are you being honest with your constituents. I can quote statistics as could those supporting gun control but there are logical truths being ignored. We should change our terminology from gun control, to gun control over law biding citizens because each law that is passed in most situation only further restricts law biding citizens. Most gun laws only increase the ability to become a victim to criminal actions because in order to abide by laws implemented it puts the citizen at a considerable disadvantage . Gun free zones only mean unarmed citizens open to criminal behavior due to the inability to defend one's self. Law enforcement only enforce the laws, and cannot be there to prevent the actual crimes in most situations. Criminals intent on malfeasance will not abide by any laws put in place but exploit any such laws that allow for an advantage against an unarmed individual. This is not to say that I am apposed to back ground checks even at gun shows to avoid loop holes as I support such measures but to restrict carrying at locations or gun free zones only makes for sitting ducks. Restricting common circulation of rifles or any similar type to the AR-15 platform again only further limits the citizen from criminals AND tyrannical infrastructures within the state and federal levels. We can never assume that our representatives are in power for support of the people and our constitution I am not in support of any of the current gun control bills, I am in support of all the pro gun bills. In light of whatever is voted into law ,if it further restricts my constitutional rights and civil rights I simply cannot and will not comply. Thank you for your time on this matter.

As a fellow resident of Virginia, I urge you to OPPOSE the multiple anti-gun bills being heard today (1/25/24) in the House Public Safety Subcommittee on Firearms, including: HB 12 HB 158 HB 183 HB 351 HB 23 HB 861 HB 585 HB 1174 Please focus more on protecting lawful gun owners and enforcing the laws that career criminals routinely disregard. Thank you.

Dear Delegates of the House Public Safety- Firearms subcommittee, The selected bills are flagrantly and utterly unconstitutional and they stand as a direct violation on the sovereignty and liberties of the citizenry of the Commonwealth. Plainly stated they violate the United States Constitution ( the Supreme Law of the Land) and the God given rights of the people which the Commonwealth purports to “protect”. Such legislation is also preposterous factually as firearms are not the “problem” , they are merely tools and as such they are inert objects that are incapable of exerting will without an evil individual wielding them for malevolent purposes. Criminality is the problem , as criminals do not have any regard for the law or the well being of their fellow man, hence the definition of criminal. Therefore all of the selected legislation put hence forth only seeks to disarm law abiding citizens, those that are neither inclined nor committed to violating the law. Law abiding citizens possess firearms to defend our lives, the lives of our families, and to ensure that our sovereignty and liberty is not stripped away from us by tyrannical Marxist ideologues masquerading as “compassionate” and “caring” legislators. This is not Washington, Illinois, or even Maryland, this is the great Commonwealth of Virginia. That Virginia which led the American revolution under George Washington and in the defense of liberty against the tyrannical crown of England that once sought to oppress and yoke the citizens of the American colonies. The motto that adorns the seal of Virginia and our great state flag is “Sic Semper Tyrannis”, which means “Death to Tyrants”. Such a motto is more apropos in the tumultuous political climate of modernity than ever before, perhaps even more so than during the revolution in which it was founded. Being elected to represent the people does not confer upon any individual the power to strip the people of their inalienable rights, those rights that were enshrined by our great founders in the Constitution. To violate the United States Constitution in an effort to subjugate the people of the republic is by definition treason. The citizenry of the Commonwealth has spoken, we demand that you cease attempting to violate the rights of the people and do the actual job that you were elected to do . If such malevolently contrived shibboleth manages to pass out of the House of Delegates and Senate without veto from Governor Youngkin we will not abide by, adhere to, or sanction unconstitutional mandates in any way. Mass noncompliance will be the response to such attempts to strip the people of their Liberty. Thank you for your attention and your time, vote no to this abhorrent legislation. L.S. McClung RN, PMH-BC, CARN

I am writing to oppose these anti-gun, anti-self-defense, anti-rights, bills. Having previously lived for nearly 20 years in another state with many of them and more, the experience of that state was that, contrary to crime dropping nationally to historic lows, their crime increased after restrictions were added. Unsurprisingly, criminals don't obey laws. They seek to exploit those who do. These laws taking away liberty and presumption of innocence of people who seek to obey laws, do nothing but create a maze of rules that ensnare unsuspecting good people who are unaware of the litany of restrictions, their nuance and ever-changing interpretation in the future. At best, people are forced to forgo their rights to self-defense entirely because they have one or more stops on their daily travels in a restricted area. Worse, otherwise law abiding people unaware of these many restrictions, find themselves in violation having no intention, history or desire to violate the law, much less hurt anyone. These are not the people with whom our criminal code and law enforcement resources should concern themselves. Even beyond that, if faced with a violent threat in these "sensitive places", those law abiding people will now be at an even greater disadvantage as we, the people, do not enjoy an armed and dedicated police force traveling with and around us as many politicians do. I noticed sniper teams on the roofs in the surrounding area during this past VCDL Lobby Day ensuring your safely against some hypothetical threat. We are not so fortunate as we go out in the world to have such resources protecting us. Worse yet, we had been been required to disarm prior to expressing our first amendment rights that day both outside and inside the building. Whether storage, locality of carry, age of an adult required to purchase or restrictions otherwise, law abiding people are not and never were the problem. Stop punishing them collectively for the actions of violent individuals. Respect and protect their rights and presumption of innocence as the US and Virginia Constitutions require of you. When you regulate firearms, it is not the machine of a firearm you are regulating. It is the people you are regulating. It is the rights of the people you are taking away. With all the supposed progress we have made, how is it that we are less deserving of liberty now than we were in the past?

Every single one of these proposed laws are blatantly unconstitutional under the plain text of both the Virginia and US constitutions. The SCOTUS has ruled multiple times, must recently in June 2022, that the 2A prohibits these types of attacks on free citizens. Voting for any of these bills is a waste of tax payer dollars, morally and ethically wrong, and, by definition of the courts already having ruled on these or similar laws as unconstitutional, an act of treason against the USA and by extension an insurrection.

I urge you to OPPOSE each of the following bills: HB 12 Federal law already covers this and additional state enforcement will create unnecessary expense. We don’t need more bills that could create negative financial impact on our community. HB 23 This is not constitutional under the Supreme Court Decision made in 2022: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. This bill prevents visitors, family, and staff from their right to self defense. Is it right to prevent an abused single mother from carrying her most effective tool of defense because she has to take her child to the ER? Wouldn’t this give anyone with nefarious intentions an easy location? Note: Cornell Law has published a clear summary of the Bruen Decision, easily accessed with an online search. I mention this case further below. HB 158 Federal law already covers this and additional State enforcement will create unnecessary expense. HB 183 Current law already covers 14 and under. increasing the scope of the law to apply to 15, 16, and 17-year-olds is an overreach. Minors in this age group have used firearms to save their own life and protect the lives of their families by stopping home invasions and violent attacks on their households. This bill is an overreach. HB 585 What problem is this bill trying to solve? What’s the difference between driving 1.5 miles or 5 or 10? This bill is unconstitutional and a solution to a non-existent problem. Furthermore, home-based gun dealers don't usually have signs outside of their home. Buyers have to be invited in for a purchase and FFL transfer. Also, convenience stores that have liquor, tobacco products, and vaping products (not legal for minors to purchase) are open to the public and within 1.5 miles of schools, yet there is no concern about that. HB 791 BB guns, and other pneumatic projectile devices, are specifically designed as hobbyist or sporting equipment. Making the possession of these on school grounds a felony is a complete overreach. Are we going to outlaw sticks, or stones, or archery, or baseball bats? These are all similarly dangerous. If BB guns have been used for violence at a school, please inform me. Otherwise, this is a “fix” to a problem that doesn’t exist. HB 861 This is not constitutional under Bruen and prevents visitors, family, and staff from their right to self defense. Is it right to prevent an abused single mother from carrying her most effective tool of defense because she has to take her child to the ER? Wouldn’t this give anyone with nefarious intentions an easy location? HB 1174 This bill is not constitutional. A Virginia court has struck down part of the Universal Background Check law because it made it impossible for 18, 19, and 20-year-olds to purchase a handgun. Other states have also struck down such prohibitions under Bruen. People in this age group are not minors. They are included in the same Second Amendment rights as older adults.

I'm a law abiding citizen, retired law enforcement officer, and responding Public Safety 1st Responder Chaplain. I have been called out, responding to or serving at a number of violent acts, anf times, often in dangerous areas. I believe in these violent times, and knowing that criminals don't and won't obey the laws, that I have a need and right to be able to defend and protect myself, and be able to continue carrying, as I have for many years. Our drivers permit is for all 50 states, and we don't have to stop at a state border. I believe a concealed carry permit should be the same, recognized in all 50 states. To have to leave my firearm inside my car, to go into a public building or rest area on the highway, can put me in needless danger. If I have to take off a d put my firearm in my trunk, it let's a criminal see where it is and I don't have it. That can let them steal the firearm and/or harm me. Please allow our law abiding citizens use their 2nd Amendment Right To Keep and Bear (bear = to carry) arms. We need to fully prosecuted existing gun laws snd crimes, Not Add More Gun Controls that criminals won't obey any way. Murder has been against the law for centuries, but increasingly still going on, sometimes unpunished.

Please keep your gun grabbing hands off legally owned guns.Why not enforce the laws already on the books. Tell D.A. To do their jobs, go after the illegal guns. It is not legal guns that is the problem, it is the illegal guns. If more people carried legally crime could go down because the bad guys won’t know whose packing and could respond to crime. Thank you for reading my response. Alexander G. Morris IV.

The attack on the right to keep and bear arms has only increased over the past 18 months since the Supreme Court clarified in the Bruen decision the standard to which modern gun control legislation must be held. Many politicians around the country know that the bills put forth since that time are unconstitutional, but they also know it usually takes years to throw out their unconstitutional bills through court, and by then they have already cost time, money, and lives of American citizens. Rather than confront the underlying issues of our nation that lead to violence, they choose to take the easy way out and simply blame inanimate objects to deflect from their own political incompetency. Virginia representatives need to be better than that. The bills proposed are either duplicative of federal law, pointless, or dangerous. All are unconstitutional. All are a reflection of a disregard for commonsense safety measures like taking criminals off the streets. These bills must not be passed. Not because they will be signed into law, but because its the duty of Virginia state representatives to uphold the constitution and work to solve problems. These bills due neither.

Please do not vote for or advance any anti gun bills. Each one limits a citizens 2nd Amendment rights... I.E. banning commonly owned and used semi automatic rifles, which is unconstitutional under Bruen... Raising the age to purchase firearms. If one can serve in the military, one can purchase a firearm. Plus, its unconstitutional under Bruen AND a Virginia court ruled against it as well. Limiting where one can carry. This only creates more soft targets which criminals will not obey anyway. Banning unserialized firearms . Unconstitutional since some were made before 1968, when numbers were not required. Also, people have the right to build unserialized firearms in their homes for personal use. This has never been an issue, but decriminalization of crimes is causing an increase in violent crimes. THAT is a problem. Limiting how many firearms one can purchase in a given period is unfair. These are just a few . Please understand all the anti gun bills are unconstitutional, especially in light of the Bruen decision. I do urge you to vote for any pro gun bills. The right to keep and bear arms is a constitutional right. The Heller, McDonald, and Bruen decisions reinforce that right. The only limits on this right should be for criminals, illegal aliens, and anyone who has been mentally adjudicated/ forced into an institution. The issue we face should be how to repair our broken mental health infrastructure, not to limit the constitutional rights of law abiding citizens. Thank you Mr Raymond Pezzoli

Our freedom was won with illegal and unregistered firearms. Please look to the G.O. A. And VCDL for guidance on Second Amendment issues. Freedom first, safety second.

I support these bills!

Hello, My name is Sameet Singh, I was born in Punjab, India and moved to Northern Virginia when I was 1 year old. Since then, I’veattended some great K-12 schools in the NOVA area, graduated from George Mason University in 2020, and now work in the Cyber Security field, serving one of our largest US Government Departments. My message to you today is not regarding any single bill in particular, but more of a mindset. I’m sure everyone here has a family that they would do anything for. We work hard everyday to provide for and to protect our families. And a big part in being able to protect, is having the right tool to protect yourself and your family members. This is why the best tool to have at your disposal is a firearm, a gun. Because if you or your family were attacked by someone in your home or out and about in public, a firearm, would be the best tool to have to save yourself and them from an attacker. Even if you’re able to call the police, it’ll at least take a few minutes for them to arrive, and sadly, within those minutes, only a few seconds are needed to completely change your world. Therefore, you are always your OWN first responser, before any other help arrives. This is why, anything, that would hinder your ability to protect yourself or your family with the best tool that you could use, a firearm, should really be re-thought. Unfortunately our society is not at the point where crime dosen’t happen, there’s no supernatural being or superhero that will swoop in to protect us in our times of need, there’s no Spider-Man or Superman who will save the day for us. However, the next best thing we have, is an responsibly armed citizen. A citizen who who is able to be gentle and loving with their kids and partner, but at the same time, prepared and alert at a moments notice when danger reveals itself. Thank you for listening, and thank you for your service to your communities, I wish you all a prosperous new year. Best, Sameet Singh

The Supreme Court has ruled that localities do not have the authority to declare broad swaths of spaces as "gun-free zones" and if private property managers wish to forbid firearms and weapons from their property they already have that right. Voting on such an unconstitutional bill is simply a waste of time where clear court rulings already apply. Many of these other bills have already been ruled unconstitutional under Bruen. And some of these bills such as making a BB gun a felony when on school grounds is simply idiotic. The House needs to stop wasting time on idiotic and frivolous bills that are simply nothing less than virtue signaling. There is real work to be done and you should attend to that business and not such tripe.

HB12 - Jones . I not not support . All firearms dealers currently offer a Firearm locking device on the sale or transfer of handguns. All new firearm come with a locking device and warning labels. child safety warning required. This doesn't change the current practice by dealers in offering for free locking devices. HB 23 Weapons; possession or transportation into facility that provides mental health services, etc. I do not support,. This bill does not exempt ems medical services or the fire service which many carry concealed when transporting patients to an emergency room or mental health facility on the duty. HB158 - McClure I do not support . All firearms dealers currently offer a Firearm locking device on the sale or transfer of handguns. All new firearm come with a locking device and warning labels. child safety warning required. This doesn't change the current practice by dealers in offering for free locking devices. HB183 - Simon HB289 - Wiley I support carrying a concealed handgun with a permit into public parking lots and storing there gun makes sense and do not unarm the citizen while in their personal vehicle. HB351 - Clark I not not support . All firearms dealers currently offer a Firearm locking device on the sale or transfer of handguns. All new firearm come with a locking device and warning labels. child safety warning required. This doesn't change the current practice by dealers in offering for free locking devices. most police departments give away free locking devices. HB585 - Mundon King I do not support this bill changes little firearms transactions which must be performed at a already approved ATF dealer location. 1.5miles is overreach by the state. HB756 - Walker I do not support. This limits gun rights. Not protection for EMS or fire personnel HB791 - Henson I do not support. This bill eliminates the number of programs that have pneumatic bb gun competition for 4 H at private or religious schools. HB861 - Hernandez I do not support,. This bill does not exempt ems medical services or the fire service which many carry concealed when transporting patients to an emergency room or mental health facility in the duty. HB872 - Earley I support . Always a lawful citizen to store a lawfully possessed firearm and ammunition in a locked private motor vehicle parked at any parking area owned or controlled by the Commonwealth. HB1141 - Cordoza I support HB1174 - Sickles I do not support changing the definition of an assault weapon widely and increasing the age which will make little difference. HB1198 - Scott, P.A. I support in reducing the fee

Vietnam Veteran - Retired Special Agent & LEO ( military 19 yrs & Federal 10 plus years) - that is me. Please consider the Bill of Rights; law abiding citizens rights to freedoms and rights of self protection. Criminals don’t follow laws against violence and criminal acts. Thank you

I oppose all of the gun control measures proposed in this session. I support Mr. Freitas' proposal for permitless carry.

Seems to me the General Assembly needs to pay attention to the Supreme Court rulings. Most of these bills if not all ignore what the Court has ruled on. Does the Gov. of Virginia think they are above the highest court in the land? Also, do not think for a Nano second that I believe these bills are about crime control. They are all about people control PERIOD. A Tyrannical state. I will fight this!!

I am submitting comments in opposition to these anti-gun rights bills. These bills do nothing to increase actual safety of Virginians. They serve only to further infringe upon our Second Amendment rights and those rights enshrined in our Virginia Constitution. Instead of focusing on the root causes of violent crimes, Democrats have chosen to target lawful Virginians' firearms rights. Most of these bills are a false solution for non-existent problems. Some of these bills would flagrantly be un-Constitutional and in opposition to prior U.S. Supreme Court decisions to include the Heller and Bruen decisions. In the 2023 Virginia elections, no candidate ran on a pro-gun control platform, therefore no mandate was handed to the House to implement such infringements. Virginians made our pro-Second Amendment stance clear in RIchmond in January 2020 when 40,000 people rallied against similar bills during that session and over 95% of Virginia counties' Board of Supervisors passed Second Amendment Sanctuary statuses. I urge the Committee Members to vote No on these bills. Thank you.

As a constituent, I urge you to OPPOSE the following bills: HB 12, Jones, requires a locking device and informational stickers to be included with every handgun sold. Federal law already covers this and it is an unnecessary expense for gun dealers. HB 23, Laufer, prohibits guns in hospitals and emergency rooms. Not constitutional under Bruen and disarms visitors, family, and staff. HB 158, McClure, requires a locking device and informational stickers to be included with every handgun sold. Federal law already covers this and it is an unnecessary expense for gun dealers. HB 183, Simon, requires all firearms in a home be secured if there is a minor in the home. Current law already covers 14 and under. 15, 16, and 17-year-olds have used guns to save lives by stopping home invasions or violent attacks on family members. HB 585, Mundon King, prevents home-based gun dealers from operating within 1.5 miles of a school. Unconstitutional and a solution to a non-existent problem. Home-based gun dealers don't have signs outside of their home generally. The customer has to be invited in. Convenience stores that have liquor, tobacco products, and vaping products are open to the public and within 1.5 miles of schools, yet there is no concern about that. HB 791, Hanson, makes BB gun possession on school groups a FELONY. Another solution to a problem that doesn't exist. HB 861, Hernandez, prohibits guns in hospitals and emergency rooms. Not constitutional under Bruen and disarms visitors, family, and staff. HB 1174, Sickles, makes it illegal for anyone under 21 to purchase any kind of firearm. A Virginia court has struck down part of the Universal Background Check law because it made it impossible for 18, 19, and 20-year-olds to purchase a handgun. Other states have also struck down such prohibitions under Bruen.

NOT ONE OF THESE BILLS ARE CONSTITUTIONAL &/OR NECESSARY! THEY'RE SIMPLY SOLUTIONS IN SEARCH OF NONEXISTENT PROBLEMS! HB 12: Federal law already covers this and it is an unnecessary expense for gun dealers. HB 23: Not constitutional under Bruen and disarms visitors, family, and staff. HB 158: Federal law already covers this and it is an unnecessary expense for gun dealers. HB 183: Current law already covers 14 and under. 15, 16, and 17-year-olds have used guns to save lives by stopping home invasions or violent attacks on family members. HB 585: Unconstitutional and a solution to a non-existent problem. Home-based gun dealers don't have signs outside of their home generally. The customer has to be invited in. Convenience stores that have liquor, tobacco products, and vaping products are open to the public and within 1.5 miles of schools, yet there is no concern about that. HB 791: Another solution to a problem that doesn't exist. HB 861: Not constitutional under Bruen and disarms visitors, family, and staff. HB 1174: A Virginia court has struck down part of the Universal Background Check law because it made it impossible for 18, 19, and 20-year-olds to purchase a handgun. Other states have also struck down such prohibitions under Bruen. Thank you.

HB 12, Jones - requires a locking device and informational stickers to be included with every handgun sold. These requirements represent an unnecessary expense for gun dealers. HB 23, Laufer, prohibits guns in hospitals and emergency rooms. Not constitutional under the Supreme Court's Bruen decision and disarms visitors, family, and staff. HB 158, McClure, requires a locking device and informational stickers to be included with every handgun sold. Federal law already covers this and it is an unnecessary expense for gun dealers. HB 183, Simon, requires all firearms in a home be secured if there is a minor in the home. Current law already covers 14 and under. 15, 16, and 17-year-olds have used guns to save lives by stopping home invasions or violent attacks on family members. HB 585, Mundon King, prevents home-based gun dealers from operating within 1.5 miles of a school. Unconstitutional and a solution to a non-existent problem. Home-based gun dealers don't have signs outside of their home generally. The customer has to be invited in. Convenience stores that have liquor, tobacco products, and vaping products are open to the public and within 1.5 miles of schools, yet there is no concern about that. HB 791, Hanson, makes BB gun possession on school groups a FELONY. Another solution to a problem that doesn't exist. HB 861, Hernandez, prohibits guns in hospitals and emergency rooms. Not constitutional under Bruen and disarms visitors, family, and staff. HB 1174, Sickles, makes it illegal for anyone under 21 to purchase any kind of firearm. A Virginia court has struck down part of the Universal Background Check law because it made it impossible for 18, 19, and 20-year-olds to purchase a handgun. Other states have also struck down such prohibitions under Bruen.

This is just a solution in search of a problem. Don't make laws we do not need. Thank you!

So there is nothing as important in and for Virginia other then Supporting Communist Legislation against the Constitution of VA and the US Constitution that all this effort must be the first thing on the agenda when a Demo-rat Majority is fraudulently elected to the House and Senate. You fools must make the people that pay you off very happy to have you ear and sell yourself to the Communist Party. Demo-rats are an embarrassment to Freedom and Good Government. Patrick Henry, you may have heard of him? Show me that age and country where the rights and liberties of the people were placed on the sole chance of their rulers being good men, without a consequent loss of liberty? ********************************** The eternal difference between right and wrong does not fluctuate, it is immutable. ********************************** The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government - lest it come to dominate our lives and interests. ********************************** Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands? ********************************** Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.... The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun.

HB 861, Hernandez, prohibits guns in hospitals and emergency rooms. Not constitutional under Bruen and disarms visitors, family, and staff.

I urge you to OPPOSE the following bills: HB 12, HB 23, HB 158, HB 183, HB 585, HB 791, HB 1174 For some of these bills... they are meaningless, as they are already covered by Federal Law... the committee and legislature should not be wasting time on bills and laws that are already on the books! For some of the other bills... they are already deemed UNCONSTITUTIONAL under the 2nd Amendment and existing Supreme Court decisions. If these become law, they have a high probably of being voided/vacated within a year or two. Aside from taking away existing rights of Virginia citizens in that time... you will ensure lawyers on both sides of the issue will make a lot of money so they can drive fancy cars and send their kids to expensive schools. Stop indirectly putting money (half of which are paid with tax dollars) in lawyers’ pockets. I'd rather our courts address real crime and issues... not laws already deemed unconstitutional. Many of these bills attempt to create a tactical "solution"... except that the specific problem the "solution" addresses doesn't or never existed or occurred in the Commonwealth. I request that my elected officials address meaningful solutions, and ensure existing rights of law-abiding citizens are not infringed upon. Thank you for your time.

These proposals are solutions in search of problems. Many of these violate the Bruen decision. I would love for us to eliminate sovereign immunity. These politicians must be able to be sued personally, held both criminally and civilly liable for any vote in favor of a law, if they knew or should have known it violates or God given rights.

I feel violated. This legislation scares me and I'm a constituent. Show me the evidence that the legislation you are proposing will actually reduce crime and violence. There is none. These are "do something" acts that restrict my right as a good, sane, sober, moral and prudent citizen to keep and bear arms. If there were a violent criminal act for which I was now unprepared, restricted in my ability to defend innocent life, who will bear responsibility for that?

Good afternoon Delegates, I stand in opposition to all of these unconstitutional bills that will not do anything to curb and only demonize legal, lawful Virginians. Also, many of these bill are redundant to either existing commonwealth law or federal regulations. Lawful firearm owners are the back bone of this great commonwealth and country. I urge you all to recognize that Virginia is one of the safest states in the nation and that all of these proposed laws are violations of the Constitution and should not moved forward to a vote. Thank you for your time and consideration on this very important matter D Scott Burns

As a born and bred Virginian; a father and husband; a disabled veteran and active member in the community; I cannot understand why individuals who are elected, willingly do what they can to violate both the Virginia and United States Constitutions to penalize law-abiding citizens such as myself. I have spent a life of duty and dedication in service and occupations to protect our State and Country from those who wish to subjecgate its citizens or worse. Not only do all of these restrictions seek a perspective only solution, they do so at the cost of innocent citizens. Law-abiding citizens do not commit drug gang offenses, home invasions, mass shootings. These are the acts of career criminals or mentally disturbed individuals. None of these proposed bills addresses those issues or the deeper problem of why people are so quick to commit these acts. Murder is murder, whether a gun is used or a cane, it is still wrong. I'm more concerned about why, instead of the tool. Obviously, certain politicians are only worried about the tools. These proposed bills are all clearly agenda focused without factual information to support true results that may be gained by violating state and federal laws to enact. The Supreme Court very clearly defined the right to arms and most of these bills would violate those freedoms. Nor is it legislators purview to dictate what citizens do with what they have within the confines if their own home. THAT, is yet another violation. It is also disturbing that legislators seem to be focused on separating Virginia from reciprocity, thus affecting relations with other states, which ultimately led to a civil war last time. They are also creating more areas where people who mean to harm can do so without fear of being stopped such as adding a new gun free zone. This is a very bad and ill-conceived premise. If the point has not been made yet, then perhaps citizens need to start holding legislators civilly responsible for lives lost as a result of such zones. Clearly they are not effective. I ask that you stop operating under partisan politics and quid pro quo agendas which only serve to penalize and subjegate our citizenry. This is not what servicemembers and veterans served, sacrificed and vowed to defend. Freedom has a cost, and it is difficult to understand, especially through the fear and pain. There is NO such thing as safety. There never was, and never will be. America has MANY enemies out there in the world, and it's citizens; it's armed citizens; are the LAST line of defense. Continuing to attempt to disarm law-abiding citizens only further prompts the question by citizens for the legislators... "Whose side are you truly on?" Please repeal these bills and focus more on actual crime, deterrence for early release, stiffer penalties for existing criminals who continue to commit them and stop bringing in more and more illegal immigrants. Thank you for your attention. Lessons of the Past, Lost to Actions of the Present, Will Forever Damn the Future. -Sean Flippin - 1989

Please stop wasting our money, as a taxpayer, on initiatives and regulation that are at best ineffective and at worst making things safer for Criminals. Creating areas that are gun-free makes safe areas for Criminals as they know that their victims will not have the tools necessary to defend themselves. Stop trying to make us, the public, less safe. Stop releasing criminals, especially repeat-offenders, Releasing criminals causes us to acquire tools to keep ourselves and our families safe.

As a constituent, I urge you to OPPOSE the following bills: HB 12, Jones, requires a locking device and informational stickers to be included with every handgun sold. Federal law already covers this and it is an unnecessary expense for gun dealers. HB 23, Laufer, prohibits guns in hospitals and emergency rooms. Not constitutional under Bruen and disarms visitors, family, and staff. HB 158, McClure, requires a locking device and informational stickers to be included with every handgun sold. Federal law already covers this and it is an unnecessary expense for gun dealers. HB 183, Simon, requires all firearms in a home be secured if there is a minor in the home. Current law already covers 14 and under. 15, 16, and 17-year-olds have used guns to save lives by stopping home invasions or violent attacks on family members. HB 585, Mundon King, prevents home-based gun dealers from operating within 1.5 miles of a school. Unconstitutional and a solution to a non-existent problem. Home-based gun dealers don't have signs outside of their home generally. The customer has to be invited in. Convenience stores that have liquor, tobacco products, and vaping products are open to the public and within 1.5 miles of schools, yet there is no concern about that. HB 791, Hanson, makes BB gun possession on school groups a FELONY. Another solution to a problem that doesn't exist. HB 861, Hernandez, prohibits guns in hospitals and emergency rooms. Not constitutional under Bruen and disarms visitors, family, and staff. HB 1174, Sickles, makes it illegal for anyone under 21 to purchase any kind of firearm. A Virginia court has struck down part of the Universal Background Check law because it made it impossible for 18, 19, and 20-year-olds to purchase a handgun. Other states have also struck down such prohibitions under Bruen. I thank you. Mr. & Mrs Lon Horiuchi

Everyone of these bills further restricting the rights of the law abiding citizen should be voted down.

This bill must be OPPOSED. These bills do NOTHING to prevent/reduce crime. In fact, these types of bills will eventually ENABLE and allow MORE crime (just look at crime in Maryland and DC) by reducing Virginian's ability to adequately and easily protect themselves. This bill is immoral, unjust, unconstitutional and racist as it will HARM black and brown people, other minorities, women, the elderly, and children who will be the eventual victims as a result of laws like this. Using these types of bills to slowly deny the public's human right of self defense will NOT save lives or keep people safe. This has been proven again and again. As lawmakers, you have an obligation to ensure that the laws you enact *protect* our God-given, human right of self defense -- you should *not* be disenfranchising us and making us MORE vulnerable to crime and injustices with these ignorant bills. Thank you.

As a voting resident and veteran I strongly OPPOSE the following bills: HB 12, Jones, requires a locking device and informational stickers to be included with every handgun sold. Federal law already covers this and it is an unnecessary expense for gun dealers. HB 23, Laufer, prohibits guns in hospitals and emergency rooms. Not constitutional under Bruen and disarms visitors, family, and staff. HB 158, McClure, requires a locking device and informational stickers to be included with every handgun sold. Federal law already covers this and it is an unnecessary expense for gun dealers. HB 183, Simon, requires all firearms in a home be secured if there is a minor in the home. Current law already covers 14 and under. 15, 16, and 17-year-olds have used guns to save lives by stopping home invasions or violent attacks on family members. HB 585, Mundon King, prevents home-based gun dealers from operating within 1.5 miles of a school. Unconstitutional and a solution to a non-existent problem. Home-based gun dealers don't have signs outside of their home generally. The customer has to be invited in. Convenience stores that have liquor, tobacco products, and vaping products are open to the public and within 1.5 miles of schools, yet there is no concern about that. HB 791, Hanson, makes BB gun possession on school groups a FELONY. Another solution to a problem that doesn't exist. HB 861, Hernandez, prohibits guns in hospitals and emergency rooms. Not constitutional under Bruen and disarms visitors, family, and staff. HB 1174, Sickles, makes it illegal for anyone under 21 to purchase any kind of firearm. A Virginia court has struck down part of the Universal Background Check law because it made it impossible for 18, 19, and 20-year-olds to purchase a handgun. Other states have also struck down such prohibitions under Bruen. This bills have gone beyond the scope of "safety" and are clearly an attempt to strip the constitutional rights of law abiding citizens of this great Commonwealth. The majority of these bills have already been struck down my the SCOTUS. Remember your oath: I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God. v/r Thomas Speich

I do not support any proposed gun restriction bills. I have been a resident of VA for 40 years and have never been in trouble with the law. I do not think the bills that are being proposed will deter gun violence. The issue is not guns. It is mental health.

Dear Democrats proposing duplicative and unconstitutional bills: It is apparent that you seek to propose bills that ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL based on the US Supreme Court. Please reference the Heller and Bruen decisions. It would appear you are taking that as a mere suggestion? Further, the "catch me if you can" approach to lawmaking is ridiculous. Yes, we know the strategy made famous by Obama...pass laws you know are unconstitutional knowing it will take ~5 years and millions of dollars to undo them. In the interim, the damage is done. This is the stuff of tyrants. HB 12: DUPLICATIVE OF FEDERAL LAW. HB 23: UNCONSTITUTIONAL UNDER BRUEN. HB 158: DUPLICATIVE OF FEDERAL LAW. HB 183: DUPLICATIVE. 14 and under is covered. There are many cases were 15, 16, 17 year olds defending themselves and family from crime using firearms. HB 585: UNCONSTITUTIONAL. HB 791: a solution looking for a problem. Most normal people grew up playing with BB guns. Cite all the crime associated with BB guns? HB 861: UNCONSTITUTIONAL UNDER BRUEN. HB 1174: UNCONSTITUTIONAL UNDER BRUEN. already heard and struck down in other states. The disarmament agenda is tiresome. If you spent half the energy in Richmond, Hampton, Norfolk, and Petersburg, 95%+ of "gun violence" would be taken care of. Your main perpetrator group is black men killing black men, 18-34. Don't you read the Virginia Crime Commission's reports? if you were serious, you'd be going after ACTUAL criminals vs. passing meaningless laws that only impact the law abiding.

HB 12, Jones, requires a locking device and informational stickers to be included with every handgun sold. Federal law already covers this and it is an unnecessary expense for gun dealers. HB 23, Laufer, prohibits guns in hospitals and emergency rooms. Not constitutional under Bruen and disarms visitors, family, and staff. HB 158, McClure - Federal law already covers this and it is an unnecessary expense for gun dealers. HB 183, Simon - Current law already covers 14 and under. 15, 16, and 17-year-olds have used guns to save lives by stopping home invasions or violent attacks on family members. HB 585, Mundon King, is Unconstitutional and a solution to a non-existent problem. Home-based gun dealers don't have signs outside of their home generally. The customer has to be invited in. Convenience stores that have liquor, tobacco products, and vaping products are open to the public and within 1.5 miles of schools, yet there is no concern about that. HB 791, Hanson, makes BB gun possession on school groups a FELONY. Another solution to a problem that doesn't exist. HB 861, Hernandez, is not constitutional under Bruen and disarms visitors, family, and staff. HB 1174, Sickles, A Virginia court has struck down part of the Universal Background Check law because it made it impossible for 18, 19, and 20-year-olds to purchase a handgun. Other states have also struck down such prohibitions under Bruen.

We are encouraging our state politicians to work on meaningful solutions that will actually help reduce gun violence, violence in general, theft, and improve the quality of our lives. Let's start enforcing current laws that are reasonable and remove those that aren't. Work on quickly improving the number of quality jobs in VA. Through good local educational services that focus on the required skills, people can improve their own lives, the lives of their family, and have more hope for the future. Childcare assistance can help families that are working. It's time to create a new playbook and stop passing additional restrictive laws that only burden our citizens and families. Start improving our lives which leads to less violence, good jobs, and strong families that can raise our children better.

Why is it that you want to continue to go against your sworn oath to office and institute further gun restrictions and control on law biding citizens? With control of the senate and house why don't you focus on the root of the problem which is more to improve the socio-economic issues regions face which should in turn lower drug and gang related problems which in turn is the true reason behind your "gun violence" issue you continue to speak on. WE DO NOT HAVE A GUN VIOLENCE ISSUE, we have violence issue that you need to address not through more gun restrictions. Enough with the gun control bills, it is the first thing the democratic party pushes when they get control of the majority. Use this time to better the communities or is that just tok difficult for you? As all you want to do is make it so criminals have more power over law biding citizens, pull our children into gang and drug culture and go easy on crime so they know there is no accountability for their actions.

I wish congress would treat firearms and firearms owners in Virginia like they do illegal aliens. Turn a blind eye to them and just let them be free. Never make rules about securing access or entry to them. Ensure that none of them need paperwork or if they do, wait so long before you check to make sure any of it is accurate, you never find the illegals and in this case, firearms. That would be swell.

"The right to keepand bear arms shall not be infringed..." Those who carry firearms should not leave them in vehicles. Many guns used in crimes are stolen, often from vehicles. Hospitals and other places people gather are where trained armed civilians can thwart a crime or mass shooting. The AR-15 is a civilian multi-purpose rifle -- easy to operate, inexpensive, accurate, low recoil, low cost ammo, and potentially lethal when necessary. It is the best rifle ever invented for U.S. civilian use...hunting, self and home defense, and target shooting. Resources in VA should be used for law enforcement, crime prevention and mental health. Take ILLEGAL guns off the streets.

Given the second amendment of the constitution, there shall be no laws that prevent me from being able to protect myself. I am a conceal carry holder and have been for almost 10 years now. We vehemently oppose any laws that would prevent Conceal Carry Holders from carrying our weapon. Our goal is to have protection and not need it rather than needing protection, and not being able to have it. We will not comply.

When will misguided legislators learn that infringing the right of law abiding citizens to exercise our Second Amendment liberties does nothing to make the public safe? In fact, it makes us all less safe because criminals love restrictions on lawful firearm ownership. Wake up! Follow the Constitution. “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed!” Bishop E.W. Jackson STAND Virginia PAC

First, SCOTUS has addressed gun rights; access to magazines & ammo multiple times. Multiple times, SCOTUS' decision has sided with law abiding gun owners. I am curious as to why you continue to suppress our God given constitutionally protected right to bear arms? I can only assume one of two reasons. Either (A) you are completely uneducated as to the writers of the constitution, as well as their separate and several memoirs on the right to keep and bear arms; and furthermore ignorant of the right of the People to keep and bear arms as a result of the People having fought against tyranny using NOT federally provided military arms and ammunition - rather, PRIVATELY owned arms and ammunition. Below are just a few examples of historically accurate statements on said RIGHTS : “No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.” – Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776 “A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks.” – Thomas Jefferson, letter to Peter Carr, August 19, 1785 “Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops.” – Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, October 10, 1787 “To disarm the people…[i]s the most effectual way to enslave them.” – George Mason, The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution, June 14, 1788 “I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers.” – George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788 My questions are simply these, who do you expect to follow these laws that you put forth? Criminals? Why would you expect someone who is a CRIMINAL to obey the law? Maybe you should take some time and learn the definition? Which brings me to part (B) as to why I think you are trying to bar citizens from owning semi-auto rifles & there average magazines - you fear us to the point where you want to disarm us in much the same way HITLER disarmed HIS constituency. Clearly Thomas Jefferson had it correct - when he said “The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes…. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” – Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776. Tyranny is the only reasonable explanation for your efforts because the lies spread by the US Government regarding death tolls, etc., is a complete fallacy. All you have to do is a little independent research regarding 'mass shootings.' And yes, private citizens did in fact have legal ownership of canons all the way through the Civil War era. Only an idiot would believe the lies that they did not.

Comments Document

In Caetano v. Massachusetts (2016), the Supreme Court reiterated its earlier rulings that "the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding" and that its protection is not limited to "only those weapons useful in warfare". New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen (2022) is a landmark: [ In a 6–3 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that New York's law was unconstitutional and that the ability to carry a pistol in public was a constitutional right guaranteed by the Second Amendment. — A 2022 poll found that 64% of Americans were in favor of the ruling in contrast with 35% of Americans that say they oppose the decision.[50] Additionally, 36%, the largest single share, said they strongly support the Court's ruling in contrast with 16% who said they strongly oppose it. The Legal Aid Society said the decision "may be an affirmative step toward ending arbitrary licensing standards that have inhibited lawful Black and Brown gun ownership in New York."[46] Former house minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R‑CA) supported the ruling, saying it "rightfully ensures the right of all law-abiding Americans to defend themselves without unnecessary government interference."[47] Law professor Steve Vladeck said the decision will "have monumental ramifications far beyond carrying firearms in public" and predicts there will be a "slew of litigation challenging any and every gun-control measure". Tread AROUND the 2nd amendment to our Constitution of the United States of America. Around it. Not on it; not lightly upon it! Carefully consider your vote! (Attachment: Photo of one night of a dangerous riot in a public place.)

Please leave law abiding citizens alone and focus the Commonwealth’s limited resources on the arrest, conviction, and incarceration of violent individuals. Paul Trible Blue Grass, VA

Suggest instead of Firearms Safety Subcommittee... Crimes Safety Subcommittee. greatly more effective! THE REAL ISSUE!

None of these proposals will impact the behavior of a criminal - only making law abiding citizens vulnerable as a new "gun free" zone attracts people seeking to make a statement with a gun and want time to do so before someone with a gun shows up. Additionally, most of these targeted problems are not currently problems or represent a growing trend that needs additional protections enacted to address. In my view, these bills have limited to no chance to provide additional protections or impact criminal behavior but DO further strip your constituents God give rights to provide the illusion of protection.

As a constituent, I urge you to OPPOSE the following bills: HB 12, Jones, requires a locking device and informational stickers to be included with every handgun sold. Federal law already covers this and it is an unnecessary expense for gun dealers. HB 23, Laufer, prohibits guns in hospitals and emergency rooms. Not constitutional under Bruen and disarms visitors, family, and staff. HB 158, McClure, requires a locking device and informational stickers to be included with every handgun sold. Federal law already covers this and it is an unnecessary expense for gun dealers. HB 183, Simon, requires all firearms in a home be secured if there is a minor in the home. Current law already covers 14 and under. 15, 16, and 17-year-olds have used guns to save lives by stopping home invasions or violent attacks on family members. HB 585, Mundon King, prevents home-based gun dealers from operating within 1.5 miles of a school. Unconstitutional and a solution to a non-existent problem. Home-based gun dealers don't have signs outside of their home generally. The customer has to be invited in. Convenience stores that have liquor, tobacco products, and vaping products are open to the public and within 1.5 miles of schools, yet there is no concern about that. HB 791, Hanson, makes BB gun possession on school groups a FELONY. Another solution to a problem that doesn't exist. HB 861, Hernandez, prohibits guns in hospitals and emergency rooms. Not constitutional under Bruen and disarms visitors, family, and staff. HB 1174, Sickles, makes it illegal for anyone under 21 to purchase any kind of firearm. A Virginia court has struck down part of the Universal Background Check law because it made it impossible for 18, 19, and 20-year-olds to purchase a handgun. Other states have also struck down such prohibitions under Bruen.

I'm a volunteer with Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, and I support this bill.

I am a member of Virginia Moms for Change, a gun violence prevention group, and I support the following bills: HB1174, HB1181, HB1195, HB12, HB1424, HB1462, HB158, HB175, HB183, HB23, HB270, HB318, HB319, HB351, HB362, HB585, HB602, HB637, HB791, HB797, HB798, HB799, HB861, HB916, & HB945 I am a member of Virginia Moms for Change, a gun violence prevention group, and I oppose these bills: HB1030, HB1141, HB1198, HB1230, HB1235, HB1321, HB1325, HB1386, HB289, HB389, HB756, & HB872 Innocent children are dying on our watch. Please do something.

My fellow Virginia’s I write today to comment on the bills before you. I am a retired Army veterans. I grew up in Virginia, went to ODU and instead of seeking residency in other states, stayed a Virginian and paid taxes while on active duty. I fought in war and lost good Soldiers and friends defending this nation, you and our Constitution. I retired in Virginia because I love this state. Your body will decide, with its vote, to either infringe on our rights or defend them. I ask you to defend them like those friends and Soldiers that also did. I am a responsible gun owner who raised his children to be responsible gun owners (all three are serving or served). I am also a CCP holder who is willing to defend his fellow citizens. If you vote for any of these bills to limit our rights it will impact my ability to defend myself and my family. Please do the right thing and defend the 2nd Amd. My wife and I already decided to leave the state if you enact these measures to limit our rights. Thank you Oliver Rose

HB 12, Federal law already covers this and it is an unnecessary expense for gun dealers. HB 23, Not constitutional under Bruen and disarms visitors, family, and staff. HB 158, Federal law already covers this and it is an unnecessary expense for gun dealers. HB 183, Current law already covers 14 and under. 15, 16, and 17-year-olds have used guns to save lives by stopping home invasions or violent attacks on family members. HB 585, Unconstitutional and a solution to a non-existent problem. Home-based gun dealers don't have signs outside of their home generally. The customer has to be invited in. Convenience stores that have liquor, tobacco products, and vaping products are open to the public and within 1.5 miles of schools, yet there is no concern about that. HB 791, Hanson, makes BB gun possession on school groups a FELONY. Another solution to a problem that doesn't exist. HB 861, Not constitutional under Bruen and disarms visitors, family, and staff. HB 1174, A Virginia court has struck down part of the Universal Background Check law because it made it impossible for 18, 19, and 20-year-olds to purchase a handgun. Other states have also struck down such prohibitions under Bruen.

The selected bills are unconstitutional! They must be voted down!

This proposed legislation is blatantly unconstitutional and, if passed, it will, no doubt, be challenged in court. The taxpayers of Virginia will then be obligated to defend these unconstitutional measures, and those defenses will almost certainly lose. This will result in costly, meaningless court costs for all Virginia taxpayers. Those tax dollars could be spent on more meaningful and productive activities that benefit all citizens.

HB 23 above disarms legally armed citizens while doing nothing to prevent crime. It makes another "self defense free" zone where criminals will ignore it.

All of these anti 2nd amendment bills DO NOT represent the vast majority of the citizenry of Virginia. All of these anti-gun bills will do absolutely nothing to impact crime, and are only a form of punishment to responsible gun owners in the commonwealth. These bills are meant to only meant to elicit “feel-good” emotions for those sensing they are impacting gun crime. Stop letting criminals go free early and do not focus the legislatures efforts on infringing on the rights of the people to legally defend themselves from those who mean to do grievous harm.

It is outrageous that the General Assembly is using our 2nd Amendment right to punish law abiding citizens who have done nothing wrong other then to defend themselves. It’s clear that Democrats pander to their bases without a thought about the citizens of this Commonwealth or this nation. This issue amongst others, galvanize the voters to get out and vote for the party that does not seek to encroach our rights under the State and Federal Constitution. There is zero proof that We The People are deranged killers, a mob or even the radical right that the Democrat who currently occupies the White House has said. He’d called us Nazis and portrayed honest, hardworking and law abiding citizens as the problem. We are not. Opens border, out of control spending, child indoctrination and parroting the DNC is the problem that is self inflicted and deserves nothing less then our disgust and rebuke come November 2024. The General Assembly reflects the divide between Northern Virginia to Richmond and the difference in South Eastern, Western Virginia. The Democrat party and Legislature know full well that gun control laws if enacted, will not reduce violence but increase victimhood that they’ll blame on Republicans and the cycle continues. Pathetic fools and they wonder why I’ve stopped contributing to candidates who never deliver to fools who govern us.

As a woman and a 30 plus year Emergency Department nurse I ask you to reject these onerous gun control laws. Laws like these discourage women who are most at risk from being able to obtain the means to defend themselves. I worked many a late night shift in Northern Virginia and walked through empty parking lots and garages worried about my safety. Women should not have to suffer this and should have ready access to the means to defend themselves. You aren't disarming criminals your are disarming women.

What, other than trampling rights of law-abiding citizens, do you think gun- free zones accomplish? This is a serious question.

The bills under consideration will do nothing to increase the safety of Virginians while infringing on our right to defend ourselves. They are designed to make it more difficult to obtain a firearm, possess a firearm, or use a firearm to defend oneself or others. Meanwhile criminals will continue unabated. Moreover, most of these unconstitutional laws have been rendered moot as they have been struck down by state and federal courts. As a former police officer and detective I implore you to reject these useless and unconstitutional laws. Thank you

No more gun control legislation. It's not the gun that's the issue. It's the mentally ill folks that obtained a gun.

I strongly oppose these bills as they are direct infringements on the 2nd Amendment of The Constitution. Most of these have already been found to be unconstitutional by various courts yet they are still being presented as bills. I am completely against these and any other such bills that infringe on the constitutional and inalienable rights of the Citizens of the United States of America and of the Commonwealth of Virginia.

No more unconstitutional gun control.

I am a member of Virginia Moms for Change, a gun violence prevention group, and I support these bills. I expect to see more gun violence prevention legislation *actually pass* since there is so much nonpartisan alignment on this topic. The status quo is unacceptable. Our pro-gun culture is a threat to our children, and a slap in the face to every person who has lost their lives to gun violence. Enough is enough - policy over prayers.

I am a member of Virginia Moms for Change, a gun violence prevention group, and I support this bill.

I am a member of Virginia Moms for Change, a gun violence prevention group, and I support this bill. Gun violence in our communities and in our state is heartbreaking and changes need to be made to protect the citizens of Virginia.

I am a member of Virginia moms for change and I support these bills.

I am a member of Virginia Moms for Change and I support these bills. To all responsible gun owners: you shouldn't be afraid of these common sense bills. These bills are directed at people who are not handling their firearms as the deadly weapons that they can be. Instead of thinking your rights are being taken away, consider instead how safe storage, permits and waiting periods could help the daily gun violence in our country. Keep your guns, we are not trying to take them away. These bills are an opportunity for you, as a responsible gun owner, to be a part of the solution to help cut down on needless violence.

I am a member of Virginia Moms for Change and I support the selected bills. I believe they will make our communities safer and that gun violence is a critical issue we must address with such legislation and more.

I am a member of Virginia Mom's for Change, a group working towards gun violence prevention. We support the bills indicated above.

I am a member of Virginia Moms for Change, a gun violence prevention group. I support bills HB1174 HB1181 HB1195 HB12 HB1424 HB1462 HB158 HB175 HB183 HB23 HB270 HB318 HB319 HB351 HB362 HB585 HB602 HB637 HB791 HB798 HB799 HB861 HB916 HB945

I am a member of Virginia Moms for Change, a gun violence prevention group. I support bills HB1174 HB1181 HB1195 HB12 HB1424 HB1462 HB158 HB175 HB183 HB23 HB270 HB318 HB319 HB351 HB362 HB585 HB602 HB637 HB791 HB798 HB799 HB861 HB916 HB945

and I support these bills. The bills we support are: HB1174, HB1181, HB1195, HB12, HB1424, HB1462, HB158, HB175, HB183, HB23, HB270, HB318, HB319, HB351, HB362, HB585, HB602, HB637, HB791, HB797, HB798, HB799, HB861, HB916, & HB945

I am a member of Virginia Moms for Change, a gun violence prevention group, and I support these bills. The bills we support are: HB1174, HB1181, HB1195, HB12, HB1424, HB1462, HB 158, HB175, HB183, HB23, HB270, HB318, HB319, HB351, HB362, HB585, HB602, HB637, HB791, HB797, HB798, HB799, HB861, HB916, & HB945

I am a member of Virginia Moms for Change, a gun violence prevention group, and I support these bills. The bills we support are: HB1174, HB1181, HB1195, HB12, HB1424, HB1462, HB158, HB175, HB183, HB23, HB270, HB318, HB319, HB351, HB362, HB585, HB602, HB637, HB791, HB797, HB798, HB799, HB861, HB916, & HB945

I am a member of Virginia Moms for Change, a gun violence prevention group, and I support this bill.

The end of solitary confinement must be done My son was murdered in solitary confinement at Red Onion Prison in Pound Va on 1/3/22.

Signup to speak virtually is supposed to be open until noon. It is 11:15 and your site says that requests to speak are closed for this meeting. I am strongly opposed to HB861. It poses a danger to people who may desperately need to defend themselves against the very people who just attacked them, sending them to the emergency room. It also creates a dangerous defense free zone in facilities offering developmental care, which may have nothing at all to do with mental health issues. These facilities may specialize in helping people with learning disabilities, for instance. It is a known fact that criminals intent on doing harm target so-called gun free zones. In fact, the criminals even admit that they prefer them. I urge you to vote against this dangerous and unnecessary legislation.

My name is Jeanne Hanewich from Chesapeake, Virginia and on behalf of the League of Women Voters of Virginia, please support this bill and vote YES.