I am writing to express my strong opposition to the anti-gun bills scheduled for consideration in your subcommittee meeting on January 29, 2026. As a law-abiding citizen who values the rights enshrined in the United States Constitution, particularly the Second Amendment, I urge you to vote against these measures that infringe upon the fundamental right to keep and bear arms. The Second Amendment guarantees the right of the people to keep and bear arms, a right that shall not be infringed. These bills, including but not limited to HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB702, HB871, HB969, and HB1359, represent direct assaults on this constitutional protection. They impose unnecessary restrictions on firearm ownership, possession, and transfer that disproportionately burden responsible gun owners while doing nothing to address the root causes of crime. It is a well-established fact that criminals, by definition, do not obey laws. Measures like bans on certain firearms (HB217), mandatory storage requirements (HB871), prohibitions on unserialized firearms (HB40), and penalties for leaving firearms in vehicles (HB110) will only disarm law-abiding citizens who follow the rules. These individuals are not the source of violent crime; rather, they are often the ones who rely on their Second Amendment rights for self-defense, hunting, and sport. Criminals will continue to acquire and use firearms illegally, unaffected by these new regulations, leaving ordinary Virginians more vulnerable. History and data show that gun control laws do not reduce crime rates but instead empower those who operate outside the law. For example, cities with strict gun laws often experience higher rates of violent crime compared to areas where law-abiding citizens can more freely exercise their rights. These bills will create more "gun-free" zones and bureaucratic hurdles that criminals ignore, effectively turning law-abiding citizens into easier targets. I respectfully request that you reject these infringement on our constitutional rights and focus instead on policies that target actual criminal behavior, such as enforcing existing laws against violent offenders and supporting mental health initiatives. Protecting the Second Amendment is essential to preserving our freedoms and ensuring public safety for all Virginians. Thank you for your time and consideration. I hope you will vote NO on these anti-Second Amendment bills. Sincerely, Bailey Pratt

In reviewing these various bills it seems that many of them disregard the Constitution that was sworn to be upheld. Additionally several have already been ruled on in various courts across the country. They serve to divide constituents especially those who vote rather than provide civil discourse and leadership. They further fail to address larger issues that plague our society. Punishing those who abide by the law and creating penalties for innocent civilians is conceptually flawed. I urge you all to reexamine the methods behind these bills and abandon them at this point. Work toward the greater good and try something that hasn’t already failed repeatedly. Truly focus on serving this great Commonwealth. It will serve all of us better in the future.

As a friend of Adam Turck, the most important thing I want to say first is that Adam was light. He was warmth. He was grace. He loved Superman. He loved his dog Lana. He loved acting. He loved fitness. He loved people. He loved life. He loved with his whole heart and his whole mind and he never let the weight of the world stop him from seeing the good in anyone and everyone. These bills are not only important to the family and friends Adam cultivated in Richmond, but to our community as a whole. Adam did everything right on August 2nd, 2025. He saw a woman in a domestic situation while walking his dog, Lana. He stepped in to try and de-escalate the situation, called the police and never letting that woman out of his sight. He did everything right and it wasn’t enough. A 19-year-old kid pulled a handgun from his backpack and shot Adam in the head. He then turned the gun on himself. That young kid took two lives that day when he never should have been able to put that woman or Adam in that position. He had pending assault charges and was only 19. Any one of the bills The Friends of Adam Turck are supporting today could have saved Adam’s life if they had already been in place. Adam was a superhero in this community, but he shouldn’t have had to be. He should still be here. Lighting up the Richmond Theater Stages, The gym he was a personal trainer at, and the lives of the people who loved him most. The city of Richmond should have long ago implemented gun safety and prevention laws that could have kept Adam here with us today. While no amount of wanting or wishing can bring him back, we can let it not be in vain, by making lasting change that prevents anyone else in Richmond from having to feel the pain we feel with the absence of Adam. He brought light to Richmond, The Theater, The Fitness Industry, and each and every life he touched. Please vote yes on HB 19, HB 21, HB 93, HB 110, and HB 1359

HB1303, I support. The remaining bills are unnecessary and bureaucratic. You are creating bills meant to solve statistically insignificant events. HB1359 and HB217 are particularly objectionable. Requiring a "purchaser license" infringes on the right to bear arms and is a complete duplication of existing background checks. The assault firearm definition is unconstitutional and will not stand up to legal challenge. Our tax dollars and attorney general resources will be wasted on such an obviously flawed legislation. Gun buy back programs are have proven to be a waste of tax payer dollars with no impact on gun crime statistics. HB110 is very heavy handed. Just because someone could detect a weapon in a private motor vehicle should not make that vehicle subject to confiscation by the state nor a penalty applied to the firearm owner. This is totally a way to punish firearm owners without solving any real gun violence crimes that you, as legislators, could better focus your time and effort on. Focus on enforcing existing laws and not letting habitual criminals get away with warnings or light sentencing for their crimes. That is the common sense approach. We have more than enough laws, we do not need more ways to trap law abiding citizens and our merchants with this slew of bills.

The bills under consideration are only going to affect those who have no intention of breaking the law. Coupled with the other bills lessening the penalties for many violent crimes, these will do nothing to prevent crime. Criminals do not follow the law. That is a textbook definition. We have plenty of laws to deal with those who perpetrate crimes. What is needed is to deal with the existing criminals. Stop what leads these people to break the law to begin with. Punish those who commit violent crimes firmly. Stop the revolving door justice that keeps them on the streets committing more crimes. Making the law abiding public defenseless while turning more violent criminals loose makes no sense. Police forces are not bodyguards! All that can be expected after calling 911 is the victim being taken to a hospital, or possibly the morgue, and an investigation, hopefully followed by an arrest. The only person that can hope to defend themselves from these violent criminals is the victim. It would be better to provide a system for more self defense classes for the public. Better help for the victims of violent crime. And fitting punishment for those who have broken the law. None of the proposed bills will do that. I hope that the Constitutional rights of the public will be considered over feel good measures. I thank you for your time in reading my comments and hope you will consider these points in voting on the proposed bills.

I urge committee members to vote against these bills, many of which infringe on our God-given rights as Americans, and some of which are already unconstitutional under existing rulings by the Supreme Court of the United States. Respectfully, a lifelong Virginian.

Hi, My name is Catherine Shultz and I’m writing this as a woman that survived almost being strangled to death, then stalked for 2 years. I was in fear of my life and I bought my first firearm and trained. My personal defense weapon saved my life and I didn’t have to pull the trigger. A piece of paper does nothing to protect survivors but I stand with VCDL & am co director of Women for Gun Rights in Va. I’m also disabled and an amputee & I can’t run from danger but I can use my firearm to protect myself. People don’t seem to understand that educating oneself vs restricting mags etc… they affect people like me and it shows me that the “gun safety” laws are simply a psychological bandage & does nothing to protect women like myself. Thank you, Catherine Shultz Women for gun rights

To the legislators; Not one of the proposed HBs should be approved. The authors of the proposed bills lack experience or insight into gun ownership or general safety of the public. Not one of these bills can be proven to save lives or stop criminal acts. What I do see is the potential for a level of state bureaucrats to create new jobs for their buddies. Let’s monitor who has a gun or who has too many bullets in their magazine. Whose family member is related to someone involved with domestic violence. This sounds like the state boys and girls are out to get their hands into Virginians pocket's again. Vote no for everyone of these HBs.

Shall not be infringed was and still is very clear. The bill of rights was written to limit the government. Please stop infringing on my god given rights.

HB19 Misdemeanors should never take away a civil right. HB21 A firearm accessory seller could not know they were selling a accessory to a prohibited person. A car parts store cannot be sued if they sell a seat cover for a car used in a bank robbery. HB40 This bill is unconstitutional, there is no analog in history or traditions of firearms with any such limitations when the Bill of Rights was adopted. Homemade guns have been legal since before the US existed. HB93 If a husband and wife co-own a shotgun and the husband gets a protective order issued against him, the wife would no longer have access to that shotgun. That punishes and needlessly endangers her life. HB110 Car owner should not be at fault for a criminal stealing a firearm. It is the criminal who is solely to blame. This bill could put a handgun in the possession of a tow truck driver that is a convicted felon. HB217 U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in both DC v Heller, and The New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen, that any firearm “in common use” is protected by the Second Amendment. Guns and magazines targeted by this bill are among the most common in the US, making this bill unconstitutional. HB229 Disarming visitors and guests, including CHP holders, violates their right to protect themselves. A U.S. District Court in the 2nd Circuit has restrained enforcement of just such a law for being unconstitutional under New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen Supreme Court ruling. HB626 Students have a right to self-defense. HB702 Destroying a functional, and possibly valuable firearms is a waste of money. State could offset costs by selling firearms to gun dealers through an auction. This program is a “turn in” and not a “give-back” program. HB871 Biometric safes are more expensive and can be unreliable when being used under stress and require batteries to work. There are other locking mechanisms that are just as secure. HB969 Center would only target violence committed using firearms and ignoring root causes of crime, as well as all the other ways violence is inflicted on victims – knives, blunt objects, hands and feet, etc. Half of violent crimes are not committed with a firearm. Term “Gun Violence” gives away true agenda: “gun violence” is a term coined by gun-control lobby to blame guns, which are inanimate objects, and not criminals that misuse guns. If a police officer shoots someone, officer gets blame, not his gun. If a criminal shoots someone, gun gets blame, not criminal. No one says, “tire iron violence” or “hand and feet violence.” It is just called “violence.” But there is a disarmament agenda with firearms and “gun violence” is just an excuse to go after firearms with more gun control. HB1300 Oppose HB1303 Oppose HB1359 Bill will get innocent people killed, it will take at least two months before a person can purchase a first firearm.  If they are purchasing that firearm for urgent self-defense, that is simply too long.  Price to get a permit, likely in hundreds of dollars, will be prohibitive for poor people and is equivalent of a poll tax.  And even with all hoops to get a permit, even citizens with a CHP will be limited to one handgun a month.  Local law-enforcement will be handed a registry of gun owners. And gun rentals at shooting ranges will not be possible for people who have not yet got their permit or are visiting from out of state or from another country.

My entire life I have taken great pride and stewardship in being a law abiding citizen of a great country. A very large part of my patriotism is the freedom and trust the founders of the nation gave me in the Second Amendment of the US constitution and Section 13 of the Virginia Bill of Rights. The anti-gun bills that have been introduced in Virginia show me that the supporters of these bills have zero regard for the Constitution, my rights as a lawful citizen and my rights to be able to defend myself and others from violent crime. The supporters of these bills have lost all sense of who the good guys are and who the bad guys are. I see this when early release is granted to hundreds of violent felons, many of which then go on to reoffend and violently prey on the very people you are supposed to protect, all for nothing more than some misdirected attempt at virtue signaling. I see this when prosecutors do not pursue charges against violent offenders in a misdirected attempt at virtue signaling. I see this when legislative efforts focus on the law-abiding and do nothing to violent felons who will not bother to be hindered by any gun laws. I see this when legislators talk about “gun violence” and do nothing about the underlying problem of “violence” and how to reduce it. I see this when I see news stories of repeat violent offenders who have been arrested for dozens of violent crimes, including murder, who end up killing someone yet again due to some form of “catch and release”. The laws are in place to remove violent felons, whether or not they use firearms, from society and prevent them from preying on your law-abiding constituents. Please use them. I urge opposition to HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB626, HB702, HB871, HB969 and HB1359. I urge support for HB1300 and HB1303.

I oppose all legislation which seeks to undermine our Constitutionally protected 2nd Amendment. Therefore, I would encourage all members to vote against these bills with a resounding NO!

As a life long Virginia resident and lawful firearms owner, I speak for myself and millions of other Virginians in saying that all of us strongly oppose any bill being introduced that restricts and infringes upon our Second Amendment rights that are guaranteed by the constitution of Virginia and of the United States. These gun control bills have been drafted under the guise of safety and crime prevention, while simultaneously doing the opposite and only increasing further resistance in both crime and safety. For decades, Virginia has been a pro-2A state where generations of families have been born into and raised on safe and responsible gun ownership. Hunting, personal protection, or simply being an enthusiast does not make someone a criminal or implies criminal intent because of the technology behind modern firearms has far surpassed the firearms of our grandfathers’s generation. Manufacturing methods and technology is ever changing, but our natural rights as law abiding citizens should never be hung in the balance and toyed with as privileges. I implore the General Assembly to please review these bills with logic, with reason, and with the hope that our state government will not make a mockery of the Second Amendment to further a political agenda not based upon fact, but upon incessant fear mongering and disarmament of the people.

I SUPPORT this bill. Under current Virginia law, a person convicted of misdemeanor assault against a family or household member is prohibited from possessing a firearm. This is a reasonable restriction—we do not want domestic abusers to have access to firearms, given their known propensity for violence. Nationally, firearms are used in more than half of intimate partner homicides, and the presence of a gun in a domestic violence situation makes it five times more likely that a woman will be killed. However, this protection currently only applies primarily to spouses, ex-spouses or those with a child in common. It does not fully cover other intimate partners. There is no reasonable basis to treat violence against a dating partner differently from violence against a spouse when it comes to preventing harm from firearms. Those convicted of domestic assault should be prohibited from possessing firearms, full stop. HB 19 is a targeted, limited expansion of existing law. It closes the dangerous “boyfriend loophole” by extending the firearm prohibition to misdemeanor convictions for assault and battery against an intimate partner. This common-sense measure will help protect victims and the Commonwealth’s citizens. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill.

Name: Brad Toohill Location: Loudoun County, Virginia I strongly oppose the following bills. These proposals punish law-abiding Virginians, undermine due process, and infringe on constitutionally protected rights while failing to address violent crime. Criminals do not follow gun laws—these bills target citizens who already do. HB 19 (McClure) This bill allows permanent loss of firearm rights based on vague “dating relationship” misdemeanors. Fundamental rights should not be stripped without clear standards and robust due process. HB 21 (Helmer) Holding firearm manufacturers and sellers liable for crimes they did not commit is unjust and dangerous. This policy attacks lawful commerce instead of criminal behavior. HB 40 (Simon) Criminalizing unfinished frames and receivers turns peaceful hobbyists into felons without evidence of crime reduction. This is regulation without results. HB 93 (Bennett-Parker) Forced firearm surrender under protective orders risks disarming innocent family members. Rights should not be suspended by accusation alone. HB 110 (Laufer) Penalizing lawful gun owners for storing a handgun in a vehicle is excessive and punitive. This bill targets responsible citizens, not criminals. HB 217 (Helmer) This bill bans commonly owned firearms and standard-capacity magazines that are clearly protected as arms in common use. It is unconstitutional and ineffective. HB 229 (Hernandez) Blanket bans on firearms and knives in medical facilities leave lawful citizens defenseless and create confusion without improving safety. HB 626 (Callsen) Disarming adults on college campuses does not enhance safety. Law-abiding individuals should not lose their right to self-defense based on location. HB 702 (Cole) Taxpayer-funded firearm turn-in and destroy programs waste public funds and show no measurable impact on crime. HB 871 (Downey) Mandated storage methods and biometric safes intrude into private homes and impose unnecessary costs on families. HB 969 (Price) Creating a new state agency focused solely on firearms expands bureaucracy while ignoring repeat offenders and enforcement failures. HB 1359 (Hope) This permit-to-purchase scheme creates delays, costs, fingerprinting, and a de facto registry. It burdens lawful ownership and disproportionately harms low-income Virginians. Virginia should focus on enforcing existing laws and prosecuting violent offenders—not restricting the rights of responsible citizens.

I urge you to oppose all of the proposed bills. None of these bills will have meaningful impact on crime committed with fire arms. The only honest way to reduce crime committed with firearms is to enforce mandatory and harsh penalties on criminals who use guns to commit crimes. Once has to realize that guns can only commit a crime in the hands of a criminal. The criminal, not the tool is the problem that needs to be addressed. A case in point: England has super strong regulations on guns. Was that effective? Did the crime rates really drop ? No, crime rates didn't drop all that much. Eliminating firearms just shifted the criminals over to using knives as their weapon of choice. These proposed regulations seem to be more aimed at annoying firearm owners, as opposed to solving any real problems. While I want to vote Democratic, these essentially useless regulations are making me seriously reconsider which party I will support in the future. Please put regulations in place to SOLVE problems, not these silly things that only provide talking points. Never forget, RESULTS are what voters want.

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence supports these bills.

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence supports this bill.

Not one of these bills will make anyone safer, but rather strip the rights of law abiding citizens of which pose no threat. Maybe try enforcing or increasing the penalties for laws against murder or violent felonies that are already in place? The problem isn't guns. It's the mentally ill people who misuse them. Making good people criminals for simply owning common firearms or magazines will not make a difference to people who have no regard for law.

Thank you - see file attached

All these bills infringe on citizens AMENDMENT RIGHT we the people been lied to BY OUR Government OFFICIALS & mainly democratic officials ABIGAIL SPANBERGER is one of them

My name is Teresa Gancsos and I am with the Richmond chapter of Moms Demand Action and we support these bills. Thank you for your attention in this matter. Teresa Gancsos

As a fellow Virginian, I urge you to please OPPOSE "gun control" bills in your committee. Concepts like an "assault weapons" ban, arbitrary magazine restrictions, "reasonable standards" for firearms businesses, and a "permit to purchase," just to name a few, do nothing to address crime in the Commonwealth. Criminals do not abide by the law, and bills like these only target law-abiding firearm owners and businesses. The General Assembly should instead pursue legislation that holds criminals accountable for their crimes, not legislation that creates new criminals overnight for lawful purchases. Again, I urge you to OPPOSE gun control in your committee.

My family and I OPPOSE all these insidious, un-Constitutional anti-2A Bills you're proposing.

Dear Legislators, You have been elected to a position for the purpose of representing citizens in VA. You have taken an oath to the state and U.S. Constitution. It is not your place to push radical agendas or ideologies that clearly oppose those Constitutions. The 2nd Amendment clearly states that it “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”. Whether you agree or disagree with it is not important. Whether you appreciate firearms or hate and fear them, is not important. What is important, is that you respect my Constitutional right to own them, carry them, use them, transport them, have immediate access to them, decide for myself how I will store them in my own home. It is NOT your place to infringe upon these rights in any way. The very reason for the 2nd Amendment is for citizens to be able to repel, remove, and defend against a tyrannical government. Don’t be a tyrannical government. Remember and honor your oaths. Put aside the partisanship. Sincerely, One of millions of gun owners

All these proposed are laws are just awful. The right of self-preservation is a fundamental human right and having the best tools for self-preservation furthers that fundamental human right. Without those tools, you degrade the most important human right in the world, the right to live and live free. Suing gun dealers and manufacturers will prevent the public from acquiring guns. Banning large swaths of arms and accessories prevent the public from defending themselves with the best tool possible. All these proposed laws are bad. Bad for Virginians and bad for human rights. HB 19 (McClure) requires forfeiture of firearm rights for a “dating relationship” misdemeanor. HB 21 (Helmer) allows civil lawsuits against firearm manufacturers and sellers for crimes committed with their products. HB 40 (Simon) outlaws unfinished frames and receivers unless serialized. HB 93 (Bennett-Parker) forces firearm surrender under protective orders in a way that could disarm innocent family members. HB 110 (Laufer) imposes a civil penalty and towing if a handgun is left in an unattended vehicle. HB 217 (Helmer) bans commonly owned firearms and standard-capacity magazines made after July 1, 2026. HB 229 (Hernandez) prohibits firearms and many knives in medical facilities. HB 626 (Callsen) restricts firearms on college campuses without lawful cause. HB 702 (Cole) establishes a firearm "turn-in and destroy" program funded by taxpayers. HB 871 (Downey) mandates specific storage requirements and biometric safes in homes with minors. HB 969 (Price) creates a state gun violence prevention agency focused solely on firearms. HB 1359 (Hope) creates a costly permit-to-purchase scheme with fingerprints, training requirements, and a de facto handgun registry.

My name is Cossie Scott a lifelong Virginia resident. This is my first time speaking here. I strongly oppose HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB626, HB702, HB871, HB969, HB1300, HB1359 I do support HB1303 45% of Virginia homes own guns lawfully. Nationally, 93% of the guns associated with crime are obtained illegally. So how are any of these regulations moving the needle in illegal gun trafficking? Or attacking the root cause of violent crime? Furthermore, the majority of the average gun related crime occurs in 9 districts in Virginia (Richmond and Hampton Roads). So you are proposing punishing the entire state and every law biding gun owner for an “illegal” gun problem in Hampton and Richmond. Not to mention 63% of the gun related deaths in Virginia are suicide related. That means that all of these bills listed are not scientifically proven with sound data, but emotionally charged by political gun grabbing rhetoric and is saturated with slippery slope informal fallacies with proposed changes being made without analytical data to suggest we have a need to change. Why do we not first address Richmond and Hampton locally before pushing your unfounded ideology on the rest of the commonwealth. Gun laws do not solve for the human condition problem in those 9 districts. We would be better served spending our time, and tax dollars, addressing the poverty problem that drives violent crime, rather than trying to make law biding citizens criminals.

I’ve been a lifelong Democrat because I believe deeply in protecting working people, expanding access to healthcare, safeguarding civil rights, and investing in strong public institutions, but I’ve never fully aligned with my party on gun control. To me, supporting the Second Amendment isn’t about ideology or partisanship — it’s about personal responsibility, self-reliance, and the belief that law-abiding citizens should have the right to protect themselves and their families. I value evidence-based policy, and I worry that many proposed gun laws primarily burden responsible owners while doing little to address the root causes of violence like poverty, mental health gaps, and systemic inequality. I want safer communities, but I believe that comes from smarter enforcement, education, and prevention rather than broad restrictions that limit constitutional rights. Holding these views sometimes puts me at odds with fellow Democrats, but I see it as proof that political identity doesn’t have to mean agreeing with every plank of the platform — it means thinking critically and standing by the principles you believe in. Please vote no to any gun restrictions that are being presented.

I support these bills as indicated above.

The attachment contains my comments on the proposed bills.

Nearly half of all households in the Commonwealth own a firearm and yet Virginia has one of the lowest gun related death rates in the nation (5.6 per 100,000). Not only are you trying to solve an issue that doesn't exist, you're sacrificing your constiunts to pander towards national politics.

As a law abiding gun owner and retired military Virginia Citizen I vehemently oppose any law that opposes our Constitutional Right via the Second Amendment. All of the bills you are considering meet this criteria. Please cease and desist any band all actions that would infringe on my rights…those that our Founding Fathers of whom many were from our Great Commonwealth, believed to be self-evident. Very respectfully, Shannon J. Cornelius, USA/USAF (Ret)

I strongly urge voting against the following bills as all of them will cause undue hardship on legal gun owners, go against the spirit of the US 2nd amendment, will place firearm manufacturers in legal jeopardy solely because their products may have been used in an unlawful fashion (same as suing Ford for getting a speeding ticket). HB 19 (McClure) requires forfeiture of firearm rights for a “dating relationship” misdemeanor. HB 21 (Helmer) allows civil lawsuits against firearm manufacturers and sellers for crimes committed with their products. HB 40 (Simon) outlaws unfinished frames and receivers unless serialized. HB 93 (Bennett-Parker) forces firearm surrender under protective orders in a way that could disarm innocent family members. HB 110 (Laufer) imposes a civil penalty and towing if a handgun is left in an unattended vehicle. HB 217 (Helmer) bans commonly owned firearms and standard-capacity magazines made after July 1, 2026. HB 229 (Hernandez) prohibits firearms and many knives in medical facilities. HB 626 (Callsen) restricts firearms on college campuses without lawful cause. HB 702 (Cole) establishes a firearm "turn-in and destroy" program funded by taxpayers. HB 871 (Downey) mandates specific storage requirements and biometric safes in homes with minors. HB 969 (Price) creates a state gun violence prevention agency focused solely on firearms. HB 1359 (Hope) creates a costly permit-to-purchase scheme with fingerprints, training requirements, and a de facto handgun registry. Thank you,

I oppose the passage of these bills. HB 19, 21, 40, 93, 110, 217, 229, 626, 702, 871, 969, 1359.

The Right to Keep and Bear Arms shall not be infringed. Stop writing and putting Unconstitutional Legislation in the Virginia Code. That covers just about everything I have seen the Democratic Majority propose as new legislation. Want to live in a communist paradise - Move to Cuba - They do not get Snow and sleet there, and you will have someone to give you instructions on how to live your life.

Just to let you know, I am an independent in every sense of the word. I tend to lean left on many issues but on the subject of the second amendment I am a firm believer. I don’t think we need these new restrictions being proposed. The topic is so complex and polar I don’t know how to convince you all of the folly of this legislation except to say many of us are single issue voters regardless of how we feel about certain social issues. I know many democrats in this state who regularly use these weapons that are the subject for future restrictions or outright banning. I will try to touch on a few issues. Assault weapons and high capacity magazine are the current boogie man of the anti gun lobby and have been since the 1990s. This was originally a deliberate attempt to confuse modern civilian semiautomatic weapons with their more dangerous fully automatic assault military versions as a prelude to ban handguns. The term assault weapon is a purely political term that has no universal meaning and it was chosen to instill fear and confusion in the public’s mind. I ask you to review these laws and ask yourself which one of these features makes these weapons more dangerous than other rifles. Is a pistol grip, bayonet lug, or similar feature what makes a rifle dangerous? Or is it caliber, muzzle energy, and rate of fire? If public safety is the true goal why doesn’t this legislation address these factors instead of cosmetics? I will tell you why. Because the average hunting rifle is more powerful than an ar-15 by a wide margin. These are not overpowered rifles as some would have you believe. It’s a semiautomatic version of an intermediate powered rifle - part way between the power of a pistol and a full power hunting rifle. Did you know even Great Britain has no restrictions on weapons with military style features? Their ban is on the caliber and rate of fire. You can even have a semiautomatic uzi there witt a 50 round magazine as long as it is chambered in 22lr. Silencers have very few restrictions there as well because they protect hearing and help minimize noise pollution. Let’s talk about the legality as well. Most of these restrictions are unconstitutional because the weapons and features are in common use. It’s unconstitutional to ban any weapon that is in common use as per DC vs Heller and Brien. If the state court doesn’t overturn these unconstitutional restrictions the Supreme Court will. I will end this conversation by saying our founding fathers faced the same issues we do. At that time most governments restricted civilian arms because they wanted to remain in power. They reasoned through their dealings with Great Britain that an armed population could never be slaves to any tyrannical government or foreign power. This may sound like a tired old saying that is often made fun of. I have heard people saying things like deer don’t need bullet proof vests and you can’t fight against a government without f-16s but is this really true? The ar-15 for instance is not powerful enough to take down a large elk humanly so the bullet proof vest comment is just plain silly. That cartridge is commonly used in other rifles as a varmint round. As far as f-16s are concerned, the Taliban sure kicked us out of their country with nothing more than small arms and guerrilla tactics. Civilian resistance movements rarely fight pitch battles with tanks and fighter jets. They use hit and run tactics combined with numbers to wear the enemy down.

Dear Committee Members, I urge you to reject the blatantly unconditional and egregious anti Second Amendment bills before you. This will do nothing to curb crime, and you know that, but will make criminals out of your political opponents, as well as many of your constituents. Scencerly, Sal DeGennaro

PLEASE PROTECT OUR GUN RIGHTS AND DO NOT DEGRADE VIRGINIANS' SECOND AMENDMENT GUARANTEED RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS!

IT IS VERY FRUSTRATING TO LIVE IN A SOCIETY IN WHICH THOSE WHO ARE ELECTED TO REPRESENT ME IMMEDIATELY STEP IN AND COME UP WITH LAWS IN AN ATTEMPT TO FRAME ME AS A CRIMINAL FOR EXERCISING MY RIGHTS. IN NO WAY HAVE I BROKEN ANY EXISTING LAWS, NOR DO I OWN ANY ITEM CURRENTLY CONSIDERED ILLEGAL. THAT THESE "REPRESENTATIVES" CAN, WITH THE STROKE OF A PEN, PENALIZE ME, MAKES ME WONDER JUST WHO THEY "REPRESENT". WE DO NOT NEED MORE LAWS TO "LESSEN CRIME", WE NEED TO ENFORCE THE ONES ALREADY ON THE BOOKS. PLEASE LEAVE YOUR LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS ALONE.

Our Second Amendment is clear and succinct: "... the right of the People to keep an bear arms shall not be infringed." What I see is an example of the government overstepping its bounds under the illusion of public safety. Many of the measures including assault weapons, magazine capacities, and "ghost guns" are based on buzz words that strike fear because people do not understand them. Let us embark on a few definitions: Infringe: "act so as to limit or undermine (something); encroach on" -Oxford Dictionary. Synonyms include Erode, Impair, and Weaken. ANY legislation that limits impairs, or weakens a citizen's right to own and carry weapons is, by definiton, infringement, and therefore a violation of our beautiful country's constitution. Ghost Gun: the ATF classifies the part of the weapon containing the trigger assembly as a "firearm," colloquially called a Lower Receiver. It is possible to manufacture this part and therefore build a weapon that has no serial number and is unregistered with the police department. This takes skill and specialized, expensive tooling; these firearms sound scary, but are by and large produced by hobbyists, not killers. Assault Weapons (HB217): The limiting, reduction, and impairment of the size of magazine that one can purchase, keep, and carry is simply a violation of the 2nd amendment. Storage (HB871): The State government has no business inside my home and how my weapons are stored. I learned to handle guns at 7 years of age, children can learn. If I lock my weapons as this bill requires, I can no longer access them in an emergency. Its safer to gun-proof my children than child-proof my guns. Permit to purchase (HB1359): We do not need a permit to exercise our first amendment rights. We do not have permits to secure our rights against inappropriate search and seizure, the 4th amendment. We also do not have permits to protect ourselves from cruel and unusual punishment. No other right enumerated in the Bill of Rights requires a permit, why do we treat the 2nd amendment differently? We already strip this right from convicted criminals, we have background checks, leave us law-abiding gunowners alone. I understand these bills have good intentions. We want to see our communities safe, healthy, and thriving, and have our neighbors and friends go about their days without fear. But let us not succumb to fear to such an extent that we throw away our freedom for the illusion of heightened safety. Let's look at California, llinois, and New York, who have the strictest policies in the nation, yet rising rates of violent crimes, and instantly the illusion is dispelled. These measures do not increase safety. What they do accomplish is an erosion of freedom, disarmament of law-abiding citizens, and violation of our country's constitution. I ask you please, as your neighbor and constituent, vote NO to these measures.

HB19 It is improper to deprive citizen rights for a misdemeanor violation Deprivation of rights is part of the accepted sentence for felony crime (voting, firearms, etc) Proposed Fix – Make domestic violence and intimate partner violence a felony level crime. HB40 Causes a wide variety of hardware store supplies felony crime to own. Proposed Fix – Table bill and remove references to unfinished frames/receivers, remove references to serialization until a method of applying for serial number is available to the general public HB110 Tow truck drivers are NOT the ideal steward for firearms The tow yard is not a safe storage location Proposed fix – Police can call a locksmith and have the vehicle opened at owner expense, firearm can be removed and held at police station for recovery HB217 Large capacity varies by firearm, the most common standard capacity is 28-32 per magazine, 100 per belt Shotgun capacity is variable based on shell length If exemptions are made for police, CHP holders (who commit crimes at a rate LOWER than police) should also be exempt (DHS/ICE are making this argument stronger every day) Proposed fix – Change “High Capacity” from 10 to 60 for magazines, and 200 for belts. Define “High Capacity” for shotgun tubes based on a defined shot-shell size. Exempt CHP holders from all magazine restrictions. HB229 As with all prohibited places, if right to self defense is abridged, a duty to protect is created Secure storage should be provided, as due to Arlington Car-Free Diet, many trips are multi-modal, preventing use of anchored, steel, hidden, locking car safe storage. Proposed Fix - Security screening and armed protection must be provided in all prohibited places, failure to protect disarmed individuals to be held under strict liability. At one or more entrance, a staffed safe-storage location to be provided for weapons to be checked-in. HB871 Biometric safes are typically the WORST QUALITY OF ALL SAFES ON THE MARKET Proposed Fix – Allow for any kind of lock, or else indicate a cypher/combo/key lock. HB1300 The police commit crimes at a higher rate than CHP holders Police get paid and can buy guns normally Suggested Fix – Table and do not reintroduce, bill is not needed HB626 As with all prohibited places, if right to self defense is abridged, a duty to protect is created Secure storage should be provided, as due to Arlington Car-Free Diet, many trips are multi-modal, preventing use of anchored, steel, hidden, locking car safe storage. As with the open-carry on streets prohibition currently in place, CHP holders need to be exempted. Proposed Fix - Security screening and armed protection must be provided in all prohibited places, failure to protect disarmed individuals to be held under strict liability. At one or more entrance, a staffed safe-storage location to be provided for weapons to be checked-in. CHP holders to be exempted. HB1359 A criminal record history check is already performed for all firearm transactions DCJS training is for armed security guards and police, if all firearms owners are DCJS certified, then exemptions for armed security and police should apply to purchase permit holders Proposed Fix – Table bill and do not reintroduce, it is redundant to already existing protections, alternatively exempt all purchase permit holders from any firearms regulations that have specific exemptions for police

This bill would strip Virginians of their Second Amendment rights for three years based on a misdemeanor conviction involving a "dating relationship." While domestic violence is a serious issue that must be addressed, HB 19 takes a broad and constitutionally dangerous approach that punishes individuals without regard for due process, proportionality, or long-standing legal principles. Under this proposal, a person could permanently lose access to a fundamental constitutional right over a non-felony offense that may involve minor conduct, mutual disputes, or allegations resolved through plea agreements to avoid costly litigation. Misdemeanors are, by definition, not among the most serious crimes in our legal system. They have never historically justified the loss of core civil rights. The Second Amendment is not a privilege granted by government. It is a natural right protected by both the United States and Virginia Constitutions. Removing that right based on a misdemeanor conviction sets a dangerous precedent that allows politicians to redefine who is "worthy" of exercising constitutional freedoms. HB 19 also creates serious due process concerns. Many misdemeanor convictions result from plea bargaining, often entered into simply to avoid financial hardship, job loss, or prolonged court proceedings. Under this bill, a momentary lapse in judgment or a disputed allegation could result in years of lost constitutional rights. Furthermore, there is no evidence that disarming non-felony offenders reduces violent crime. Criminals who intend to commit acts of violence do not obey gun laws. This bill will not stop violent offenders. It will only disarm law-abiding citizens who have already served their sentence and are attempting to rebuild their lives. This proposal moves Virginia closer to a system where civil rights are treated as conditional privileges, revocable at the discretion of lawmakers. That is fundamentally incompatible with the principles of a free society. Punishment should be proportional, targeted, and focused on truly dangerous individuals. HB 19 fails that test. It expands government power at the expense of constitutional liberty and opens the door to further erosion of rights in the future.

I disagree with any and all laws pertaining to our gun rights and any law that infringes our right to own,sell, trade or gift. These amendments are a total outreach of our constitutional rights and we the people will not stand for it.

These bill do nothing to address criminals and only affects law abiding gun owners. As a black man I feel they are racist as well. Vote NO to all of these bills.

I stand with Gun Owners of America and the Virginia Citizens Defense League in opposing any attempt to restrict law abiding Virginians 2nd amendment rights. These bills will do nothing to stop crime and only serve to limit the rights of the people to exercise their 2nd amendment rights. As a constituent, I urge you to OPPOSE these gun bills: HB 19, Misdemeanors should never take away a civil right. HB 21, This bill is designed to have a chilling effect on all aspects of the firearms industry. HB 40, This bill is unconstitutional, as there was no analog in the history or traditions of firearms with any such limitations at the time the Bill of Rights was adopted. Homemade guns have been legal since before the United States existed. HB 93, This disctriminates against people in the same household and also discriminates against young people who are legally allowed to own fire arms. HB 110, Punish criminals who do this, not the law abiding citizens. HB 217, The U.S. Supreme Court has said in both DC v Heller, and recently The New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen, that any firearm “in common use” is protected by the Second Amendment. The guns and magazines targeted by this bill are among the most common guns and magazines in the United States, making this bill unconstitutional. There are conservatively estimated to be over 20 million AR-15s and 700 million magazines that hold more than 10 rounds in civilian hands. HB 229, Disarming visitors and guests, including concealed handgun permit holders, at such facilities violates their right to protect themselves in an emergency. A U.S. District Court in the 2nd Circuit has restrained enforcement of just such a law for being unconstitutional under New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen Supreme Court ruling. HB 626, A solution in search of a problem. Higher education students are adults and have a right to self-defense. HB 702, The name of the program implies that the Commonwealth gives firearms to citizens and now wants citizens to give them back. That is not the case. The State does not give us our rights and does not own our property. HB 871, Biometric safes are more expensive than non-biometric safes and often times more unreliable when being used under stress, This discriminates against those people who are poor and still have a right to self protection. HB 969, we do not need to grow the state bureaucracy to study violent crime when most violent crime does not involve firearms. HB 1359, please find me a constitutional right that you have to get a permit for. There is not one and we should not be limiting the rights of the people by require a permit to exercise their 2nd amendment rights. I SUPPORT the following bill: HB 1303, 90 days is more than sufficient for the State Police to issue a non-resident permit. There is no reason that this should take longer than this.

I’m against all these worthless anti-gun / anti-freedom bills that will do nothing to reduce crime, but will only serve to reduce the freedoms of law abiding citizens. Please retract them and do something good for Virginians. Thank you.

I do not support these bills.

I am opposed to any and all gun legislation the 2nd amendment is a right not privilege and can not be infringed upon . I also have to question your motives as to why you want to disarm law abiding citizens. Down through history any government that has done that has destroyed the common citizen.

I oppose any and all restrictions on our God given and Constitutionally protected Right to keep and bear arms. None of this nonsense passes constitutional muster. And will have the effect of making the lives Of law abiding citizens less safe while you are Lowering penalties for real crime and turning Law abiding citizens into criminals... These bills are nothing more than a government power grab. What part of "Shall NOT be infringed " do you not Understand??

All bills with the exception of HB 1303 are unconstitutional and I do NOT support them.

I oppose these bills

When did our state government decide that they do not have to follow our Constitution of the United States of America? The 2nd Amendment is an individual right under the Constitution that states clearly that it shall not be infringed on which in simple terms means that no government official or group has the ability to take a person's right to keep and bear arms in the United States of America. This Amendment was so important to our forefathers that it is the second thing they wrote to establish that the government does not have the ability to take your right to defend yourself against all enemies and this includes a tyrannical state government that doesn't understand plain text that our country was founded on. It doesn't matter what others opinions or feelings on the subject of the right to bear arms is because it is my right and not their's that we are talking about at this time. As a society of individuals in our country that have never agreed on things of this nature since the invention of the modern firearm we have to look no farther than our own Constitution to see that this is not a collective right of certain people that agree or disagree with the principle of firearms but infact a Constitutional right of an individual to determine there views of their personal right to bear arms. With the world in the state it is in at our present time this Constitutional right is needed more then ever because we are facing people that think that the can completely ignore the Constitution and its not even on a national level but a state level. This is also a truly sad moment of our state that is the founding place for our country as it exists from the time that we settled in this new land of an unknown world at the time but to disrespect our founding Document that started it all on top of it is the worst thing that could happen in our state for these elected officials to look at the Bill of Rights and say to themselves that those Amendment are not worth following because I have a different opinion, belief or feeling on that Amendment that I am personally going to take the individual right of every person in Virginia just because I don't want to follow these Amendments as they are written. Do you understand how this is being a tyrannical government just like the British were when they were trying to control the entire population at the time that we had the Revolution in this great land to start this great country. When people say that the 2nd Amendment is dated and need to be revised but can see the actual beauty in how our forefathers predicted that this Amendment would be necessary throughout time to even to the year 2026 were we have a government that is looking at this exact Amendment and saying no we don't have to follow that anymore because we have all these people that don't like the fact that a free person of the United States of America can purchase anything that has to do with their ability to not only protect themselves in self defense but also to protect themselves from the tyrannical government that is before us today. I'm sorry but as a person that has no affiliation to a political party or any other organization on this subject in our country I believe in our Constitution and the Amendments that were written in the Bill of Rights to protect myself, my family and my friends from people that think that they know what is best for everyone in our country on the basis that they either think they are smarter, richer or elected.

I oppose every gun-control bill pending before this committee because they are prohibited by both the United States and Virginia Constitutions. The Second Amendment provides that “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Supreme Court held that this language protects an individual right to possess firearms for lawful purposes such as self-defense, independent of militia service. The Court emphasized that the Amendment protects arms “in common use” by law-abiding citizens and forbids bans on entire classes of such arms. In McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010), the Court reaffirmed that this right is fully incorporated against the states, binding Virginia to the same constitutional limits as Congress. Virginia’s Constitution independently protects this right, stating in Article I, Section 13 that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” In New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen (2022), the Supreme Court rejected interest-balancing tests and adopted a text-history-tradition standard: if the Second Amendment’s text covers the conduct, it is presumptively protected, and the government must show the regulation is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Modern policy goals, crime statistics, or legislative preferences are insufficient. Many pending bills restrict semi-automatic rifles, including AR-style firearms that are owned by millions of Americans and commonly used for lawful purposes such as self-defense, sport shooting, and hunting. Under Heller, arms in common use cannot be banned, and the “dangerous and unusual” exception does not apply. There is no historical tradition of banning commonly owned firearms based on rate of fire, operating mechanism, or cosmetic features, and under Bruen the absence of such historical analogues is dispositive. Other bills ban magazines over ten rounds, which are standard components of many commonly owned handguns and rifles. Because magazines are integral to firearm function, such bans operate as functional prohibitions on protected firearms. There is no Founding-era or Reconstruction-era tradition of limiting ammunition capacity, making these bans unconstitutional under Bruen. Permit-to-purchase schemes likewise unconstitutionally burden a fundamental right by converting it into a government-granted privilege. The right to keep arms necessarily includes the right to acquire them, and fees, training mandates, biometric requirements, and processing delays disproportionately burden citizens and lack historical justification. These schemes invite arbitrary enforcement and indirect suppression of a constitutional right. While public safety is a legitimate concern, the Supreme Court has made clear that constitutional rights cannot be traded away through legislative cost-benefit analysis. Regulations unsupported by historical tradition fail regardless of asserted benefits. For these reasons, the pending gun-control bills before this committee are inconsistent with both the United States and Virginia Constitutions and should be rejected.

Please no more gun bans

These proposed actions would increase the amount of money that is already taken from us in taxes. They make no sense, as we have a 2.3 billion surplus. These actions only hurt Virginians. The democrat party ran on affordability, and these bills do just the opposite. The taxes on firearms, and the banning of them and accessories have already proven to do nothing but punish law abiding citizens. CRIMINALS DONT FOLLOW LAWS! Reducing manditory sentecing for rape and other horrible crimes only make us less safe. Combined with TRYING to disarm us and helping criminals you out us at risk, and rob us of our rights and money. You all should be ashamed of yourselves for being bought off. You all remind me of our flag. You are acting like tyrants. You talk of affordability, yet you are trying to take more of our money. The people will not stand for tour unconstitutional actions. You may have control for the next two years, but your political careers will be destroyed. Tou have become radical tyrants. You hate the other side so much, that you are willing to destroy us. Shame on all of you. The pendulum always swings back, and you are just guaranteeing it will swing so far back that you will wish you never did this. The destruction of our constitution, and your petty attacks are not worth the backlash that will come when the people rise up against what you believe in.

Leave my second amendment rights alone and worry about all the criminals both legal and illegal. Don't screw with law-abiding citizens who work and pay your salary

Hello, I agree and stand with the opinions of the Virginia Citizens Defense League and Gun Owners of America on these troubling bills. The right to keep and bear ares enshrined as a God given right in both the US (2nd amendment) and Virginia (article 1, section 13) Constitutions. Please do not legislate millions of peaceful, law abiding Virginians into criminals with the stroke of a pen.

I support HB19 because it responsibly extends the law to close the "intimate partner" or "boyfriend" loophole. There is a clear and proven link between domestic violence and gun violence. Domestic abusers are not always married and are prone to extend their violent behavior outside of their partnerships; so HB19 gives law enforcement an essential tool to protect our communities in full.

Please Protect Our 2nd Amendment Rights. Thank You.

Please don’t support any Bills that restrict or infringe on my 2nd Amendment rights.

To whom it may concern, It is important to recognize that criminals, by definition, disregard existing laws and are unlikely to be deterred by the introduction of new legislation. Consequently, the implementation of additional laws often impacts only law-abiding citizens, placing new restrictions or obligations upon those who already comply with legal standards. The focus, therefore, should not be on drafting further statutes but rather on ensuring the consistent and effective enforcement of the laws currently in place. By allocating resources toward upholding existing regulations, society can enhance public safety, maintain fairness, and uphold the integrity of the justice system without unnecessarily burdening responsible citizens. Respectfully, Mr. Jones

You were elected as a protest against the President. You definitely weren't elected to cancel Virginians constitutional rights. I'm sure your big donors outside of Virginia will be happy. But last time you tried this 90 of 95 counties, Cities and Town revolted against you. Plus once your donor lists are published by the influential VCDL and the lawsuits start. The people will find out who you actually serve. Unless you represent Arlington or Fairfax all democratic seats will be in jeopardy for the next election. Finally: You take an oath to honor the constitution when you get the privilege to serve the people. Someone who immediately violates their oath has no honor and can never be trusted with authority. People will remember that when it's time to vote again. I know I will. I used to be a Democrat and donor. But I will never vote for a Democrat again.

HB 19 - In the current status of who can report who; it is wholly unwise to remove firearms for a “dating relationship” misdemeanor. Once the court costs, etc. to defend yourself and then waiting to get have weapon returned makes absolutely no sense at all. This is not a FELONY. HB 21-Weapons manufacturers are not the criminal, they only make a tool used for hunting, recreational marksmanship and self defense. Money should be spent on mental health and addiction treatment HB40 - Only criminals will use weapons without serial numbers whether made at home or they will remove serial numbers off illegally bought weapons. This only hurts lawful citizens. HB93 - would remove self defense weapons from others in the family who are lawful and have not committed any criminal activity HB 111 - This is insanity, how will the towing company comply with a chain of custody of a weapon? There is no mention of appropriately storing a gun in a gun vault in a vehicle when traveling, etc. HB 229 - Medical personnel need protecting as much as any other citizen especially in high risk areas like emergency rooms with the potential for violence from drug crazed or mentally ill persons. Trust me, I have been there. HB 626 - This would be nearly impossible to enforce as one travels thru urban universities like VCU HB 702 - This bill is directing funding to the wrong approach to control gun violence. Use the funds for mental and addiction services, gang violence, etc. HB 871 - There is not enough definition on the requirements. Safe and easy access to a firearm for home protection is something most gun owners already employ. HB 969 - This bill requires further definition of gun violence prevention. Again, using the funds for mental health, addiction and gang violence are all necessary HB 1359 - This bill would place undue cost burdens on those who dont have the means to fulfill the costly requirements thus it is in my estimation a class and racial issue and not about guns. Training is something that should be sought out by any gun owner. I urge your consideration on these bills and protect the lawful gun owners in the Commonwealth. Respectfully Please vote no

Please consider this by destroying the constitutional rights of the people of Virginia. You also will eventually come to the repercussions of your decisions, ie court action and loss of tax payer money etc.Now the 2nd amendment to the constitution in short says “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED ,basically no laws are to go against the constitution and also as per article 6 clause two of the constitution. Thank you and think wisely because your constituents as whole do not want this. Second Amendment Right to Bear Arms 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. Amdt2.1Overview of Second Amendment, Right to Bear Arms Amdt2.2Historical Background on Second Amendment Amdt2.3Early Second Amendment Jurisprudence Amdt2.4Heller and Individual Right to Firearms Amdt2.5Post-Heller Issues and Application of Second Amendment to States Amdt2.6Bruen and Concealed-Carry Licenses Amdt2.7Rahimi and Applying the Second Amendment Bruen Standard

Not one of you liberals submitted a bill to address the real evil that is using a gun. So all of these bills are designed to punish legal law abiding gun owners and protect the real criminals. Im78 years old and have owned and bought guns from the age of 15 when I purchased my first gun with money earned from a paper route. NOT ONE OF THE GUNS I'VE OWNED EVER HARMED ANYONE. IT'S AN INANIMATE OBJECT

As a veteran, I am against any so called gun control legislation that has not demonstrably proven to improve public safety while only minimally impacting individuals’ God given rights and liberties. It is unconscionable to think that elected leaders would even think about passing legislation that infringed upon individual rights merely for purposes of “doing something” without having weighed the impact on law abiding citizens and the innumerable sacrifices made to sustain and protect those rights and liberties through the years. Having served myself and also been the victim of illegal firearm use I staunchly support the 2A rights and individuals’ right to self-defense. Each person’s situation and experiences are different and they deserve to exercise their rights and liberties in a way that accommodates those circumstances, experiences, limitations, etc. So called “assault weapons” (a misnomer in itself) may have features and appearances that some persons find scary or intimidating but, to someone possessing that firearm for their own, individual law purposes, most all of those features actually improve the performance or safety related to the use of that same firearm. All semi-automatic firearms, regardless of how they might LOOK to a casual or uninformed observer basically function the same. Stocks, forearm, bipods, scopes, rails, magazines, etc. do not alter the fundamental intended purpose of this “tool.” I certainly understand those who do not appreciate firearms, in general, or who might actually be scared by their existence or appearance. But our 2A and self defense rights should never be indescribably infringed upon merely for these type reasons. There are very good reasons our fore fathers were adamant about including these inalienable rights as foundational principles in our founding documents. These foundational principles are as relevant today as they were at our founding. Anyone who is arrogant enough to think that they have studied and researched and experienced as much as the founding father scholars and thinkers should reconsider their actions carefully before indiscriminately treading upon one of our sacred rights and liberties without certifiable proof of the amount of public safety that would be realized by their actions. Anything less goes against the solemn oath you have sworn to uphold.

I oppose this bill, honor your oath

i OPPOSE any legislation that restricts 2nd amendment rights

I agree with the VCDL on these bills.

I oppose this bill on so many grounds. There is no statistical evidence on how many lives this will save or cost. Yes cost. Un armed people are defenseless. Battery is serious. Taking someone's constitutional rights puts one or both parties at risk should the gun owner need to deafened themselves or another.

Opposite any gun laws. They will not stop any crime. Try enforcing the laws we already.

I support this bill

These sorts of draconian proposals severely restrict the ability of law-abiding citizens to effectively defend themselves against threats of violence. None of the proposed measures which have been inflicted on the citizenry of other states have made one iota of difference in crime levels. They HAVE however restricted law-abiding citizens from exercising their Constitutional rights via the 2nd Amendment. Vote now to cease this onslaught on the rights of law-abiding Virginians. Gun violence is perpetrated by CRIMINALS, so focus on the criminal prosecutions. Limiting the rights of law-abiding Virginians is tantamount to fascism. And as always, "When seconds count, the police are just minutes away!". That's what you are saying to Virginians. If I cannot be trusted to defend myself legally, then you cannot be trusted to run the Commonwealth.

These legislations violate many sections of the Virginia Constitution not just the U.S. Constitution. Legislations like these does nothing to prevent, curtail, deter or otherwise stop crimes or acts of violence. These legislations do not hold criminals that cannot legally possess, purchase or own firearms accountable for their possession, use or handling of a firearm. These legislations do not keep firearms out of the hands of criminals. Cliché but true rhetoric (Criminals will get guns and magazines and commit crimes regardless of the laws. These legislations are immoral, unethical and down right oppressive and serve no purpose other than to infringe upon rights and deny rights. Reminder: - 18, 19 and 20 year old men and women are entrusted in the operation, use, carry and implementation of the following in the service of our country as Servicemembers, Coast Guardsmen, National Guardsmen and Air National Guardsmen and Reservists as well as law enforcement: Semi-automatic Pistols with high capacity magazines, Semi- Automatic Rifles with 30 round magazines, machine guns, rockets, tanks, missiles, rocket Launchers etc and yet Virginia Legislators want to strip away the rights of civilians of that age group of their right to own and bear arms. That is hypocritical and it undermines the Constitution. Our nation foundation and freedom was earned through the blood and sweat of young 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20 year old men from the Revolutionary War for our independence and that of our 17 year old to 20 year old war fighters today standing tall and maintaining our soon to be 250 years of being a Constitutional Republic and our Freedom. Do not allow the stripping of the rights of these military aged men and women that serve and defend our nation, our freedom and our Constitutions. Do not insult them or slap them in the face or turn your backs on them. Fight for them because at some point we have fought and we have sacrificed for you and these young men and women will too. Any legislation that denies and deprives this age group the use, ownership while expecting them to serve in our country and have them carry, operate and use them in the defense of our nation and potentially die, be seriously injured or maimed is diabolical and is disgraceful. Magazine capacity restrictions: (Do not limit or stop the intent of criminals or those intent on committing any act of violence. We have seen the demonstrated and factual extreme actions/tactics that have been used for example: Using a vehicle to run into crowds, Vehicle Born Improvised Explosive Devises (VBIED), Improvised Explosive Devices (IED), mass stabbings, gas attacks and chemical warfare, fire, and more Constitution of Virginia - Article I. Bill of Rights Sections 1,2, 9,10,11. These legislations below, restrict the right to self- defense. Legal gun owners are not committing crimes and do not intend to committ crimes. These legislations are not about accountability for criminals. They are written to suppress and take away the rights of law abiding citizens and ro take away a means of self-defense. These legislations do not create a safer Virginia. HB110, HB1359, HB969, HB871, HB702, HB24, HB21, HB700, HB229, HB217, HB110, HB93, HB19, Example: - HB700: Denies and delays the access to firearms in an emergency situation where a victim of stalking or domestic abuse are in imminent danger. V/R Raymond Carter SFC(Retired)

I strongly oppose this bill

All of these bills are intolerable infringements of the right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment and the Constitution of Virginia. Supporting these bills is a violation of your oaths of office. In addition, as should be evident, these bills will only affect law-abiding gun owners, the very people least likely to offend. Criminals, by definition, do not obey the law. They are unlikely to obey these.

Please do not consider any anti-gun bills. Any potential law that goes against our Constitution is wrong and should not be acknowledged. We shouldn't have to pay for our rights. No innocent person should be penalized for a criminal's actions. A gun's capacity is irrelevant. If a person comments a REAL crime, they should be convected and sentenced accordingly. A right should be lost only through certain major criminal actions, not some fool's option of potential. No manufacturer should be responsible for how their product is used. The one responsible is the one in possession of said product, even if it was stolen. Our last Governor understood this. Our new Governor and her political party desperately needs to. We have seen the failures of worthless states like California, Maryland, New York and others. We don't need to be another one. No law will ever stop a crime. The law should provide proper penalties or real crimes. No law should be made for the sole purpose of controlling and wielding power over the citizens of this State or our country.

I am opposed to HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB626, HB702, HB871, HB969, and HB1359, I support HB 1300 and HB1303.

My father was born in Romania in 1933 and as a child lived under the fascism of socialism. The first thing the fascist socialists did was to confiscate guns. Nearly 400,000 Jews were slaughtered by the socialists after having been disarmed in Romania. Now socialists have taken power in Virginia by running as "moderates" and immediately showing their true selves once safely elected. Democrats, like their brethren Nazis, seek to disarm and enslave the general population. I oppose any legislation which punishes law-abiding citizens from protecting themself, their family, and their property. I oppose any legislation which punishes a citizen for potentially being robbed, as if the thief is not the problem-- the victim is treated as the criminal. I oppose any legislation which allows accusations to remove the rights of others. If I accuse every member of government of being a child abuser, are you forced to remain away from your child(ren)? I oppose Nazis and Democrats for the same reasons.

As a fellow Virginian, I urge you to please OPPOSE "gun control" bills in your committee. Concepts like an "assault weapons" ban, arbitrary magazine restrictions, "reasonable standards" for firearms businesses, and a "permit to purchase," just to name a few, do nothing to address crime in the Commonwealth. Criminals do not abide by the law, and bills like these only target law-abiding firearm owners and businesses. The General Assembly should instead pursue legislation that holds criminals accountable for their crimes, not legislation that creates new criminals overnight for lawful purchases. Again, I urge you to OPPOSE gun control in your committee. I support HB 1303 by Delegate Ware. Thank you for all that you do for Virginia.

Disarming the population is not a viable means to promote public safety. It is the duty of the individual to protect themselves from physical harm that may occur by criminal activity. It is not the responsibility of politicians or police. That is why bills like HB 19, HB 21, HB 40, HB 93, HB 229, HB 1359 are unconstitutional and put the general public in more danger as violent criminals will take advantage of unarmed civilians. HB 110 and HB 702 will promote criminal use of firearms as the firearms will be taken away from the registered owners' possession which greatly increases the likelihood the firearm will end up on the black market for resale where violent criminals obtain their weapons. HB 871 will also be ineffective as gun violence prevention means while again adding a monetary burden and serious disadvantage to law a biding citizens in the immediate face of danger. The people of Virginia do not support these policies that waste the time of politicians and money of the tax payer.

I oppose all of these unconstitutional bills.

HB 19 (McClure) requires forfeiture of firearm rights for a “dating relationship” misdemeanor. HB 21 (Helmer) allows civil lawsuits against firearm manufacturers and sellers for crimes committed with their products. HB 40 (Simon) outlaws unfinished frames and receivers unless serialized. HB 93 (Bennett-Parker) forces firearm surrender under protective orders in a way that could disarm innocent family members. HB 110 (Laufer) imposes a civil penalty and towing if a handgun is left in an unattended vehicle. HB 217 (Helmer) bans commonly owned firearms and standard-capacity magazines made after July 1, 2026. HB 229 (Hernandez) prohibits firearms and many knives in medical facilities. HB 626 (Callsen) restricts firearms on college campuses without lawful cause. HB 702 (Cole) establishes a firearm "turn-in and destroy" program funded by taxpayers. HB 871 (Downey) mandates specific storage requirements and biometric safes in homes with minors. HB 969 (Price) creates a state gun violence prevention agency focused solely on firearms. HB 1359 (Hope) creates a costly permit-to-purchase scheme with fingerprints, training requirements, and a de facto handgun registry. ALL of these bills are Unconstitutional and will cause Lawsuits and MASS NON COMPLIANCE

I oppose all these bills!

As a fellow virginian I am very disappointed in these outrageous bills proposed. They do nothing to stop criminals cause they don't follow rules or laws anyways it just hurts people trying to protect themselves from being hurt or God forbid something worse. I have lived in virginia my whole life and love this state but i also love the 2nd amendment and freedom to bear arms so please take in consideration myself and thousands of other virginian's that love the 2nd amendment and the state of Virginia and strike down these outrageous bills. Thank you for your time god bless the 2nd amendment and the state of Virginia!

All these bills are an infringement on our constitutional second amendment rights!

You ran as a middle of the road moderate ticket, and wanted to bring everyone together. all these bills go against that and alienate half of the state. You want bi partisan support? Well to get that you can not be going after law abiding citizens and take away a constitutionally protected right.

Hello, as a true Virginian whose family goes back to the founding of this state, country and fought in the revolutionary war. The anti gun bills being pushed on us are completely unconstitutional. My ancestors would be rolling in their graves right now knowing what you all are trying to do to our personal liberties, freedom and property. All of the anti gun legislation being pushed is not only unconstitutional but against previous Supreme Court rulings. You plan to turn over half of your state into criminals overnight for legally purchased items. So not only are you infringing on the 2nd Amendment but now on our 5th Amendment. 12 months in jail! Sounds like an 8th Amendment violation. True Virginians do not want these unconstitutional laws placed on us. Virginia is where freedom was won and not taken! I urge you all to vote against these unconstitutional bills. We are not California or New York. Our friends in Northern Virginia do not speak for all of Virginia anymore. My kindness regards. True Virginian.

These bills are ill-advised “solutions” in desperate search of largely non-existent problems. The 2nd amendment was quite clear. “Shall not be infringed” means exactly those words. These bills will only make law-abiding citizens less safe. Please actually consider your constituents safety instead of your partisan talking points.

I urge a vote against this, and any gun related bill, that would arguably restrict gun rights, or increase the cost of having,/buying firearms or ammunition, or create any kind of registry of such, of law abiding citizens of Virginia. Most of these bills would do nothing for saving lives, and criminals will not abide by them.

These anti-Second Amendment legislations violate the Second Amendment freedoms guaranteed by the United States Constitution and Virginia Constitution. These bills will not make Virginians safer. but will put us at risk for predatory criminals. Also, the Second Amendment wpuld protect us from a tyranical government. Who protects us from you? Do you so crave power that you must disatm us? Why do you hate fireams?

I oppose these bills. Limiting our right to defend ourselves will not reduce crime or make anyone safer, except violent criminals.

Dear Committee Chair, I am writing to respectfully urge you to OPPOSE these bills. These proposals place unconstitutional burdens on law-abiding citizens while failing to address the root causes of criminal misuse of firearms. Measures such as taxpayer-funded gun turn-in and destruction programs, knife and firearm bans at medical facilities, and magazine capacity restrictions unfairly target responsible gun owners in my community without demonstrable public safety benefits. I ask that you vote “NO” on this legislation and instead support policies that enforce existing laws and address criminal behavior, rather than restricting the rights of lawful citizens. Thank you for your time and consideration. Respectfully, Jan

My family and I hope you will reconsider all of these unconstitutional and tyrannical bills that seek to limit the God given right of citizens to defend themselves. Supporting these unconstitutional. bills as the Governor simultaneously supports the actions of Mr. Petti as a legal firearms owner, is indeed hypocrisy.

Good Morning. I respectfully oppose the following House Bills, which collectively place excessive burdens on law-abiding Virginians while offering little evidence of meaningful reductions in violent crime. These proposals raise serious concerns related to constitutional rights, due process, public safety, and cost. HB 19 (McClure) requires forfeiture of firearm rights for certain misdemeanors involving a broadly defined “dating relationship.” This imposes severe constitutional consequences without felony-level due process protections and relies on vague definitions prone to misuse. HB 21 (Helmer) allows civil lawsuits against firearm manufacturers and sellers for crimes committed with their products. This abandons long-standing liability principles by holding lawful businesses responsible for third-party criminal acts, increasing costs and reducing lawful access without improving public safety. HB 40 (Simon) criminalizes unfinished frames and receivers unless serialized, burdening lawful hobbyists and small manufacturers despite a lack of evidence that such items meaningfully drive crime. HB 93 (Bennett-Parker) mandates firearm surrender under protective orders in ways that may disarm innocent family members who are not accused of wrongdoing, undermining due process and property rights in shared households. HB 110 (Laufer) penalizes and allows towing of vehicles when a handgun is left unattended, even if secured. This may discourage lawful compliance with firearm-restricted locations by eliminating practical storage options. HB 217 (Helmer) bans commonly owned firearms and standard-capacity magazines manufactured after July 1, 2026. Such bans target arms in common lawful use and raise serious constitutional concerns while failing to address criminal misuse of existing firearms. HB 229 (Hernandez) prohibits firearms and many knives in medical facilities, removing lawful self-defense options from patients, visitors, and staff, including permit holders who have already undergone background checks. HB 626 (Callsen) restricts lawful firearm possession on college campuses, treating adult students and faculty as if they forfeit constitutional rights despite documented safety concerns and delayed emergency response times. HB 702 (Cole) establishes a taxpayer-funded firearm turn-in and destroy program with no demonstrated impact on violent crime, diverting resources from proven enforcement and prevention strategies. HB 871 (Downey) mandates specific storage methods and biometric safes in homes with minors, imposing costly, one-size-fits-all requirements that intrude into private homes and may delay access in emergencies. HB 969 (Price) creates a new state agency focused solely on firearms while ignoring broader contributors to violence such as repeat offenders, mental health access, and community-based interventions. HB 1359 (Hope) establishes a costly permit-to-purchase system with fingerprints, training mandates, and a de facto registry, creating delays and barriers to exercising a constitutional right without clear public safety benefits. Conclusion: Taken together, these bills represent a sweeping expansion of government control over lawful firearm ownership. They burden responsible citizens, weaken due process, and prioritize symbolic regulation over effective crime reduction. I urge the General Assembly to reject these measures and focus on enforcing existing laws and addressing violent criminal behavior.

Forum: These Bills are an attack on the lawful Citizen and will not stop the criminal element from doing harm. This has been proven time and time again. The intent of these Bills is to discourage the Citizenry from exercising their rights as protected by the US Constitution and the VA Constitution. These documents are explicit that our rights are being protected and not being given to us by the Govt. It is the Govt responsibility to protect our Bill of Rights and not to subvert them at the Federal and Local level. These bills seek to create a list and registry as forbidden by law. The declaration that all guns that are semi-automatic are "assault weapons" is absurd. The look of a gun does not define it as an assault weapon. These Bills have been stricken down by the highest court(s) in the land time and time again. The only reason for these bills is too attack the lawful citizen and will not do anything to stop the aggressor in his/her intent to do harm. There is significant history that illustrates that an armed populace in society is a peaceful and secure society. I respectfully oppose these Bills that attack the fundamental Bill of Rights that the Federal and State Constitutions protect. V/R, Mr. Charters

I stand with the VCDL and GOA. The proposed bills are tyrannical, these bills make it only harder on law abiding citizens. All gun laws are infringements on the Second Amendment. Just Remembering History” On April 21, 1775, Virginia’s Royal Governor, Lord Dunmore, ordered British marines to seize gunpowder from the Williamsburg powder magazine to prevent a colonial uprising. This "Gunpowder Incident" enraged colonists, leading to militia mobilization under Patrick Henry, forcing a payment for the powder and accelerating Virginia's march toward revolution. “

I oppose these bills because they are unconstitutional!!

I urge you not oppose all of these bills.

All of these bills pushing further gun control only hurt law abiding citizens and punish them for the actions of criminals. Further they aim to disarm potential victims in a lame attempt to establish “common sense” gun control that is anything but. California, Chicago, New York are the model for many of these bills and the evidence is clear that they are not effective and even harmful. If a criminal stole a car and drove it into a crowd of people, you wouldn’t hold the car’s owner responsible. You wouldn’t hold the vehicle’s manufacturer responsible. You wouldn’t pass a law that requires safe storage of vehicles. If someone exhibited a “red flag” you wouldn’t take aware their location driver’s license with no due process or investigation. We don’t do any of that because “common sense” says that it’s ridiculous. The difference between cars and firearms however is there is no Second Amendment for cars, which means that these laws make even less sense and are directly unconstitutional.

All of the aforementioned bills are a substantial attack the God given rights & the 2nd Amendment. These in fact are the opposite of good governance. How does the aforementioned reduce the size & scope of government? How does the aforementioned lead to affordability? There are no statistics that show a benefit to society! Furthermore the aforementioned will only lead to a higher government cost to the citizens while squashing the rights of the citizens!

As a resident of York County I am opposed to the bills listed above and wish for them to be rejected by this committee.

As a Virginian, I am completely opposed to HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB626, HB702, HB871, HB969, and HB1359. Similar ideas have been tried in the past in other states, and have been proven not to reduce any crime, but only serve to unnecessarily burden law-abiding citizens in the lawful exercise of their Second-Amendment rights. If "common sense" were used to try to reduce violent crime, it would be completely obvious that inanimate objects, can, by themselves, do nothing. The sole responsibility lies in the hands of the person who commits the crime, not in what object they chose to use in the perpetration of the crime. The focus of "public safety" initiatives should be keeping violent criminals off the streets, not limiting citizens of their Constitutionally -protected rights. I do not appreciate my tax dollars being used to advance this agenda, and then being further used to try to defend it in the inevitable litigation of these infringements on Virginian's rights. Thank you for your time.

All Anti-Gun bills are Unconstitutional and Impede Citizens' right to Self Defense. We, the residents of the Commonwealth of Virginia OPPOSE any and all of these and will fight each and every one of themthem

As a fellow Virginian, I urge you to please OPPOSE "gun control" bills in your committee. Concepts like an "assault weapons" ban, arbitrary magazine restrictions, "reasonable standards" for firearms businesses, and a "permit to purchase," just to name a few, do nothing to address crime in the Commonwealth. Criminals do not abide by the law, and bills like these only target law-abiding firearm owners and businesses. The General Assembly should instead pursue legislation that holds criminals accountable for their crimes, not legislation that creates new criminals overnight for lawful purchases. Many of the bills proposed have already been declared unconstitutional by multiple Supreme Court decisions. Most others are likely to be struct down in future court proceedings. Again, I urge you to OPPOSE gun control in your committee. Thank you for all that you do for Virginia. Respectfully, Mark Salamone

Unconstitutional. What part of shall not be infringed is misunderstood?

I firmly oppose any laws or policies that infringe upon my Second Amendment rights. I believe the right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental constitutional protection, and I do not support legislation that restricts law‑abiding citizens from exercising that right. Tucker Ophof Bristow, VA 20136

Stop all bills restricting our Second Amendment rights.

I strongly oppose this bill. HB 19

I am a resident of Ashburn in Loudoun County, Virginia. I respectfully submit the following written testimony in opposition to the bills listed below. HB1359 – Firearm purchase requirements; penalties I oppose HB1359 because it adds additional requirements and penalties that burden law-abiding purchasers without clear evidence of reducing criminal misuse. HB1427 – Limitation on handgun purchases I oppose HB1427 because purchase limits restrict lawful ownership while failing to address how firearms are obtained by those who commit crimes. HB19 – Firearms; purchase after assault & battery of family or household member I oppose HB19 due to due process and proportionality concerns, as it restricts rights prior to full adjudication rather than focusing on enforcement of existing protections. HB21 – Firearm industry members; civil liability standards I oppose HB21 because it expands civil liability in ways that risk penalizing lawful businesses for the actions of third parties without improving public safety. HB217 – Assault firearms and certain ammunition feeding devices I oppose HB217 because it targets lawful ownership based on firearm type rather than criminal misuse and lacks evidence of meaningful public safety benefit. HB229 – Weapons prohibited in certain hospitals I oppose HB229 because blanket prohibitions rely on disarmament rather than appropriate security and enforcement in sensitive facilities. HB24 – Concealed handgun permit reciprocity I oppose HB24 because limiting reciprocity penalizes lawful permit holders without deterring criminal activity, while Virginia’s current framework has functioned effectively. HB40 – Plastic or unserialized firearms I oppose HB40 due to overbroad definitions that risk unintended impacts on lawful ownership and small businesses rather than targeting criminal conduct. HB540 – Carrying firearms in restricted locations I oppose HB540 because expanding restricted locations increases complexity and the risk of unintentional violations by law-abiding citizens. HB700 – Waiting period for firearm purchases I oppose HB700 because mandatory waiting periods delay the exercise of a constitutional right without clear evidence of reducing violent crime. HB871 – Firearm storage requirements in residences I oppose HB871 because it imposes criminal penalties through broad storage mandates that may be difficult to apply consistently and fairly. HB907 – Security requirements for firearms dealers I oppose HB907 because it adds regulatory and penalty burdens on lawful dealers without clear evidence that such measures reduce criminal misuse. For these reasons, I respectfully urge the committee to oppose the bills listed above. Thank you for the opportunity to submit written testimony for the public record.

I appose this bill.

My name is Cole Zerrenner, and I am a registered voter residing in Ashburn, Loudoun County, Virginia. I respectfully submit this written testimony in opposition to the following bills scheduled before the House Public Safety – Firearms Subcommittee: HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB626, HB702, HB871, HB969, HB1300, HB1303, and HB1359. I oppose these bills because, taken individually and collectively, they impose additional restrictions and penalties on law-abiding citizens while failing to meaningfully address criminal misuse of firearms or the underlying causes of violence. Many of these proposals expand prohibitions, create new compliance burdens, or rely on vague standards that raise concerns regarding due process, inconsistent enforcement, and unintended consequences. Several of the bills before the subcommittee emphasize preemptive restrictions or broad prohibitions rather than focusing on enforcement of existing laws, accountability for criminal conduct, or effective mental health interventions. Policies that reduce procedural safeguards or delay the exercise of constitutional rights risk undermining public confidence without clear evidence of improved public safety outcomes. I respectfully urge the subcommittee to consider whether these measures meaningfully target criminal behavior or instead primarily impact responsible Virginians who already comply with the law. Public safety is best served through targeted enforcement, due process protections, and policies that address root causes rather than symbolic or duplicative restrictions. Thank you for the opportunity to submit written testimony for the public record and for your consideration of my views. Respectfully submitted, Cole Zerrenner Ashburn, Loudoun County, Virginia

First and foremost, I fully support any comments made by Virginia Citizens Defense League, The NRA, and Gun Owners of America in regard to support for the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. As a fellow Virginian, I urge you to please OPPOSE "gun control" bills in your committee. Concepts like an "assault weapons" ban, arbitrary magazine restrictions, "reasonable standards" for firearms businesses, and a "permit to purchase," just to name a few, do nothing to address crime in the Commonwealth. Criminals do not abide by the law, and bills like these only target law-abiding firearm owners and businesses. The General Assembly should instead pursue legislation that holds criminals accountable for their crimes, not legislation that creates new criminals overnight for lawful purchases. A lot of these proposed bills are unconstitutional and may even be a civil rights violation due to the fact that they most certainly will disproportionally have a negative effect on minorities, women, and people of lower income and certainly violating an 18–20 year-old persons 2nd Amendment right to own and bear arms. If they have to work and pay taxes and be held accountable as an adult you can't legally deny them any rights under the constitution. Many of these proposed bills have already successfully been challenged at the U.S. Supreme court in rulings supporting the 2nd amendment. Examples cases- v Heller and v Bruen, so you are intentionally trying to pass bills that will not hold up in court and wasting valuable taxpayer money to pursue these bills. Again, I urge you to OPPOSE gun control in your committee. Thank you for all that you do for Virginia. Sincerely, Chris McDorman

Why I Oppose Each Bill below: HB 19 – Opposition: Punishes a non‑violent misdemeanor unrelated to firearms. Violates: Heller (2008); Hayes (4th Cir. 2009) – proportionality; Bruen (2022) – no historical basis for such a blanket ban. HB 21 – Opposition: Imposes strict liability for third‑party crimes, chilling lawful commerce. Violates: Heller (2008); Printz (1997) – cannot commandeer private actors; Bruen (2022) – no historic analogue. HB 40 – Opposition: Criminalizes already‑lawful homemade components and deprives property without compensation. Violates: Heller (2008); Miller (1939) – regulation must have a reasonable safety link; Bruen (2022); Lucas (1992) – takings. HB 93 – Opposition: Overbroad removal punishes lawful spouses and 18‑20‑year‑olds who may already possess firearms. Violates: Heller (2008); McDonald (2010); Bruen (2022) – age‑restriction lacks history; Carpenter (2018) – vague “if officer believes” standard violates due process. HB 110 – Opposition: Penalizes mere visibility and treats the gun as property that can be seized without due process. Violates: Heller (2008); Jones (2012) – towing = unlawful seizure; Bruen (2022) – no historic precedent. HB 217 – Opposition: Bars weapons in common lawful use and imposes capacity limits without historical support. Violates: Heller (2008); Bruen (2022); Miller v. Bonta (9th Cir. 2021). HB 229 – Opposition: Prevents lawful armed visitors in public medical settings without a narrow justification. Violates: Heller (2008); Bruen (2022); Katz (1967) – potential Fourth‑Amendment search issues. HB 626 – Opposition: Denies adult students the right to self‑defense on public campuses. Violates: Heller (2008); Bruen (2022); Washington v. Davis (1976) – lacks rational basis. HB 702 – Opposition: Authorizes confiscation/destruction of lawfully owned property without compensation or due process. Violates: Heller (2008); Kelo (2005) – takings require just compensation; Bruen (2022) - no historic precedent. HB 871 – Opposition: Expensive, tech‑exclusive requirement makes lawful loaded storage impracticable. Violates: Heller (2008); Bruen (2022); Willowbrook v. Olech (2000) – overinclusive impact on owners with minors. HB 969 – Opposition: Single‑issue agency risks viewpoint discrimination and may enable firearm‑specific regulations lacking constitutional footing. Violates: Heller (2008); Bruen (2022); Mathews v. Eldridge (1976) – inadequate procedural due process. HB 1359 – Opposition: Creates costly, time‑consuming barriers that effectively deny the right to acquire firearms for lawful purposes. Violates: Heller (2008); Bruen (2022); McDonald (2010); Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections (1966) – fee structure resembles a poll tax. The Virginia Constitution’s Article I § 16 protects an individual’s right to keep and bear arms, and the state Supreme Court requires any limitation to be narrowly tailored, historically grounded, and consistent with due‑process (§ 13) and takings (§ 14) protections. The bills listed: HB 19, 93, 110, 871 (mandatory surrenders/penalties); HB 21, 40, 1359 (civil‑liability or costly licensing); HB 217, 229, 626, 702 (bans on common‑use firearms or accessories); and HB 969 (a gun‑only state agency)—all impose restrictions without a clear historical analogue, over‑reach permissible regulation, and create undue financial or procedural burdens. Consequently, they conflict with Virginia’s constitutional guarantees.

I SUPPORT HB1303. A right delayed is a right denied. I OPPOSE HB19: Misdemeanors should not remove rights. I OPPOSE HB21: How could a firearm accessory seller reasonably know if they were selling a gun sling to a prohibited person? Should a car parts store be sued if they sold a seat cover for a car used in a bank robbery? I OPPOSE HB40: Even a chunk of aluminum, if sold to the public to become a frame or receiver once completed, must be serialized under this bill. The bill doesn’t grandfather existing homemade firearms. This bill is unconstitutional under Bruen. Homemade guns have been legal since before the United States existed. I OPPOSE HB93: There are multiple problems with the bill as written. If a husband and wife co-own a shotgun for home defense, for example, and the husband gets a protective order issued against him, the wife would no longer have access to that co-owned shotgun. That punishes the wife and needlessly endangers her life. Also, a person 18-20yo can legally possess rifles, shotguns, and handguns. Others right can not be removed because of the actions of another. I OPPOSE HB110: The car owner should not be at fault even if a criminal opens an unlocked car door to steal a firearm. It is the criminal who is solely to blame. I OPPOSE HB217: The U.S. Supreme Court has said in both DC v Heller, and recently in Bruen, that any firearm “in common use” is protected by the 2A. The guns and magazines targeted by this bill are among the most common guns and magazines in the US & VA, making this bill unconstitutional. I OPPOSE HB229: Disarming visitors and guests, including concealed handgun permit holders, at such facilities violates their right to protect themselves in an emergency. A U.S. District Court in the 2nd Circuit has restrained enforcement of just such a law for being unconstitutional under Bruen. I OPPOSE HB626: A solution in search of a problem. Higher education students and staff are adults and have a right to self-defense. I OPPOSE HB702: Destroying what might be perfectly functional, and possibly quite valuable, firearms is a waste of money. The State could offset any costs by selling the firearms to licensed gun dealers through an auction. This program is a “turn in” and not a “give-back” program, the government never owned them. I OPPOSE HB871: Biometric safes are more expensive than non-biometric safes. Biometric safes can be unreliable when being used under stress and they also require batteries to work. There are plenty of other locking mechanisms for safes that are more secure. I OPPOSE HB969: The Center would only be targeting violence committed using firearms and ignoring the root causes of crime, as well as all the other ways violence is inflicted on victims – knives, blunt objects, hands and feet, etc. Half of violent crimes are not committed with a firearm! I OPPOSE HB1359: This bill WILL get innocent people killed, as it will take at least two months before a person can purchase their first firearm. If they are purchasing that firearm for urgent self-defense, that is simply too long. The price to get a permit, is not equitable. Even citizens with CHPs will be limited to one handgun a month. Local law-enforcement will be handed a registry of gun owners. And gun rentals at shooting ranges will not be possible for people who have not yet got their permit or are visiting from out of state or from another country. It is sickening to see this bill even proposed.

This document breaks down my reasoning for supporting these bills.

I SUPPORT THIS BILL

Disarming the law-abiding, tax-paying citizenry of the Commonwealth is going to drive me away from this state. Stop creating unconstitutional efforts that curtail my Rights as an American Citizen. If you want to change the Right, then change the Constitution through the amendment process. Otherwise, focus on what you can really change and fund. Schools and roads. Quit wasting my hard earned money that I spend on local businesses that keep Virginians employed. I am not the only one who will vote with my feet. I left California for a reason...not you're trying to re-create it on the East coast.

Too many people with guns that shouldn’t be with guns. I know lazy gun owners who have had their items stolen. Lazy gun owners might as well be donating their legal firearms to criminals- putting them in dangerous hands should have more severe consequences. Adam T. lost his life protecting someone in a situation that could’ve been avoided if weapons weren’t involved. More strict gun laws will result in fewer cases of gun violence like this.

I support these bills to prevent gun violence in Virginia. Attached is the story of my friend Adam Turck’s tragic death due to gun violence in August 2025, and why the Friends of Adam Turck are choosing to support these five bills. Virginians like Adam have a right to be kind and brave without being killed, and it is the job of the state to guarantee that right.

Its is vital to the safety of the community that these bills be passed. on August 2, 2025 not to far from the capital building, one of my best friends, Adam Turck, was shot and killed on a beautiful Saturday morning trying to help a woman in the middle of a domestic violence altercation. The individual who shot him was a 19 year old boy who illegally had a gun. There were several eye witnesses and 2 recordings of the event that showed that Adam did everything right in remaining calm and attempting to defuse the situation, but that was not enough. Adam was a brave, kind and caring person. He would never be able to leave someone in need, but if these laws had been in place, he may never have had to step in in this situation. His lose has devastated our community and that is why we have come together to make sure these bills get passed. I know that the situations are not unique, as tragic as that is... and something needs to be done. Please vote yes.

HB 110 I SUPPORT this bill. HB 110 prohibits leaving a handgun visible in an unattended vehicle on public property. Simply put, it requires gun owners to store the firearm out of sight—such as in the glove compartment, center console —to prevent it from being readily observable from outside. This requirement is straightforward and not onerous for responsible gun owners. Many already take this basic precaution. HB 110 will help deter gun thefts from vehicles—a major source of stolen firearms entering criminal hands. HB 110 is a reasonable, narrowly tailored measure that promotes public safety without infringing on lawful gun ownership. HB19 I SUPPORT this bill. Under current Virginia law, a person convicted of misdemeanor assault against a family or household member is prohibited from possessing a firearm. This protection currently only applies primarily to spouses, ex-spouses or those with a child in common. It does not fully cover other intimate partners. There is no reasonable basis to treat violence against a dating partner differently from violence against a spouse when it comes to preventing harm from firearms. Those convicted of domestic assault should be prohibited from possessing firearms, full stop. HB 19 is a targeted, limited expansion of existing law. It closes the dangerous “boyfriend loophole” by extending the firearm prohibition to misdemeanor convictions for assault and battery against an intimate partner. This common-sense measure will help protect victims and the Commonwealth’s citizens. HB 93 I SUPPORT this bill. Under current Virginia law, individuals subject to a protective order or convicted of misdemeanor domestic assault are prohibited from possessing firearms. However, there is no clear mechanism to ensure these prohibited individuals actually relinquish their guns, leaving survivors at continued risk. HB 93 creates a straightforward enforcement mechanism for laws already on the books. It is targeted, limited in scope, and focused on protecting survivors of domestic violence by reducing the risk of armed abusers. This common-sense measure will help safeguard the Commonwealth’s citizens without creating new prohibitions. HB 21 SUPPORT this bill. HB 21 would require firearm industry members—manufacturers, distributors, importers, and sellers—to implement “reasonable procedures, safeguards, and business practices” to prevent the sale or distribution of firearms to prohibited persons, straw purchasers (those buying for someone barred from ownership), firearm traffickers, or anyone the seller has reasonable cause to believe poses a substantial risk of gun violence or self-harm. Firearm manufacturers and distributors handle a uniquely dangerous product. Like sellers of any potentially hazardous good, they should maintain reasonable safeguards to protect the public from negligent or reckless business practices that endanger Virginians. HB 1359 I SUPPORT this bill. HB 1359 would require any person who purchases a firearm to present a valid firearms purchaser license issued by the Department of State Police. as we require vehicle owners to obtain and maintain a license before driving a car, we should require gun owners to obtain and maintain a license before possessing a firearm. Attached is information about my friend Adam, who was a victim of gun violence last year.

I am IN SUPPORT of HB19. Currently our law prohibits the ownership of firearms by individuals convicted of misdemeanor assault against a family or household member. This is a fantastic and necessary law but it leaves open the dangerous "boyfriend loophole." HB19 is a targeted, limited expansion of the existing law and closes this loophole by including "intimate partners" in the list of those prohibited from possessing firearms. In an age when many intimate partners co-habitat for years before marriage (if they chose to marry at all), this expansion is absolutely paramount to providing legal safety to victims of domestic abuse. Any submission to the committee which claims HB19 "limits freedoms" is folly. This law only restricts the ownership of firearms to specific individuals who have been CONVICTED OF A VIOLENT CRIME -- against a person who lived with and TRUSTED them. Those individuals deserve limited freedoms as a result of their conviction. On August 2, 2025, my friend, Adam Turck, while deescalating a domestic dispute, became the victim of gun violence. Adam saved a life that day, but tragically lost his own. This occurred on a neighborhood street in Richmond, VA -- in broad day light. The shooter then turned the firearm on himself, ending another life. Had this bill been in effect, there is a strong chance that no lives would have been lost that day. We count on lawmakers such as yourselves to pass effective gun safety laws like HB19 and save these lives BEFORE tragedy strikes. Before we lose our innocent. Before we lose our heroes. This law is designed to save lives. I SUPPORT IT. This law is designed to protect the abused. I SUPPORT IT.

My friend Adam was killed late last year helping save someone from violence committed by their partner. The perpetrator pulled a gun out of his backpack and shot Adam, then turned the gun on himself. Any one of these bills could have played a role in ensuring this did not happen, and saved so many people from devastating loss. I urge you to pass these bills.

As a concerned resident, parent, and active voter, I support this bill to keep Virginians safe from gun violence.

In summary, I support House Bills 19, 93, 110, 201, 691, 696, 702, 871, 901, 909, 969, 1303, and 1359. I oppose House Bills 21, 40, 207, 217, 229, 626, 700, 907, 919. Please refer to my attached document for further explanation.

As a father, I want to raise my child in a world where doing the right thing doesn't put them in danger. My friend Adam did the right thing. He stepped in to help someone who was in a bad situation, and that decision—one he made with clear eyes and a full heart for humanity—cost him his life. While I appreciate that many constituents in this state are opposed to any restrictions on their 2nd amendment rights, there are many more who support reasonable efforts to restrict access to firearms and penalize those who are careless with the weapons they own. We cannot say with any certainty that the passing of bills like HB 19 or HB 110 would have prevented Adam's death, but we can they will save others' in the future. And that's worth fighting for.

I SUPPORT this bill. The current law only applies primarily to spouses, ex-spouses or those with a child in common. It does not fully cover other intimate partners. There is no reasonable basis to treat violence against a dating partner differently from violence against a spouse when it comes to preventing harm from firearms. Those convicted of domestic assault should be prohibited from possessing firearms, full stop. HB 19 is a targeted, limited expansion of existing law that closes the dangerous “boyfriend loophole” by extending the firearm prohibition to misdemeanor convictions for assault and battery against an intimate partner. This common-sense measure will help protect victims and the Commonwealth’s citizens. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. Attached is the leave-behind of the Friends of Adam Turck, telling his story and advocating for the bills that could have prevented his murder.

I am writing in memory of my friend Adam Turck, who was murdered with a .22 caliber handgun in Shockoe Bottom in August 2025. I support the following bills because I believe they will go a long way toward ensuring that what happened to Adam doesn't happen again. HB110: I SUPPORT this bill. HB 110 prohibits leaving a handgun visible in an unattended vehicle on public property. Simply put, it requires gun owners to store the firearm out of sight—such as in the glove compartment, center console —to prevent it from being readily observable from outside. This requirement is straightforward and not onerous for responsible gun owners. Many already take this basic precaution. Importantly, HB 110 will help deter gun thefts from vehicles—a major source of stolen firearms entering criminal hands. I want to stress that I support this bill, but not the similar bill being considered by the Senate, because it imposes a civil fine instead of a criminal penalty. HB 110 is a reasonable, narrowly tailored measure that promotes public safety without infringing on lawful gun ownership. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. HB19 I SUPPORT this bill. Under current Virginia law, a person convicted of misdemeanor assault against a family or household member is prohibited from possessing a firearm. However, this protection currently only applies primarily to spouses, ex-spouses or those with a child in common. It does not fully cover other intimate partners. There is no reasonable basis to treat violence against a dating partner differently from violence against a spouse when it comes to preventing harm from firearms. HB 19 is a targeted, limited expansion of existing law. It closes the dangerous “boyfriend loophole” by extending the firearm prohibition to misdemeanor convictions for assault and battery against an intimate partner. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. HB38 Under current Virginia law, individuals subject to a protective order or convicted of misdemeanor domestic assault are prohibited from possessing firearms. However, there is no clear mechanism to ensure these prohibited individuals actually relinquish their guns, leaving survivors at continued risk. HB 93 addresses this gap. The bill also notifies the individual that law enforcement may seek a search warrant if there's reason to believe firearms have not been relinquished. HB 93 creates a straightforward enforcement mechanism for laws already on the books. It is targeted, limited in scope, and focused on protecting survivors of domestic violence by reducing the risk of armed abusers. This common-sense measure will help safeguard the Commonwealth’s citizens without creating new prohibitions. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. HB21 I SUPPORT this bill. HB 21 would require firearm industry members to implement “reasonable procedures, safeguards, and business practices” to prevent the sale or distribution of firearms to prohibited persons, straw purchasers, firearm traffickers, or anyone the seller has reasonable cause to believe poses a substantial risk of gun violence or self-harm. In short, this bill establishes basic standards of responsible conduct and makes it easier to hold the industry accountable for reckless practices that fuel illegal gun trafficking, straw purchases, or other harms in our communities. This is a targeted, common-sense step toward greater accountability and safer communities. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill.

I SUPPORT this bill. Under current Virginia law, a person convicted of misdemeanor assault against a family or household member is prohibited from possessing a firearm. This is a reasonable restriction—we do not want domestic abusers to have access to firearms, given their known propensity for violence. Nationally, firearms are used in more than half of intimate partner homicides, and the presence of a gun in a domestic violence situation makes it five times more likely that a woman will be killed. However, this protection currently only applies primarily to spouses, ex-spouses or those with a child in common. It does not fully cover other intimate partners. There is no reasonable basis to treat violence against a dating partner differently from violence against a spouse when it comes to preventing harm from firearms. Those convicted of domestic assault should be prohibited from possessing firearms, full stop. HB 19 is a targeted, limited expansion of existing law. It closes the dangerous “boyfriend loophole” by extending the firearm prohibition to misdemeanor convictions for assault and battery against an intimate partner. This common-sense measure will help protect victims and the Commonwealth’s citizens. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill.

I SUPPORT this bill. HB 110 prohibits leaving a handgun visible in an unattended vehicle on public property. Simply put, it requires gun owners to store the firearm out of sight—such as in the glove compartment, center console —to prevent it from being readily observable from outside. This requirement is straightforward and not onerous for responsible gun owners. Many already take this basic precaution. Importantly, HB 110 will help deter gun thefts from vehicles—a major source of stolen firearms entering criminal hands. Research shows that vehicle thefts account for roughly half of all reported gun thefts nationally in recent years, and stolen guns contribute significantly to firearm-related crimes. In Richmond alone vehicle gun thefts have skyrocketed: from 225 reported in 2017 to over 600 in recent years (e.g., 644 in 2023 and similarly high numbers since). Leaving a handgun in plain view in an unattended vehicle is irresponsible and unnecessarily endangers our community. HB 110 is a reasonable, narrowly tailored measure that promotes public safety without infringing on lawful gun ownership. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill.

Comments Document

I SUPPORT THIS BILL.

I SUPPORT this bill. Under current Virginia law, a person convicted of misdemeanor assault against a family or household member is prohibited from possessing a firearm. This is a reasonable restriction—we do not want domestic abusers to have access to firearms, given their known propensity for violence. Nationally, firearms are used in more than half of intimate partner homicides, and the presence of a gun in a domestic violence situation makes it five times more likely that a woman will be killed. However, this protection currently only applies primarily to spouses, ex-spouses or those with a child in common. It does not fully cover other intimate partners. There is no reasonable basis to treat violence against a dating partner differently from violence against a spouse when it comes to preventing harm from firearms. Those convicted of domestic assault should be prohibited from possessing firearms, full stop. HB 19 is a targeted, limited expansion of existing law. It closes the dangerous “boyfriend loophole” by extending the firearm prohibition to misdemeanor convictions for assault and battery against an intimate partner. This common-sense measure will help protect victims and the Commonwealth’s citizens. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill.

I SUPPORT this bill. In August 2025, my friend Adam Turck witnessed an act of domestic violence in public. He stepped in to deescalate the situation and was shot by the assailant. Adam lost his life by saving another’s. This legislation could have saved him and will save countless others. Under the current law a person that has been convicted of assaulting a family member may not intentionally purchase, own, or transport a gun. HB19 would expand these protections to include intimate partners and close the “Boyfriend Loop”. Marital status should be irrelevant when protecting people from their partners. The link between gun violence and domestic violence is very clear. Each year, between 700 – 900 people are killed in intimate partner violence. Gun violence is involved in over half of these instances. This is common-sense legislature that will help better protect our Commonwealth as a whole. Accordingly, I support this bill.

Comments Document

I support these Bills

Comments Document

I SUPPORT this bill. My friend Adam Turck was shot and killed by someone who had prior pending assault charges against an intimate partner. The person who shot him was arguing with his partner in the street, in broad daylight. This is not someone who should have access to a gun. Under current Virginia law, a person convicted of misdemeanor assault against a family or household member is prohibited from possessing a firearm. This is a reasonable restriction—we do not want domestic abusers to have access to firearms, given their known propensity for control tactics and shame issues that spiral into violence over time. Nationally, firearms are used in more than half of intimate partner homicides, and the presence of a gun in a domestic violence situation makes it five times more likely that a woman will be killed. However, this protection currently only applies primarily to spouses, ex-spouses, or those with a child in common. It does not fully cover other intimate partners. There is no reasonable basis to treat violence against a dating partner differently from violence against a spouse when it comes to preventing harm from firearms. Anyone intimate with someone who has domestic violence charges may not have the strength to leave immediately, but that does not mean they should put in mortal danger or be killed. Adam gave his life for someone he didn't know, trying to stop a cycle of violence he never was a part of. The woman he saved may have never gotten out of that situation. Both the police and onlookers confirmed if Adam had not stepped in, there is no question she would be dead. Those convicted of domestic assault should be prohibited from possessing firearms, full stop. HB 19 is a targeted, limited expansion of existing law. It closes the dangerous “boyfriend loophole” by extending the firearm prohibition to misdemeanor convictions for assault and battery against an intimate partner. This common-sense measure will help protect victims and the Commonwealth’s citizens. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. For Virginia. For Richmond. For Adam.

HB 110 – Firearm in unattended vehicle; civil penalties I SUPPORT this bill. HB 110 is a reasonable, narrowly tailored measure that promotes public safety without infringing on lawful gun ownership. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. HB19 – Purchase, possession, or transportation of firearm; assault and battery of a family or household member or intimate partner; penalties I SUPPORT this bill. HB 19 is a targeted, limited expansion of existing law. It closes the dangerous “boyfriend loophole” by extending the firearm prohibition to misdemeanor convictions for assault and battery against an intimate partner. This common-sense measure will help protect victims and the Commonwealth’s citizens. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. HB 93 – Firearms; transfers to another person from a prohibited person I SUPPORT this bill. HB 93 creates a straightforward enforcement mechanism for laws already on the books. It is targeted, limited in scope, and focused on protecting survivors of domestic violence by reducing the risk of armed abusers. This common-sense measure will help safeguard the Commonwealth’s citizens without creating new prohibitions. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. HB21 – Firearm industry members; creates standards of responsible conduct, civil liability (available here) I SUPPORT this bill. This is a targeted, common-sense step toward greater accountability and safer communities. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. HB 1359 – Firearm purchase requirements; penalties (available here) I SUPPORT this bill. HB 1359 would require any person who purchases a firearm to present a valid firearms purchaser license issued by the Department of State Police. This bill would have three large practical impacts: (i) Prohibit possession of firearms by anyone under age 21; (ii) require regular firearms safety training for all licensed owners to promote responsible handling and storage (iii) create a de facto waiting period: Individuals could not purchase a firearm without first obtaining a license, a process that can take up to 45 days. This would help reduce impulsive purchases that can lead to irreversible harm in our communities. Just as we require vehicle owners to obtain and maintain a license before driving a car, we should require gun owners to obtain and maintain a license before possessing a firearm. This is a targeted, common-sense step toward greater accountability and safer communities. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill.

Comments Document

I support these bills.

I stand strongly with the VCDL on these proposed laws. VA has always been a bipartisan state on gun issues, and although the second amendment has may purposes- it must be preserved to protect the citizens of this state. Overreaching federal law enforcement, and all threats domestic and foreign are kept in line by responsible firearm ownership. Gun control also impacts lower income groups, impoverished populations, and people of color disproportionately. We must preserve the 2nd amendment.

I support HB19. People in all relationships, not just marriage, deserve to be protected from the increased risk of violence when guns and domestic violence intersect. This bill ensures that intimate partner, or dating relationships, are included in the definition of domestic violence and the firearms prohibitions that already exist are applicable. For example, this bill would include a relationship where a woman cohabitates with her boyfriend but isn't married to him.

As a concerned parent and Virginian, I support these bills.

I strongly oppose this bill.

I am writing to express my strong opposition to the recently proposed bills on gun control. While I understand the intent behind these bills—to enhance public safety—I firmly believe that they will have unintended consequences that infringe on the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens. The Second Amendment guarantees "the right of individuals to keep and bear arms", and it is a fundamental part of what makes this country free. These bills being proposed would place unnecessary and burdensome restrictions on responsible gun owners, making it harder for Virginians to exercise their rights in a lawful and safe manner. Rather than focusing on restricting access to firearms, I urge the General Assembly to consider measures that target criminals and illegal activities, such as enforcing stricter penalties for those who use firearms in the commission of crimes, or improving background checks for gun purchases. It is essential to address the root causes of violence, such as mental health issues and gang-related activity, rather than punishing responsible gun owners who follow the law. Furthermore, these proposed bills could create significant logistical challenges for gun owners, particularly those who rely on their firearms for self-defense, hunting, or recreational activities. The financial burden and potential legal ramifications of complying with these new regulations would be overwhelming for many Virginians. I strongly urge you to reconsider these proposals and to focus on policies that protect both our rights and our communities. I trust that you will make the best decision for all Virginians, and I sincerely hope that you will oppose these bills.

I strongly oppose HB19, which expands firearm restrictions for individuals convicted of assault and battery against intimate partners or cohabitants. The bill's broad definition of "intimate partner" could unfairly penalize individuals based on brief or non-abusive relationships, potentially leading to unjust consequences for people who do not pose a genuine risk. By tying firearm restrictions to misdemeanor offenses, the bill risks criminalizing individuals who have already faced legal consequences for their actions, without clear evidence of ongoing danger. While protecting victims of domestic violence is crucial, This bill risks undermining due process by imposing blanket penalties without consideration of the circumstances. Rather than broad punitive measures, the commonwealth should focus on targeted interventions that support both victims and offenders in addressing the root causes of domestic violence instead of blaming objects for the crimes of people.

We support HB19 because it will expand critical protection for people in domestically violent relationships. This bill includes protecting people who are in non marital relationships.

The Idea of taking away a right, without due process, and for a misdemeanor offense is incompatible with our Commonwealth's idea of civil liberties. Especially when such crimes are not even convictions. This proposal will give vengeful partners the ability to attack their partner in yet another legal avenue whether or not any such danger is unfounded or not by law enforcement. Therefore, I cannot support this bill.

HB110, Del. Laufer (D): This bill will save lives by eliminating provisions allowing any person to store their firearms in their car and preventing firearms from being stolen from cars. I SUPPORT this bill as half of all stolen guns are ones that are stolen from a car, and half of all crimes committed with a gun have a stolen gun used. This is a straightforward way to reduce these crimes and gun violence. HB19, Del. McClure (D): I SUPPORT this bill as it expands critical protections to additional relationship categories. This is a critical step to ensuring that more individuals are protected from domestic violence and gun violence. HB21, Del. Helmer (D): I SUPPORT this bill as industry accountability is a great way to force manufacturers to raise standards of safety. Firearm manufacturers and distributors must be held accountable for reckless behavior and practices that make our communities less safe. HB229, Del. Hernandez (D): I SUPPORT this bill and commonsense restrictions on gun access and believe in protecting the safety of our medical care providers. HB24, Del. Helmer (D): I SUPPORT this bill as visitors wishing to carry concealed handguns in Virginia should meet the same level of safety requirements that we require of our state’s residents. HB40, Del. Simon (D): I SUPPORT this bill as it would make it easier to prosecute and prevent crimes committed by ghost guns. HB626, Del. Callsen (D): I SUPPORT extending the protection of k-12 schools to our institutions of higher education. HB702, Del. Cole (D): I SUPPORT this bill as currently it can be incredibly difficult to find a way to get a gun destroyed that you no longer want or has come into your possession through something like inheritance. The public benefits from the creation of more drop-off point for individuals, of their own free will, to relinquish firearms to be destroyed. HB700, Hayes (D): I SUPPORT this bill as waiting periods provide law enforcement additional time to perform an accurate background check and create a “cooling off” period to prevent acts of violence or suicide attempts. HB93, Bennett-Parker: I SUPPORT this bill, as it strengthens protections for domestic violence survivors. We must establish a clear process to separate a person from their firearms who has been convicted of a domestic violence offense, or who is subject to a protective order.

Adam Turck was shot and killed in August of 2025 when he saw someone in trouble and intervened to help. He was in his early 30's and beloved in both the theater and weightlifting community here in RVA. Lets not make his loss of life be in vain. Gun ownership is already at an all time high, so it makes sense to enact laws that reflect that. These four bills are not trying to take away anyone's guns. They are trying to create deterrents to tragic events like the one that happened to Adam. Please dont be swayed by the ugly rhetoric that I have read in some of the comments. We can enact a few common sense gun safety laws without people fearing that their guns will be taken away. That is an old argument and one that is never going to be realized. So lets move on from that and do what we can to ensure the public safety as much as possible. Thanks for your consideration of: HB 93, HB 702, HB 110, and HB 19

I support HB19 because domestic violence does not only occur in marriages. Including intimate partner and dating relationships — such as cohabitating partners — and applying firearm prohibitions ensures more people receive the protection they deserve.

I support the presented gun laws that will improve the Commonwealth’s safety

The biggest issue with this bill is that it means someone convicted of a misdemeanor gets one of their constitutional rights stripped from them for 3 years. A misdemeanor should never strip someone of their constitutional rights.

In 2021, my elderly stepmother shot through a closed door during an argument with my elderly father, striking him in the back and paralyzing him. My father has spent the past five years in extreme physical agony, unable to walk, paying caretakers out of pocket to hoist him in and out of bed, unable to care for himself. The lack of movement in his life has led to horrific bed sores, which become bone infections, which lead to extended hospital stays and a horrible quality of life. All this because my stepmother was allowed to have a gun. There are countless stories like this of the bullet's aftermath: of the lifelong physical and mental damage that comes from guns. It has been a horrific five years, full of physical pain and mental anguish for our entire family. I wouldn't wish this on anyone. The bills before you now will not only save lives, they will spare whole swaths of our neighborhoods from needing to deal with these horrors. One bullet, lodged in my father's spine, didn't kill him. Instead, it has shattered the life he had, his ability to work and care for himself, and his family. Each bullet we allow in our communities has the ability to do the same. His care has bankrupted him personally, and now he relies on state care and Medicaid, an avoidable burden on taxpayers. There are numerous reasons guns have no place in our society, and I hope my father's story is just one that helps make change. Please support all bills that make guns harder to access, harder to keep. Please do everything you can to keep guns out of the hands of our society. Thank you for the great work you are doing to keep Virginians safe.

This bill ensures that intimate partner, or dating relationships, are included in the definition of domestic violence and firearms prohibitions are applicable. We SUPPORT this bill as it expands critical protections to additional relationship categories. For example, this bill would include a relationship where a woman cohabitates with her boyfriend.

I am writing to oppose the current slate of firearm restriction bills before the General Assembly. While these proposals are framed as public safety measures, in practice they disproportionately harm marginalized Virginians — including racial minorities, LGBTQ+ individuals (especially trans people), immigrants, and low-income residents — who often face higher risks of targeted violence and slower or unequal police response. These bills add costs, delays, and bureaucratic hurdles to exercising a fundamental right. Increased fees, mandatory waiting periods, feature bans, and expanded disqualifications fall hardest on people with limited financial resources, unstable work schedules, or justified concerns about their personal safety. For many vulnerable individuals, the ability to lawfully and promptly acquire a firearm is not about ideology, but about self-defense. History shows that restrictive gun laws are most aggressively enforced in minority communities, amplifying disparities in arrests, prosecution, and legal exposure — even when no harm has occurred. Expanding civil liability, criminal penalties, and subjective risk standards increases that risk. Public safety should not come at the expense of civil rights or equal access to self-protection. Policies that price people out of their rights or delay lawful self-defense do not address the root causes of violence and instead leave the most vulnerable less safe. I respectfully urge you to oppose these bills and support approaches that protect both public safety and the rights of all Virginians, regardless of income, identity, or background. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Such bills if passed would provide little benefit to the safety of Virginia citizens. Gun violence is not a major concern in Virginia, and criminals will neither abide nor be limited by such legislation. Instead, many responsible citizens would lose their rights. There is no reason to pass such measures. In addition, many of these bills are not written to an excellent level of clarity and will spur much confusion on what remains legal or illegal.

I support this bill as the data and evidence show that it will reduce harm and deaths from guns. Taking this measure will ensure that guns are used responsibly and only for the intended consequences. Owning a gun is a serious responsibility and measures like this must be put into action as currently they are being misused and causing an epidemic in this country. Guns are the #1 killer of children and teens in the United States. When the impact of an item causes so much harm, measures must be put into place to protect people, especially children.

I support the following bills because guns are the number one cause of death for children in our commonwealth and our nation. HB 110 will help reduce the number of gun thefts from cars, and these thefts are on the rise. Additionally, we need to close the boyfriend loophole from domestic violence offenders (HB19).

This is a 2nd amendment violation. The constitution does not exclude where I can and can't carry a firearm and nether will you.

This is a 2nd amendment violation. The constitution does not exclude where I can and can't carry a firearm and nether will you.

My rights and 2nd amendment shall not be infringed apon! Everyone has a God given right to the 2nd amendment. Every one should have there gun and use it to defend their selves if needed.

I respectfully submit this comment as a concerned Virginia citizen (and member of r/VAGuns) to oppose House Bill 19, which would criminalize the purchase, possession, or transportation of a firearm following a misdemeanor conviction for certain assault and battery offenses. The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, § 13 of the Virginia Constitution protect the right to keep and bear arms. The Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller recognized an individual right to possess firearms for self-defense and invalidated broad disarmament of law-abiding adults. McDonald v. City of Chicago incorporated that protection against the states. New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen directs courts to evaluate firearm restrictions based on historical tradition rather than utilitarian balancing. Under the Bruen framework, the Commonwealth must identify historical analogues to justify disarming individuals based on misdemeanor convictions. HB 19 lacks clear historical tradition for disqualification based solely on non-violent or low-level misdemeanors tied to “intimate partner” definitions. There is no tradition of disarming individuals for such convictions distinct from historically recognized serious crimes. This bill is unconstitutional in proscribing rights beyond historically established prohibitions. While domestic violence is a serious social problem, the extension of firearm prohibitions to certain misdemeanor convictions has not been shown conclusively to reduce violent crime. RAND’s systematic reviews find inconclusive evidence on the effectiveness of broad prohibited-person categories in reducing firearm violence; the strongest evidence supports targeted interventions rather than expansive categorical bans. Federal and state crime data (FBI UCR/NIBRS; CDC WISQARS) show intimate partner violence involves many forms of harm, not all of which correlate with firearm use. Expanding prohibited persons without clear linkage to actual firearm misuse dilutes enforcement priorities and diverts resources from interventions with stronger evidence of effectiveness. HB 19 creates a Class 1 misdemeanor for possession after qualifying convictions and defines “family or household member” and “intimate partner” expansively, including cohabitants within the past 12 months. This could unintentionally penalize lawful co-owners of firearms where one partner is disqualified, creating inconsistent and inequitable outcomes. The statutory text does not address shared property or distinguish between cases where firearms were involved in the underlying offense and those where they were not. Similar measures in other states have generated enforcement challenges, ambiguity in scope, and increased court burdens without public safety benefits. Broad prohibitory schemes carry disparate impacts. Misdemeanor convictions disproportionately affect marginalized communities; layering firearm disabilities on top of existing penalties exacerbates collateral consequences without clear public safety justification. The bill’s blanket three-year prohibition may hinder employment, housing, and civic participation, deepening socioeconomic inequities. HB 19 expands prohibited-person categories in a manner that is constitutionally dubious under Bruen, empirically unsupported as a crime-reduction measure, and statutorily overbroad with inequitable effects. For these reasons, I respectfully urge the Committee to oppose HB 19.

HB 19 expands post-conviction firearm disabilities by adding certain misdemeanor categories. While promoting risk reduction is important, it is not clear that this proposal prevents a category of violent criminal behavior that existing law already does not address. Clear criteria and historical analogues consistent with Bruen improve the likelihood of constitutional durability.

I have serious concerns with this bill as it relates to misdemeanor offenses and the removal of constitutional rights. Traditionally, misdemeanors do not carry penalties that temporary strip citizens of their fundamental rights. This bill proposes removing a person’s Second Amendment rights based on incidents such as a fight, argument, or dating dispute—situations that, while potentially serious, do not rise to the level of felony conduct. If the Second Amendment is not a second-class right, then it must be treated the same as all other constitutional rights. Applying “common sense” requires consistency. If a misdemeanor offense is sufficient to remove the right to keep and bear arms, then logically the same standard should apply to all constitutional rights, including freedom of speech, due process, and voting. Selectively targeting only the Second Amendment sets a dangerous and unconstitutional precedent. If the intent of this legislation is to protect public safety, it should focus on serious criminal conduct and ensure due process, not impose sweeping, temporary penalties on citizens for lower-level offenses. As written, this bill unfairly singles out one constitutional right while leaving others untouched. I urge the committee to amend this bill to ensure equal treatment of all constitutional rights, or reject it entirely if that standard cannot be met.

As a representative of r/VAGuns, a popular online community of Virginia gun owners on the social media platform Reddit, we fully and unanimously endorse this bill and others like it that promote common-sense gun laws. Our community stands united in support of the recent legislation being passed in the General Assembly, which aims to protect and strengthen our neighborhoods while respecting the rights of responsible gun owners. These bills represent practical, balanced measures that help safeguard our community, and r/VAGuns proudly backs these efforts to promote safety and responsibility across Virginia.

Simply unconstitutional. Only a tyrant would agree with this. A waste of time and money for no benefit.

Bill HB19 | McClure | Firearms; purchase, etc., after assault & battery of family or household member or intimate partner needs some work. Crimes of passion happen to the young. Three years is way too long when one year can show the person over reacted. It would be far better for the police to record the offense and advise them to split up. Make a one year fire arm restriction for the second offense - not the first. This may have remove guns from police and court officers as they should not be exempt. What about military personnel? Are they to be sent into combat without a fire arm?

I support this bill because the majority of women killed by an intimate partner are killed with a gun, and 6 million women reported having a gun used on them by an intimate partner.

I am writing to express my strong opposition to the anti-gun bills scheduled for consideration in your subcommittee meeting on January 29, 2026. As a law-abiding citizen who values the rights enshrined in the United States Constitution, particularly the Second Amendment, I urge you to vote against these measures that infringe upon the fundamental right to keep and bear arms. The Second Amendment guarantees the right of the people to keep and bear arms, a right that shall not be infringed. These bills, including but not limited to HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB702, HB871, HB969, and HB1359, represent direct assaults on this constitutional protection. They impose unnecessary restrictions on firearm ownership, possession, and transfer that disproportionately burden responsible gun owners while doing nothing to address the root causes of crime. It is a well-established fact that criminals, by definition, do not obey laws. Measures like bans on certain firearms (HB217), mandatory storage requirements (HB871), prohibitions on unserialized firearms (HB40), and penalties for leaving firearms in vehicles (HB110) will only disarm law-abiding citizens who follow the rules. These individuals are not the source of violent crime; rather, they are often the ones who rely on their Second Amendment rights for self-defense, hunting, and sport. Criminals will continue to acquire and use firearms illegally, unaffected by these new regulations, leaving ordinary Virginians more vulnerable. History and data show that gun control laws do not reduce crime rates but instead empower those who operate outside the law. For example, cities with strict gun laws often experience higher rates of violent crime compared to areas where law-abiding citizens can more freely exercise their rights. These bills will create more "gun-free" zones and bureaucratic hurdles that criminals ignore, effectively turning law-abiding citizens into easier targets. I respectfully request that you reject these infringement on our constitutional rights and focus instead on policies that target actual criminal behavior, such as enforcing existing laws against violent offenders and supporting mental health initiatives. Protecting the Second Amendment is essential to preserving our freedoms and ensuring public safety for all Virginians. Thank you for your time and consideration. I hope you will vote NO on these anti-Second Amendment bills. Sincerely, Bailey Pratt

In reviewing these various bills it seems that many of them disregard the Constitution that was sworn to be upheld. Additionally several have already been ruled on in various courts across the country. They serve to divide constituents especially those who vote rather than provide civil discourse and leadership. They further fail to address larger issues that plague our society. Punishing those who abide by the law and creating penalties for innocent civilians is conceptually flawed. I urge you all to reexamine the methods behind these bills and abandon them at this point. Work toward the greater good and try something that hasn’t already failed repeatedly. Truly focus on serving this great Commonwealth. It will serve all of us better in the future.

As a friend of Adam Turck, the most important thing I want to say first is that Adam was light. He was warmth. He was grace. He loved Superman. He loved his dog Lana. He loved acting. He loved fitness. He loved people. He loved life. He loved with his whole heart and his whole mind and he never let the weight of the world stop him from seeing the good in anyone and everyone. These bills are not only important to the family and friends Adam cultivated in Richmond, but to our community as a whole. Adam did everything right on August 2nd, 2025. He saw a woman in a domestic situation while walking his dog, Lana. He stepped in to try and de-escalate the situation, called the police and never letting that woman out of his sight. He did everything right and it wasn’t enough. A 19-year-old kid pulled a handgun from his backpack and shot Adam in the head. He then turned the gun on himself. That young kid took two lives that day when he never should have been able to put that woman or Adam in that position. He had pending assault charges and was only 19. Any one of the bills The Friends of Adam Turck are supporting today could have saved Adam’s life if they had already been in place. Adam was a superhero in this community, but he shouldn’t have had to be. He should still be here. Lighting up the Richmond Theater Stages, The gym he was a personal trainer at, and the lives of the people who loved him most. The city of Richmond should have long ago implemented gun safety and prevention laws that could have kept Adam here with us today. While no amount of wanting or wishing can bring him back, we can let it not be in vain, by making lasting change that prevents anyone else in Richmond from having to feel the pain we feel with the absence of Adam. He brought light to Richmond, The Theater, The Fitness Industry, and each and every life he touched. Please vote yes on HB 19, HB 21, HB 93, HB 110, and HB 1359

HB1303, I support. The remaining bills are unnecessary and bureaucratic. You are creating bills meant to solve statistically insignificant events. HB1359 and HB217 are particularly objectionable. Requiring a "purchaser license" infringes on the right to bear arms and is a complete duplication of existing background checks. The assault firearm definition is unconstitutional and will not stand up to legal challenge. Our tax dollars and attorney general resources will be wasted on such an obviously flawed legislation. Gun buy back programs are have proven to be a waste of tax payer dollars with no impact on gun crime statistics. HB110 is very heavy handed. Just because someone could detect a weapon in a private motor vehicle should not make that vehicle subject to confiscation by the state nor a penalty applied to the firearm owner. This is totally a way to punish firearm owners without solving any real gun violence crimes that you, as legislators, could better focus your time and effort on. Focus on enforcing existing laws and not letting habitual criminals get away with warnings or light sentencing for their crimes. That is the common sense approach. We have more than enough laws, we do not need more ways to trap law abiding citizens and our merchants with this slew of bills.

Dear Members of the Virginia House Public Safety Firearms Subcommittee: I am writing to express my deep concerns regarding several of the bills currently on the docket at today’s meeting that I believe impose overly restrictive and chilling effects on the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Virginians. As someone with over six decades of active participation in shooting sports, I feel compelled to share my perspective based on extensive experience in the responsible exercise of these constitutional rights. For more than 60 years, I have been a devoted participant in shooting sports across various disciplines. Throughout this time, I have witnessed firsthand how responsible gun ownership and proper safety training create a culture of respect for firearms and the rights they represent. I am both an NRA Certified Range Safety Officer and a United States Marine Corps Certified Range Safety Officer, credentials that reflect my commitment to the highest standards of firearm safety and education. In these roles, I have dedicated countless hours to ensuring that shooters of all skill levels understand and practice safe firearm handling. Much of the proposed legislation before your committee, in my view, risks discouraging lawful participation in shooting sports and responsible firearm ownership without demonstrably addressing criminal misuse. Overly broad restrictions often burden those who already comply with the law, while doing little to deter individuals who disregard it entirely. I respectfully urge the Subcommittee to carefully consider whether these measures strike the appropriate balance between public safety and the constitutional rights of law-abiding Virginians. Shooting sports have been an integral part of American culture and Virginia's heritage. They teach discipline, responsibility, focus, and respect. These are values that strengthen our communities. Overly burdensome regulations such as those on the docket today do not distinguish between those who respect the law and those who do not; instead, they disproportionately affect those of us who have demonstrated decades of safe and responsible firearm use. I urge this committee to carefully consider the unintended consequences of legislation that may seem reasonable in theory but proves impractical or unjust in application. The rights protected by the Second Amendment are fundamental, and any restrictions placed upon them must be narrowly tailored, clearly justified, and respectful of Virginia's long tradition of responsible gun ownership. I thank you for allowing me to submit this written response and for providing the opportunity for citizens to voice their concerns on these important matters. More importantly, I thank each of you for your service to the Commonwealth of Virginia. The work you do on behalf of our citizens is vital to our democracy, and I appreciate your willingness to consider all perspectives as you deliberate on these critical issues. Respectfully submitted, George Mather, Jr. 6212 Sudley Church Court Fairfax Station, VA 22039 Email: mather.george.6212@gmail.com Mobile: 1.703.598.8848

The bills under consideration are only going to affect those who have no intention of breaking the law. Coupled with the other bills lessening the penalties for many violent crimes, these will do nothing to prevent crime. Criminals do not follow the law. That is a textbook definition. We have plenty of laws to deal with those who perpetrate crimes. What is needed is to deal with the existing criminals. Stop what leads these people to break the law to begin with. Punish those who commit violent crimes firmly. Stop the revolving door justice that keeps them on the streets committing more crimes. Making the law abiding public defenseless while turning more violent criminals loose makes no sense. Police forces are not bodyguards! All that can be expected after calling 911 is the victim being taken to a hospital, or possibly the morgue, and an investigation, hopefully followed by an arrest. The only person that can hope to defend themselves from these violent criminals is the victim. It would be better to provide a system for more self defense classes for the public. Better help for the victims of violent crime. And fitting punishment for those who have broken the law. None of the proposed bills will do that. I hope that the Constitutional rights of the public will be considered over feel good measures. I thank you for your time in reading my comments and hope you will consider these points in voting on the proposed bills.

I urge committee members to vote against these bills, many of which infringe on our God-given rights as Americans, and some of which are already unconstitutional under existing rulings by the Supreme Court of the United States. Respectfully, a lifelong Virginian.

Hi, My name is Catherine Shultz and I’m writing this as a woman that survived almost being strangled to death, then stalked for 2 years. I was in fear of my life and I bought my first firearm and trained. My personal defense weapon saved my life and I didn’t have to pull the trigger. A piece of paper does nothing to protect survivors but I stand with VCDL & am co director of Women for Gun Rights in Va. I’m also disabled and an amputee & I can’t run from danger but I can use my firearm to protect myself. People don’t seem to understand that educating oneself vs restricting mags etc… they affect people like me and it shows me that the “gun safety” laws are simply a psychological bandage & does nothing to protect women like myself. Thank you, Catherine Shultz Women for gun rights

To the legislators; Not one of the proposed HBs should be approved. The authors of the proposed bills lack experience or insight into gun ownership or general safety of the public. Not one of these bills can be proven to save lives or stop criminal acts. What I do see is the potential for a level of state bureaucrats to create new jobs for their buddies. Let’s monitor who has a gun or who has too many bullets in their magazine. Whose family member is related to someone involved with domestic violence. This sounds like the state boys and girls are out to get their hands into Virginians pocket's again. Vote no for everyone of these HBs.

Shall not be infringed was and still is very clear. The bill of rights was written to limit the government. Please stop infringing on my god given rights.

HB19 Misdemeanors should never take away a civil right. HB21 A firearm accessory seller could not know they were selling a accessory to a prohibited person. A car parts store cannot be sued if they sell a seat cover for a car used in a bank robbery. HB40 This bill is unconstitutional, there is no analog in history or traditions of firearms with any such limitations when the Bill of Rights was adopted. Homemade guns have been legal since before the US existed. HB93 If a husband and wife co-own a shotgun and the husband gets a protective order issued against him, the wife would no longer have access to that shotgun. That punishes and needlessly endangers her life. HB110 Car owner should not be at fault for a criminal stealing a firearm. It is the criminal who is solely to blame. This bill could put a handgun in the possession of a tow truck driver that is a convicted felon. HB217 U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in both DC v Heller, and The New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen, that any firearm “in common use” is protected by the Second Amendment. Guns and magazines targeted by this bill are among the most common in the US, making this bill unconstitutional. HB229 Disarming visitors and guests, including CHP holders, violates their right to protect themselves. A U.S. District Court in the 2nd Circuit has restrained enforcement of just such a law for being unconstitutional under New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen Supreme Court ruling. HB626 Students have a right to self-defense. HB702 Destroying a functional, and possibly valuable firearms is a waste of money. State could offset costs by selling firearms to gun dealers through an auction. This program is a “turn in” and not a “give-back” program. HB871 Biometric safes are more expensive and can be unreliable when being used under stress and require batteries to work. There are other locking mechanisms that are just as secure. HB969 Center would only target violence committed using firearms and ignoring root causes of crime, as well as all the other ways violence is inflicted on victims – knives, blunt objects, hands and feet, etc. Half of violent crimes are not committed with a firearm. Term “Gun Violence” gives away true agenda: “gun violence” is a term coined by gun-control lobby to blame guns, which are inanimate objects, and not criminals that misuse guns. If a police officer shoots someone, officer gets blame, not his gun. If a criminal shoots someone, gun gets blame, not criminal. No one says, “tire iron violence” or “hand and feet violence.” It is just called “violence.” But there is a disarmament agenda with firearms and “gun violence” is just an excuse to go after firearms with more gun control. HB1300 Oppose HB1303 Oppose HB1359 Bill will get innocent people killed, it will take at least two months before a person can purchase a first firearm.  If they are purchasing that firearm for urgent self-defense, that is simply too long.  Price to get a permit, likely in hundreds of dollars, will be prohibitive for poor people and is equivalent of a poll tax.  And even with all hoops to get a permit, even citizens with a CHP will be limited to one handgun a month.  Local law-enforcement will be handed a registry of gun owners. And gun rentals at shooting ranges will not be possible for people who have not yet got their permit or are visiting from out of state or from another country.

My entire life I have taken great pride and stewardship in being a law abiding citizen of a great country. A very large part of my patriotism is the freedom and trust the founders of the nation gave me in the Second Amendment of the US constitution and Section 13 of the Virginia Bill of Rights. The anti-gun bills that have been introduced in Virginia show me that the supporters of these bills have zero regard for the Constitution, my rights as a lawful citizen and my rights to be able to defend myself and others from violent crime. The supporters of these bills have lost all sense of who the good guys are and who the bad guys are. I see this when early release is granted to hundreds of violent felons, many of which then go on to reoffend and violently prey on the very people you are supposed to protect, all for nothing more than some misdirected attempt at virtue signaling. I see this when prosecutors do not pursue charges against violent offenders in a misdirected attempt at virtue signaling. I see this when legislative efforts focus on the law-abiding and do nothing to violent felons who will not bother to be hindered by any gun laws. I see this when legislators talk about “gun violence” and do nothing about the underlying problem of “violence” and how to reduce it. I see this when I see news stories of repeat violent offenders who have been arrested for dozens of violent crimes, including murder, who end up killing someone yet again due to some form of “catch and release”. The laws are in place to remove violent felons, whether or not they use firearms, from society and prevent them from preying on your law-abiding constituents. Please use them. I urge opposition to HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB626, HB702, HB871, HB969 and HB1359. I urge support for HB1300 and HB1303.

I oppose all legislation which seeks to undermine our Constitutionally protected 2nd Amendment. Therefore, I would encourage all members to vote against these bills with a resounding NO!

As a life long Virginia resident and lawful firearms owner, I speak for myself and millions of other Virginians in saying that all of us strongly oppose any bill being introduced that restricts and infringes upon our Second Amendment rights that are guaranteed by the constitution of Virginia and of the United States. These gun control bills have been drafted under the guise of safety and crime prevention, while simultaneously doing the opposite and only increasing further resistance in both crime and safety. For decades, Virginia has been a pro-2A state where generations of families have been born into and raised on safe and responsible gun ownership. Hunting, personal protection, or simply being an enthusiast does not make someone a criminal or implies criminal intent because of the technology behind modern firearms has far surpassed the firearms of our grandfathers’s generation. Manufacturing methods and technology is ever changing, but our natural rights as law abiding citizens should never be hung in the balance and toyed with as privileges. I implore the General Assembly to please review these bills with logic, with reason, and with the hope that our state government will not make a mockery of the Second Amendment to further a political agenda not based upon fact, but upon incessant fear mongering and disarmament of the people.

I SUPPORT this bill. HB 21 would require firearm industry members—manufacturers, distributors, importers, and sellers—to implement “reasonable procedures, safeguards, and business practices” to prevent the sale or distribution of firearms to prohibited persons, straw purchasers (those buying for someone barred from ownership), firearm traffickers, or anyone the seller has reasonable cause to believe poses a substantial risk of gun violence or self-harm. In short, this bill establishes basic standards of responsible conduct and makes it easier to hold the industry accountable for reckless practices that fuel illegal gun trafficking, straw purchases, or other harms in our communities. Opponents claim it violates federal law (like the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act) or the U.S. Constitution. They are mistaken. An identical approach in New York was challenged and upheld as constitutional by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in 2025. Similar accountability laws are already in place in states including California, Illinois, Colorado, New Jersey, Connecticut, and others. Firearm manufacturers and distributors handle a uniquely dangerous product. Like sellers of any potentially hazardous good, they should maintain reasonable safeguards to protect the public from negligent or reckless business practices that endanger Virginians. This is a targeted, common-sense step toward greater accountability and safer communities. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill.

Name: Brad Toohill Location: Loudoun County, Virginia I strongly oppose the following bills. These proposals punish law-abiding Virginians, undermine due process, and infringe on constitutionally protected rights while failing to address violent crime. Criminals do not follow gun laws—these bills target citizens who already do. HB 19 (McClure) This bill allows permanent loss of firearm rights based on vague “dating relationship” misdemeanors. Fundamental rights should not be stripped without clear standards and robust due process. HB 21 (Helmer) Holding firearm manufacturers and sellers liable for crimes they did not commit is unjust and dangerous. This policy attacks lawful commerce instead of criminal behavior. HB 40 (Simon) Criminalizing unfinished frames and receivers turns peaceful hobbyists into felons without evidence of crime reduction. This is regulation without results. HB 93 (Bennett-Parker) Forced firearm surrender under protective orders risks disarming innocent family members. Rights should not be suspended by accusation alone. HB 110 (Laufer) Penalizing lawful gun owners for storing a handgun in a vehicle is excessive and punitive. This bill targets responsible citizens, not criminals. HB 217 (Helmer) This bill bans commonly owned firearms and standard-capacity magazines that are clearly protected as arms in common use. It is unconstitutional and ineffective. HB 229 (Hernandez) Blanket bans on firearms and knives in medical facilities leave lawful citizens defenseless and create confusion without improving safety. HB 626 (Callsen) Disarming adults on college campuses does not enhance safety. Law-abiding individuals should not lose their right to self-defense based on location. HB 702 (Cole) Taxpayer-funded firearm turn-in and destroy programs waste public funds and show no measurable impact on crime. HB 871 (Downey) Mandated storage methods and biometric safes intrude into private homes and impose unnecessary costs on families. HB 969 (Price) Creating a new state agency focused solely on firearms expands bureaucracy while ignoring repeat offenders and enforcement failures. HB 1359 (Hope) This permit-to-purchase scheme creates delays, costs, fingerprinting, and a de facto registry. It burdens lawful ownership and disproportionately harms low-income Virginians. Virginia should focus on enforcing existing laws and prosecuting violent offenders—not restricting the rights of responsible citizens.

I urge you to oppose all of the proposed bills. None of these bills will have meaningful impact on crime committed with fire arms. The only honest way to reduce crime committed with firearms is to enforce mandatory and harsh penalties on criminals who use guns to commit crimes. Once has to realize that guns can only commit a crime in the hands of a criminal. The criminal, not the tool is the problem that needs to be addressed. A case in point: England has super strong regulations on guns. Was that effective? Did the crime rates really drop ? No, crime rates didn't drop all that much. Eliminating firearms just shifted the criminals over to using knives as their weapon of choice. These proposed regulations seem to be more aimed at annoying firearm owners, as opposed to solving any real problems. While I want to vote Democratic, these essentially useless regulations are making me seriously reconsider which party I will support in the future. Please put regulations in place to SOLVE problems, not these silly things that only provide talking points. Never forget, RESULTS are what voters want.

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence supports these bills.

Please see attachment.

Not one of these bills will make anyone safer, but rather strip the rights of law abiding citizens of which pose no threat. Maybe try enforcing or increasing the penalties for laws against murder or violent felonies that are already in place? The problem isn't guns. It's the mentally ill people who misuse them. Making good people criminals for simply owning common firearms or magazines will not make a difference to people who have no regard for law.

All these bills infringe on citizens AMENDMENT RIGHT we the people been lied to BY OUR Government OFFICIALS & mainly democratic officials ABIGAIL SPANBERGER is one of them

My name is Teresa Gancsos and I am with the Richmond chapter of Moms Demand Action and we support these bills. Thank you for your attention in this matter. Teresa Gancsos

As a fellow Virginian, I urge you to please OPPOSE "gun control" bills in your committee. Concepts like an "assault weapons" ban, arbitrary magazine restrictions, "reasonable standards" for firearms businesses, and a "permit to purchase," just to name a few, do nothing to address crime in the Commonwealth. Criminals do not abide by the law, and bills like these only target law-abiding firearm owners and businesses. The General Assembly should instead pursue legislation that holds criminals accountable for their crimes, not legislation that creates new criminals overnight for lawful purchases. Again, I urge you to OPPOSE gun control in your committee.

My family and I OPPOSE all these insidious, un-Constitutional anti-2A Bills you're proposing.

Dear Legislators, You have been elected to a position for the purpose of representing citizens in VA. You have taken an oath to the state and U.S. Constitution. It is not your place to push radical agendas or ideologies that clearly oppose those Constitutions. The 2nd Amendment clearly states that it “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”. Whether you agree or disagree with it is not important. Whether you appreciate firearms or hate and fear them, is not important. What is important, is that you respect my Constitutional right to own them, carry them, use them, transport them, have immediate access to them, decide for myself how I will store them in my own home. It is NOT your place to infringe upon these rights in any way. The very reason for the 2nd Amendment is for citizens to be able to repel, remove, and defend against a tyrannical government. Don’t be a tyrannical government. Remember and honor your oaths. Put aside the partisanship. Sincerely, One of millions of gun owners

All these proposed are laws are just awful. The right of self-preservation is a fundamental human right and having the best tools for self-preservation furthers that fundamental human right. Without those tools, you degrade the most important human right in the world, the right to live and live free. Suing gun dealers and manufacturers will prevent the public from acquiring guns. Banning large swaths of arms and accessories prevent the public from defending themselves with the best tool possible. All these proposed laws are bad. Bad for Virginians and bad for human rights. HB 19 (McClure) requires forfeiture of firearm rights for a “dating relationship” misdemeanor. HB 21 (Helmer) allows civil lawsuits against firearm manufacturers and sellers for crimes committed with their products. HB 40 (Simon) outlaws unfinished frames and receivers unless serialized. HB 93 (Bennett-Parker) forces firearm surrender under protective orders in a way that could disarm innocent family members. HB 110 (Laufer) imposes a civil penalty and towing if a handgun is left in an unattended vehicle. HB 217 (Helmer) bans commonly owned firearms and standard-capacity magazines made after July 1, 2026. HB 229 (Hernandez) prohibits firearms and many knives in medical facilities. HB 626 (Callsen) restricts firearms on college campuses without lawful cause. HB 702 (Cole) establishes a firearm "turn-in and destroy" program funded by taxpayers. HB 871 (Downey) mandates specific storage requirements and biometric safes in homes with minors. HB 969 (Price) creates a state gun violence prevention agency focused solely on firearms. HB 1359 (Hope) creates a costly permit-to-purchase scheme with fingerprints, training requirements, and a de facto handgun registry.

My name is Cossie Scott a lifelong Virginia resident. This is my first time speaking here. I strongly oppose HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB626, HB702, HB871, HB969, HB1300, HB1359 I do support HB1303 45% of Virginia homes own guns lawfully. Nationally, 93% of the guns associated with crime are obtained illegally. So how are any of these regulations moving the needle in illegal gun trafficking? Or attacking the root cause of violent crime? Furthermore, the majority of the average gun related crime occurs in 9 districts in Virginia (Richmond and Hampton Roads). So you are proposing punishing the entire state and every law biding gun owner for an “illegal” gun problem in Hampton and Richmond. Not to mention 63% of the gun related deaths in Virginia are suicide related. That means that all of these bills listed are not scientifically proven with sound data, but emotionally charged by political gun grabbing rhetoric and is saturated with slippery slope informal fallacies with proposed changes being made without analytical data to suggest we have a need to change. Why do we not first address Richmond and Hampton locally before pushing your unfounded ideology on the rest of the commonwealth. Gun laws do not solve for the human condition problem in those 9 districts. We would be better served spending our time, and tax dollars, addressing the poverty problem that drives violent crime, rather than trying to make law biding citizens criminals.

I’ve been a lifelong Democrat because I believe deeply in protecting working people, expanding access to healthcare, safeguarding civil rights, and investing in strong public institutions, but I’ve never fully aligned with my party on gun control. To me, supporting the Second Amendment isn’t about ideology or partisanship — it’s about personal responsibility, self-reliance, and the belief that law-abiding citizens should have the right to protect themselves and their families. I value evidence-based policy, and I worry that many proposed gun laws primarily burden responsible owners while doing little to address the root causes of violence like poverty, mental health gaps, and systemic inequality. I want safer communities, but I believe that comes from smarter enforcement, education, and prevention rather than broad restrictions that limit constitutional rights. Holding these views sometimes puts me at odds with fellow Democrats, but I see it as proof that political identity doesn’t have to mean agreeing with every plank of the platform — it means thinking critically and standing by the principles you believe in. Please vote no to any gun restrictions that are being presented.

I support these bills as indicated above.

The attachment contains my comments on the proposed bills.

Nearly half of all households in the Commonwealth own a firearm and yet Virginia has one of the lowest gun related death rates in the nation (5.6 per 100,000). Not only are you trying to solve an issue that doesn't exist, you're sacrificing your constiunts to pander towards national politics.

As a law abiding gun owner and retired military Virginia Citizen I vehemently oppose any law that opposes our Constitutional Right via the Second Amendment. All of the bills you are considering meet this criteria. Please cease and desist any band all actions that would infringe on my rights…those that our Founding Fathers of whom many were from our Great Commonwealth, believed to be self-evident. Very respectfully, Shannon J. Cornelius, USA/USAF (Ret)

I strongly urge voting against the following bills as all of them will cause undue hardship on legal gun owners, go against the spirit of the US 2nd amendment, will place firearm manufacturers in legal jeopardy solely because their products may have been used in an unlawful fashion (same as suing Ford for getting a speeding ticket). HB 19 (McClure) requires forfeiture of firearm rights for a “dating relationship” misdemeanor. HB 21 (Helmer) allows civil lawsuits against firearm manufacturers and sellers for crimes committed with their products. HB 40 (Simon) outlaws unfinished frames and receivers unless serialized. HB 93 (Bennett-Parker) forces firearm surrender under protective orders in a way that could disarm innocent family members. HB 110 (Laufer) imposes a civil penalty and towing if a handgun is left in an unattended vehicle. HB 217 (Helmer) bans commonly owned firearms and standard-capacity magazines made after July 1, 2026. HB 229 (Hernandez) prohibits firearms and many knives in medical facilities. HB 626 (Callsen) restricts firearms on college campuses without lawful cause. HB 702 (Cole) establishes a firearm "turn-in and destroy" program funded by taxpayers. HB 871 (Downey) mandates specific storage requirements and biometric safes in homes with minors. HB 969 (Price) creates a state gun violence prevention agency focused solely on firearms. HB 1359 (Hope) creates a costly permit-to-purchase scheme with fingerprints, training requirements, and a de facto handgun registry. Thank you,

I oppose the passage of these bills. HB 19, 21, 40, 93, 110, 217, 229, 626, 702, 871, 969, 1359.

The Right to Keep and Bear Arms shall not be infringed. Stop writing and putting Unconstitutional Legislation in the Virginia Code. That covers just about everything I have seen the Democratic Majority propose as new legislation. Want to live in a communist paradise - Move to Cuba - They do not get Snow and sleet there, and you will have someone to give you instructions on how to live your life.

Just to let you know, I am an independent in every sense of the word. I tend to lean left on many issues but on the subject of the second amendment I am a firm believer. I don’t think we need these new restrictions being proposed. The topic is so complex and polar I don’t know how to convince you all of the folly of this legislation except to say many of us are single issue voters regardless of how we feel about certain social issues. I know many democrats in this state who regularly use these weapons that are the subject for future restrictions or outright banning. I will try to touch on a few issues. Assault weapons and high capacity magazine are the current boogie man of the anti gun lobby and have been since the 1990s. This was originally a deliberate attempt to confuse modern civilian semiautomatic weapons with their more dangerous fully automatic assault military versions as a prelude to ban handguns. The term assault weapon is a purely political term that has no universal meaning and it was chosen to instill fear and confusion in the public’s mind. I ask you to review these laws and ask yourself which one of these features makes these weapons more dangerous than other rifles. Is a pistol grip, bayonet lug, or similar feature what makes a rifle dangerous? Or is it caliber, muzzle energy, and rate of fire? If public safety is the true goal why doesn’t this legislation address these factors instead of cosmetics? I will tell you why. Because the average hunting rifle is more powerful than an ar-15 by a wide margin. These are not overpowered rifles as some would have you believe. It’s a semiautomatic version of an intermediate powered rifle - part way between the power of a pistol and a full power hunting rifle. Did you know even Great Britain has no restrictions on weapons with military style features? Their ban is on the caliber and rate of fire. You can even have a semiautomatic uzi there witt a 50 round magazine as long as it is chambered in 22lr. Silencers have very few restrictions there as well because they protect hearing and help minimize noise pollution. Let’s talk about the legality as well. Most of these restrictions are unconstitutional because the weapons and features are in common use. It’s unconstitutional to ban any weapon that is in common use as per DC vs Heller and Brien. If the state court doesn’t overturn these unconstitutional restrictions the Supreme Court will. I will end this conversation by saying our founding fathers faced the same issues we do. At that time most governments restricted civilian arms because they wanted to remain in power. They reasoned through their dealings with Great Britain that an armed population could never be slaves to any tyrannical government or foreign power. This may sound like a tired old saying that is often made fun of. I have heard people saying things like deer don’t need bullet proof vests and you can’t fight against a government without f-16s but is this really true? The ar-15 for instance is not powerful enough to take down a large elk humanly so the bullet proof vest comment is just plain silly. That cartridge is commonly used in other rifles as a varmint round. As far as f-16s are concerned, the Taliban sure kicked us out of their country with nothing more than small arms and guerrilla tactics. Civilian resistance movements rarely fight pitch battles with tanks and fighter jets. They use hit and run tactics combined with numbers to wear the enemy down.

Dear Committee Members, I urge you to reject the blatantly unconditional and egregious anti Second Amendment bills before you. This will do nothing to curb crime, and you know that, but will make criminals out of your political opponents, as well as many of your constituents. Scencerly, Sal DeGennaro

PLEASE PROTECT OUR GUN RIGHTS AND DO NOT DEGRADE VIRGINIANS' SECOND AMENDMENT GUARANTEED RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS!

IT IS VERY FRUSTRATING TO LIVE IN A SOCIETY IN WHICH THOSE WHO ARE ELECTED TO REPRESENT ME IMMEDIATELY STEP IN AND COME UP WITH LAWS IN AN ATTEMPT TO FRAME ME AS A CRIMINAL FOR EXERCISING MY RIGHTS. IN NO WAY HAVE I BROKEN ANY EXISTING LAWS, NOR DO I OWN ANY ITEM CURRENTLY CONSIDERED ILLEGAL. THAT THESE "REPRESENTATIVES" CAN, WITH THE STROKE OF A PEN, PENALIZE ME, MAKES ME WONDER JUST WHO THEY "REPRESENT". WE DO NOT NEED MORE LAWS TO "LESSEN CRIME", WE NEED TO ENFORCE THE ONES ALREADY ON THE BOOKS. PLEASE LEAVE YOUR LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS ALONE.

Our Second Amendment is clear and succinct: "... the right of the People to keep an bear arms shall not be infringed." What I see is an example of the government overstepping its bounds under the illusion of public safety. Many of the measures including assault weapons, magazine capacities, and "ghost guns" are based on buzz words that strike fear because people do not understand them. Let us embark on a few definitions: Infringe: "act so as to limit or undermine (something); encroach on" -Oxford Dictionary. Synonyms include Erode, Impair, and Weaken. ANY legislation that limits impairs, or weakens a citizen's right to own and carry weapons is, by definiton, infringement, and therefore a violation of our beautiful country's constitution. Ghost Gun: the ATF classifies the part of the weapon containing the trigger assembly as a "firearm," colloquially called a Lower Receiver. It is possible to manufacture this part and therefore build a weapon that has no serial number and is unregistered with the police department. This takes skill and specialized, expensive tooling; these firearms sound scary, but are by and large produced by hobbyists, not killers. Assault Weapons (HB217): The limiting, reduction, and impairment of the size of magazine that one can purchase, keep, and carry is simply a violation of the 2nd amendment. Storage (HB871): The State government has no business inside my home and how my weapons are stored. I learned to handle guns at 7 years of age, children can learn. If I lock my weapons as this bill requires, I can no longer access them in an emergency. Its safer to gun-proof my children than child-proof my guns. Permit to purchase (HB1359): We do not need a permit to exercise our first amendment rights. We do not have permits to secure our rights against inappropriate search and seizure, the 4th amendment. We also do not have permits to protect ourselves from cruel and unusual punishment. No other right enumerated in the Bill of Rights requires a permit, why do we treat the 2nd amendment differently? We already strip this right from convicted criminals, we have background checks, leave us law-abiding gunowners alone. I understand these bills have good intentions. We want to see our communities safe, healthy, and thriving, and have our neighbors and friends go about their days without fear. But let us not succumb to fear to such an extent that we throw away our freedom for the illusion of heightened safety. Let's look at California, llinois, and New York, who have the strictest policies in the nation, yet rising rates of violent crimes, and instantly the illusion is dispelled. These measures do not increase safety. What they do accomplish is an erosion of freedom, disarmament of law-abiding citizens, and violation of our country's constitution. I ask you please, as your neighbor and constituent, vote NO to these measures.

This bill represents a direct and deliberate attack on the lawful firearms industry and the constitutional rights of Virginians who depend on it. HB 21 seeks to impose civil liability on manufacturers, distributors, and sellers for the criminal misuse of their lawful products, even when those products were sold in full compliance with state and federal law. The firearms industry is already one of the most heavily regulated industries in the nation. Dealers, manufacturers, and distributors are subject to extensive background check requirements, recordkeeping mandates, inspections, and compliance standards. HB 21 ignores this reality and instead attempts to hold lawful businesses responsible for the independent criminal actions of third parties. Under this bill, even sellers of ordinary firearm accessories such as holsters, slings, cases, and stocks could face costly lawsuits if a criminal later misuses a firearm. These businesses have no reasonable way to predict the future actions of customers, nor do they have the authority to conduct background checks on accessory purchasers. Expecting them to somehow prevent criminal misuse is both unrealistic and unjust. This proposal violates long-standing principles of American law, which hold individuals responsible for their own actions. We do not sue car manufacturers for drunk driving deaths, knife companies for stabbings, or hardware stores for assaults involving tools. Yet, HB 21 singles out the firearms industry for discriminatory treatment. The true purpose of this bill is not public safety. It is to create a flood of politically motivated lawsuits designed to bankrupt lawful businesses through legal costs alone. Even when companies ultimately prevail in court, the financial burden of defending against endless litigation will force many small dealers and manufacturers to close their doors. This tactic has been rejected at the federal level through the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which recognizes that blaming lawful businesses for criminal acts is fundamentally unfair and harmful to constitutional rights. HB 21 attempts to undermine that protection at the state level and invites years of costly legal battles. By targeting the lawful supply chain, this bill would reduce access to firearms and accessories for responsible citizens, especially in rural and underserved communities. It would harm local businesses, eliminate jobs, and leave law-abiding Virginians with fewer options to exercise their right to self-defense. HB 21 also raises serious constitutional concerns. The Supreme Court has made clear that the Second Amendment protects not only firearms themselves, but also the lawful commercial channels through which citizens acquire them. Undermining those channels is an indirect but effective way to restrict a fundamental right. Public policy should focus on punishing criminals, not persecuting lawful businesses. HB 21 does the opposite. It shifts blame away from offenders and onto innocent parties who followed the law.

I disagree with any and all laws pertaining to our gun rights and any law that infringes our right to own,sell, trade or gift. These amendments are a total outreach of our constitutional rights and we the people will not stand for it.

These bill do nothing to address criminals and only affects law abiding gun owners. As a black man I feel they are racist as well. Vote NO to all of these bills.

I stand with Gun Owners of America and the Virginia Citizens Defense League in opposing any attempt to restrict law abiding Virginians 2nd amendment rights. These bills will do nothing to stop crime and only serve to limit the rights of the people to exercise their 2nd amendment rights. As a constituent, I urge you to OPPOSE these gun bills: HB 19, Misdemeanors should never take away a civil right. HB 21, This bill is designed to have a chilling effect on all aspects of the firearms industry. HB 40, This bill is unconstitutional, as there was no analog in the history or traditions of firearms with any such limitations at the time the Bill of Rights was adopted. Homemade guns have been legal since before the United States existed. HB 93, This disctriminates against people in the same household and also discriminates against young people who are legally allowed to own fire arms. HB 110, Punish criminals who do this, not the law abiding citizens. HB 217, The U.S. Supreme Court has said in both DC v Heller, and recently The New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen, that any firearm “in common use” is protected by the Second Amendment. The guns and magazines targeted by this bill are among the most common guns and magazines in the United States, making this bill unconstitutional. There are conservatively estimated to be over 20 million AR-15s and 700 million magazines that hold more than 10 rounds in civilian hands. HB 229, Disarming visitors and guests, including concealed handgun permit holders, at such facilities violates their right to protect themselves in an emergency. A U.S. District Court in the 2nd Circuit has restrained enforcement of just such a law for being unconstitutional under New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen Supreme Court ruling. HB 626, A solution in search of a problem. Higher education students are adults and have a right to self-defense. HB 702, The name of the program implies that the Commonwealth gives firearms to citizens and now wants citizens to give them back. That is not the case. The State does not give us our rights and does not own our property. HB 871, Biometric safes are more expensive than non-biometric safes and often times more unreliable when being used under stress, This discriminates against those people who are poor and still have a right to self protection. HB 969, we do not need to grow the state bureaucracy to study violent crime when most violent crime does not involve firearms. HB 1359, please find me a constitutional right that you have to get a permit for. There is not one and we should not be limiting the rights of the people by require a permit to exercise their 2nd amendment rights. I SUPPORT the following bill: HB 1303, 90 days is more than sufficient for the State Police to issue a non-resident permit. There is no reason that this should take longer than this.

I’m against all these worthless anti-gun / anti-freedom bills that will do nothing to reduce crime, but will only serve to reduce the freedoms of law abiding citizens. Please retract them and do something good for Virginians. Thank you.

All Virginia opposes any and all gun legislation the 2nd amendment is a right not a privilege . I also have to question why anyone would want to disarm the general public while making the criminal stronger.? Any country that has ever done that has turned on his own population that is historical fact so what your motive?

I do not support these bills.

My family and I enjoy recreational shooting and hunting. House Bill 217 bans the firearms and magazines that we use lawfully on a regular basis. This is very upsetting to most gun owners. HB 217 punishes lawful gun owners for the misuse of firearms by criminals. Should this bill pass, I will encourage my college age children to relocate to other freedom loving states and not settle in Virginia where their rights are being taken.

HB21 This bill seeks to punish law-abiding hardworking gun manufacturers and those they employ, either directly or indirectly, by making them conspirators in crimes committed using guns. Besides it being unconstitutional, this law is also discriminatory in that it does not impose the same laws against car manufacturers whose autos and trucks are used in the commission of crimes and a plethora of other legal products used in the commission crime. HB-217 is arbitrary and capricious in that there is no such objective definition or standard for what constitutes a “standard magazine capacity” and/ or firearm. HB-702. This is misuse of public funds. It represents an ideological or charitable function that should be funded like other charities - voluntary contribution. As such it should require the same federal approvals as any other authorized charity. HB-1359. This is textbook 2A infringement prohibited by the US Constitution. Infringe is defined by Meriam-Webster dictionary as “to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another”. Imposition of taxes, requisite training, purchase delays, etc constitute infringement. Time and public funds are better spent funding law enforcement and executive offices to enforce civil and criminal laws that directly affect or deter criminal activities.

I oppose any and all restrictions on our God given and Constitutionally protected Right to keep and bear arms. None of this nonsense passes constitutional muster. And will have the effect of making the lives Of law abiding citizens less safe while you are Lowering penalties for real crime and turning Law abiding citizens into criminals... These bills are nothing more than a government power grab. What part of "Shall NOT be infringed " do you not Understand??

All bills with the exception of HB 1303 are unconstitutional and I do NOT support them.

I oppose these bills

When did our state government decide that they do not have to follow our Constitution of the United States of America? The 2nd Amendment is an individual right under the Constitution that states clearly that it shall not be infringed on which in simple terms means that no government official or group has the ability to take a person's right to keep and bear arms in the United States of America. This Amendment was so important to our forefathers that it is the second thing they wrote to establish that the government does not have the ability to take your right to defend yourself against all enemies and this includes a tyrannical state government that doesn't understand plain text that our country was founded on. It doesn't matter what others opinions or feelings on the subject of the right to bear arms is because it is my right and not their's that we are talking about at this time. As a society of individuals in our country that have never agreed on things of this nature since the invention of the modern firearm we have to look no farther than our own Constitution to see that this is not a collective right of certain people that agree or disagree with the principle of firearms but infact a Constitutional right of an individual to determine there views of their personal right to bear arms. With the world in the state it is in at our present time this Constitutional right is needed more then ever because we are facing people that think that the can completely ignore the Constitution and its not even on a national level but a state level. This is also a truly sad moment of our state that is the founding place for our country as it exists from the time that we settled in this new land of an unknown world at the time but to disrespect our founding Document that started it all on top of it is the worst thing that could happen in our state for these elected officials to look at the Bill of Rights and say to themselves that those Amendment are not worth following because I have a different opinion, belief or feeling on that Amendment that I am personally going to take the individual right of every person in Virginia just because I don't want to follow these Amendments as they are written. Do you understand how this is being a tyrannical government just like the British were when they were trying to control the entire population at the time that we had the Revolution in this great land to start this great country. When people say that the 2nd Amendment is dated and need to be revised but can see the actual beauty in how our forefathers predicted that this Amendment would be necessary throughout time to even to the year 2026 were we have a government that is looking at this exact Amendment and saying no we don't have to follow that anymore because we have all these people that don't like the fact that a free person of the United States of America can purchase anything that has to do with their ability to not only protect themselves in self defense but also to protect themselves from the tyrannical government that is before us today. I'm sorry but as a person that has no affiliation to a political party or any other organization on this subject in our country I believe in our Constitution and the Amendments that were written in the Bill of Rights to protect myself, my family and my friends from people that think that they know what is best for everyone in our country on the basis that they either think they are smarter, richer or elected.

I oppose every gun-control bill pending before this committee because they are prohibited by both the United States and Virginia Constitutions. The Second Amendment provides that “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Supreme Court held that this language protects an individual right to possess firearms for lawful purposes such as self-defense, independent of militia service. The Court emphasized that the Amendment protects arms “in common use” by law-abiding citizens and forbids bans on entire classes of such arms. In McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010), the Court reaffirmed that this right is fully incorporated against the states, binding Virginia to the same constitutional limits as Congress. Virginia’s Constitution independently protects this right, stating in Article I, Section 13 that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” In New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen (2022), the Supreme Court rejected interest-balancing tests and adopted a text-history-tradition standard: if the Second Amendment’s text covers the conduct, it is presumptively protected, and the government must show the regulation is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Modern policy goals, crime statistics, or legislative preferences are insufficient. Many pending bills restrict semi-automatic rifles, including AR-style firearms that are owned by millions of Americans and commonly used for lawful purposes such as self-defense, sport shooting, and hunting. Under Heller, arms in common use cannot be banned, and the “dangerous and unusual” exception does not apply. There is no historical tradition of banning commonly owned firearms based on rate of fire, operating mechanism, or cosmetic features, and under Bruen the absence of such historical analogues is dispositive. Other bills ban magazines over ten rounds, which are standard components of many commonly owned handguns and rifles. Because magazines are integral to firearm function, such bans operate as functional prohibitions on protected firearms. There is no Founding-era or Reconstruction-era tradition of limiting ammunition capacity, making these bans unconstitutional under Bruen. Permit-to-purchase schemes likewise unconstitutionally burden a fundamental right by converting it into a government-granted privilege. The right to keep arms necessarily includes the right to acquire them, and fees, training mandates, biometric requirements, and processing delays disproportionately burden citizens and lack historical justification. These schemes invite arbitrary enforcement and indirect suppression of a constitutional right. While public safety is a legitimate concern, the Supreme Court has made clear that constitutional rights cannot be traded away through legislative cost-benefit analysis. Regulations unsupported by historical tradition fail regardless of asserted benefits. For these reasons, the pending gun-control bills before this committee are inconsistent with both the United States and Virginia Constitutions and should be rejected.

Please no more gun bans

These proposed actions would increase the amount of money that is already taken from us in taxes. They make no sense, as we have a 2.3 billion surplus. These actions only hurt Virginians. The democrat party ran on affordability, and these bills do just the opposite. The taxes on firearms, and the banning of them and accessories have already proven to do nothing but punish law abiding citizens. CRIMINALS DONT FOLLOW LAWS! Reducing manditory sentecing for rape and other horrible crimes only make us less safe. Combined with TRYING to disarm us and helping criminals you out us at risk, and rob us of our rights and money. You all should be ashamed of yourselves for being bought off. You all remind me of our flag. You are acting like tyrants. You talk of affordability, yet you are trying to take more of our money. The people will not stand for tour unconstitutional actions. You may have control for the next two years, but your political careers will be destroyed. Tou have become radical tyrants. You hate the other side so much, that you are willing to destroy us. Shame on all of you. The pendulum always swings back, and you are just guaranteeing it will swing so far back that you will wish you never did this. The destruction of our constitution, and your petty attacks are not worth the backlash that will come when the people rise up against what you believe in.

Leave my second amendment rights alone and worry about all the criminals both legal and illegal. Don't screw with law-abiding citizens who work and pay your salary

Hello, I agree and stand with the opinions of the Virginia Citizens Defense League and Gun Owners of America on these troubling bills. The right to keep and bear ares enshrined as a God given right in both the US (2nd amendment) and Virginia (article 1, section 13) Constitutions. Please do not legislate millions of peaceful, law abiding Virginians into criminals with the stroke of a pen.

Please Protect Our 2nd Amendment Rights. Thank You.

Please don’t support any Bills that restrict or infringe on my 2nd Amendment rights.

To whom it may concern, It is important to recognize that criminals, by definition, disregard existing laws and are unlikely to be deterred by the introduction of new legislation. Consequently, the implementation of additional laws often impacts only law-abiding citizens, placing new restrictions or obligations upon those who already comply with legal standards. The focus, therefore, should not be on drafting further statutes but rather on ensuring the consistent and effective enforcement of the laws currently in place. By allocating resources toward upholding existing regulations, society can enhance public safety, maintain fairness, and uphold the integrity of the justice system without unnecessarily burdening responsible citizens. Respectfully, Mr. Jones

You were elected as a protest against the President. You definitely weren't elected to cancel Virginians constitutional rights. I'm sure your big donors outside of Virginia will be happy. But last time you tried this 90 of 95 counties, Cities and Town revolted against you. Plus once your donor lists are published by the influential VCDL and the lawsuits start. The people will find out who you actually serve. Unless you represent Arlington or Fairfax all democratic seats will be in jeopardy for the next election. Finally: You take an oath to honor the constitution when you get the privilege to serve the people. Someone who immediately violates their oath has no honor and can never be trusted with authority. People will remember that when it's time to vote again. I know I will. I used to be a Democrat and donor. But I will never vote for a Democrat again.

Holding any company liable for a product they produce that is used illegally or in a manner not for its designed purpose is innaporpriate. If this were to pass, any company that produces a product that is misused can be held liable. For example, alcohol producers, car manufacturers etc., this creates a slippery slope and punishes businesses for actions taken that are completely out of their control.

HB 19 - In the current status of who can report who; it is wholly unwise to remove firearms for a “dating relationship” misdemeanor. Once the court costs, etc. to defend yourself and then waiting to get have weapon returned makes absolutely no sense at all. This is not a FELONY. HB 21-Weapons manufacturers are not the criminal, they only make a tool used for hunting, recreational marksmanship and self defense. Money should be spent on mental health and addiction treatment HB40 - Only criminals will use weapons without serial numbers whether made at home or they will remove serial numbers off illegally bought weapons. This only hurts lawful citizens. HB93 - would remove self defense weapons from others in the family who are lawful and have not committed any criminal activity HB 111 - This is insanity, how will the towing company comply with a chain of custody of a weapon? There is no mention of appropriately storing a gun in a gun vault in a vehicle when traveling, etc. HB 229 - Medical personnel need protecting as much as any other citizen especially in high risk areas like emergency rooms with the potential for violence from drug crazed or mentally ill persons. Trust me, I have been there. HB 626 - This would be nearly impossible to enforce as one travels thru urban universities like VCU HB 702 - This bill is directing funding to the wrong approach to control gun violence. Use the funds for mental and addiction services, gang violence, etc. HB 871 - There is not enough definition on the requirements. Safe and easy access to a firearm for home protection is something most gun owners already employ. HB 969 - This bill requires further definition of gun violence prevention. Again, using the funds for mental health, addiction and gang violence are all necessary HB 1359 - This bill would place undue cost burdens on those who dont have the means to fulfill the costly requirements thus it is in my estimation a class and racial issue and not about guns. Training is something that should be sought out by any gun owner. I urge your consideration on these bills and protect the lawful gun owners in the Commonwealth. Respectfully Please vote no

Please consider this by destroying the constitutional rights of the people of Virginia. You also will eventually come to the repercussions of your decisions, ie court action and loss of tax payer money etc.Now the 2nd amendment to the constitution in short says “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED ,basically no laws are to go against the constitution and also as per article 6 clause two of the constitution. Thank you and think wisely because your constituents as whole do not want this. Second Amendment Right to Bear Arms 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. Amdt2.1Overview of Second Amendment, Right to Bear Arms Amdt2.2Historical Background on Second Amendment Amdt2.3Early Second Amendment Jurisprudence Amdt2.4Heller and Individual Right to Firearms Amdt2.5Post-Heller Issues and Application of Second Amendment to States Amdt2.6Bruen and Concealed-Carry Licenses Amdt2.7Rahimi and Applying the Second Amendment Bruen Standard

Not one of you liberals submitted a bill to address the real evil that is using a gun. So all of these bills are designed to punish legal law abiding gun owners and protect the real criminals. Im78 years old and have owned and bought guns from the age of 15 when I purchased my first gun with money earned from a paper route. NOT ONE OF THE GUNS I'VE OWNED EVER HARMED ANYONE. IT'S AN INANIMATE OBJECT

As a veteran, I am against any so called gun control legislation that has not demonstrably proven to improve public safety while only minimally impacting individuals’ God given rights and liberties. It is unconscionable to think that elected leaders would even think about passing legislation that infringed upon individual rights merely for purposes of “doing something” without having weighed the impact on law abiding citizens and the innumerable sacrifices made to sustain and protect those rights and liberties through the years. Having served myself and also been the victim of illegal firearm use I staunchly support the 2A rights and individuals’ right to self-defense. Each person’s situation and experiences are different and they deserve to exercise their rights and liberties in a way that accommodates those circumstances, experiences, limitations, etc. So called “assault weapons” (a misnomer in itself) may have features and appearances that some persons find scary or intimidating but, to someone possessing that firearm for their own, individual law purposes, most all of those features actually improve the performance or safety related to the use of that same firearm. All semi-automatic firearms, regardless of how they might LOOK to a casual or uninformed observer basically function the same. Stocks, forearm, bipods, scopes, rails, magazines, etc. do not alter the fundamental intended purpose of this “tool.” I certainly understand those who do not appreciate firearms, in general, or who might actually be scared by their existence or appearance. But our 2A and self defense rights should never be indescribably infringed upon merely for these type reasons. There are very good reasons our fore fathers were adamant about including these inalienable rights as foundational principles in our founding documents. These foundational principles are as relevant today as they were at our founding. Anyone who is arrogant enough to think that they have studied and researched and experienced as much as the founding father scholars and thinkers should reconsider their actions carefully before indiscriminately treading upon one of our sacred rights and liberties without certifiable proof of the amount of public safety that would be realized by their actions. Anything less goes against the solemn oath you have sworn to uphold.

I oppose this bill, honor your oath

i OPPOSE any legislation that restricts 2nd amendment rights

I agree with the VCDL on these bills.

Opposite any gun laws. They will not stop any crime. Try enforcing the laws we already.

I support this bill

These sorts of draconian proposals severely restrict the ability of law-abiding citizens to effectively defend themselves against threats of violence. None of the proposed measures which have been inflicted on the citizenry of other states have made one iota of difference in crime levels. They HAVE however restricted law-abiding citizens from exercising their Constitutional rights via the 2nd Amendment. Vote now to cease this onslaught on the rights of law-abiding Virginians. Gun violence is perpetrated by CRIMINALS, so focus on the criminal prosecutions. Limiting the rights of law-abiding Virginians is tantamount to fascism. And as always, "When seconds count, the police are just minutes away!". That's what you are saying to Virginians. If I cannot be trusted to defend myself legally, then you cannot be trusted to run the Commonwealth.

These legislations violate many sections of the Virginia Constitution not just the U.S. Constitution. Legislations like these does nothing to prevent, curtail, deter or otherwise stop crimes or acts of violence. These legislations do not hold criminals that cannot legally possess, purchase or own firearms accountable for their possession, use or handling of a firearm. These legislations do not keep firearms out of the hands of criminals. Cliché but true rhetoric (Criminals will get guns and magazines and commit crimes regardless of the laws. These legislations are immoral, unethical and down right oppressive and serve no purpose other than to infringe upon rights and deny rights. Reminder: - 18, 19 and 20 year old men and women are entrusted in the operation, use, carry and implementation of the following in the service of our country as Servicemembers, Coast Guardsmen, National Guardsmen and Air National Guardsmen and Reservists as well as law enforcement: Semi-automatic Pistols with high capacity magazines, Semi- Automatic Rifles with 30 round magazines, machine guns, rockets, tanks, missiles, rocket Launchers etc and yet Virginia Legislators want to strip away the rights of civilians of that age group of their right to own and bear arms. That is hypocritical and it undermines the Constitution. Our nation foundation and freedom was earned through the blood and sweat of young 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20 year old men from the Revolutionary War for our independence and that of our 17 year old to 20 year old war fighters today standing tall and maintaining our soon to be 250 years of being a Constitutional Republic and our Freedom. Do not allow the stripping of the rights of these military aged men and women that serve and defend our nation, our freedom and our Constitutions. Do not insult them or slap them in the face or turn your backs on them. Fight for them because at some point we have fought and we have sacrificed for you and these young men and women will too. Any legislation that denies and deprives this age group the use, ownership while expecting them to serve in our country and have them carry, operate and use them in the defense of our nation and potentially die, be seriously injured or maimed is diabolical and is disgraceful. Magazine capacity restrictions: (Do not limit or stop the intent of criminals or those intent on committing any act of violence. We have seen the demonstrated and factual extreme actions/tactics that have been used for example: Using a vehicle to run into crowds, Vehicle Born Improvised Explosive Devises (VBIED), Improvised Explosive Devices (IED), mass stabbings, gas attacks and chemical warfare, fire, and more Constitution of Virginia - Article I. Bill of Rights Sections 1,2, 9,10,11. These legislations below, restrict the right to self- defense. Legal gun owners are not committing crimes and do not intend to committ crimes. These legislations are not about accountability for criminals. They are written to suppress and take away the rights of law abiding citizens and ro take away a means of self-defense. These legislations do not create a safer Virginia. HB110, HB1359, HB969, HB871, HB702, HB24, HB21, HB700, HB229, HB217, HB110, HB93, HB19, Example: - HB700: Denies and delays the access to firearms in an emergency situation where a victim of stalking or domestic abuse are in imminent danger. V/R Raymond Carter SFC(Retired)

I strongly oppose this bill

All of these bills are intolerable infringements of the right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment and the Constitution of Virginia. Supporting these bills is a violation of your oaths of office. In addition, as should be evident, these bills will only affect law-abiding gun owners, the very people least likely to offend. Criminals, by definition, do not obey the law. They are unlikely to obey these.

Please do not consider any anti-gun bills. Any potential law that goes against our Constitution is wrong and should not be acknowledged. We shouldn't have to pay for our rights. No innocent person should be penalized for a criminal's actions. A gun's capacity is irrelevant. If a person comments a REAL crime, they should be convected and sentenced accordingly. A right should be lost only through certain major criminal actions, not some fool's option of potential. No manufacturer should be responsible for how their product is used. The one responsible is the one in possession of said product, even if it was stolen. Our last Governor understood this. Our new Governor and her political party desperately needs to. We have seen the failures of worthless states like California, Maryland, New York and others. We don't need to be another one. No law will ever stop a crime. The law should provide proper penalties or real crimes. No law should be made for the sole purpose of controlling and wielding power over the citizens of this State or our country.

I am opposed to HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB626, HB702, HB871, HB969, and HB1359, I support HB 1300 and HB1303.

My father was born in Romania in 1933 and as a child lived under the fascism of socialism. The first thing the fascist socialists did was to confiscate guns. Nearly 400,000 Jews were slaughtered by the socialists after having been disarmed in Romania. Now socialists have taken power in Virginia by running as "moderates" and immediately showing their true selves once safely elected. Democrats, like their brethren Nazis, seek to disarm and enslave the general population. I oppose any legislation which punishes law-abiding citizens from protecting themself, their family, and their property. I oppose any legislation which punishes a citizen for potentially being robbed, as if the thief is not the problem-- the victim is treated as the criminal. I oppose any legislation which allows accusations to remove the rights of others. If I accuse every member of government of being a child abuser, are you forced to remain away from your child(ren)? I oppose Nazis and Democrats for the same reasons.

As a fellow Virginian, I urge you to please OPPOSE "gun control" bills in your committee. Concepts like an "assault weapons" ban, arbitrary magazine restrictions, "reasonable standards" for firearms businesses, and a "permit to purchase," just to name a few, do nothing to address crime in the Commonwealth. Criminals do not abide by the law, and bills like these only target law-abiding firearm owners and businesses. The General Assembly should instead pursue legislation that holds criminals accountable for their crimes, not legislation that creates new criminals overnight for lawful purchases. Again, I urge you to OPPOSE gun control in your committee. I support HB 1303 by Delegate Ware. Thank you for all that you do for Virginia.

Disarming the population is not a viable means to promote public safety. It is the duty of the individual to protect themselves from physical harm that may occur by criminal activity. It is not the responsibility of politicians or police. That is why bills like HB 19, HB 21, HB 40, HB 93, HB 229, HB 1359 are unconstitutional and put the general public in more danger as violent criminals will take advantage of unarmed civilians. HB 110 and HB 702 will promote criminal use of firearms as the firearms will be taken away from the registered owners' possession which greatly increases the likelihood the firearm will end up on the black market for resale where violent criminals obtain their weapons. HB 871 will also be ineffective as gun violence prevention means while again adding a monetary burden and serious disadvantage to law a biding citizens in the immediate face of danger. The people of Virginia do not support these policies that waste the time of politicians and money of the tax payer.

I oppose all of these unconstitutional bills.

HB 19 (McClure) requires forfeiture of firearm rights for a “dating relationship” misdemeanor. HB 21 (Helmer) allows civil lawsuits against firearm manufacturers and sellers for crimes committed with their products. HB 40 (Simon) outlaws unfinished frames and receivers unless serialized. HB 93 (Bennett-Parker) forces firearm surrender under protective orders in a way that could disarm innocent family members. HB 110 (Laufer) imposes a civil penalty and towing if a handgun is left in an unattended vehicle. HB 217 (Helmer) bans commonly owned firearms and standard-capacity magazines made after July 1, 2026. HB 229 (Hernandez) prohibits firearms and many knives in medical facilities. HB 626 (Callsen) restricts firearms on college campuses without lawful cause. HB 702 (Cole) establishes a firearm "turn-in and destroy" program funded by taxpayers. HB 871 (Downey) mandates specific storage requirements and biometric safes in homes with minors. HB 969 (Price) creates a state gun violence prevention agency focused solely on firearms. HB 1359 (Hope) creates a costly permit-to-purchase scheme with fingerprints, training requirements, and a de facto handgun registry. ALL of these bills are Unconstitutional and will cause Lawsuits and MASS NON COMPLIANCE

Greetings, These bills that are being proposed will do more than infringe on Va citizens rights , they will cause many to loose their jobs and cause hardship on an already financially strained population. I work for a firearms manufacturer, these bills will shut us down. Put numerous citizens like me out of work! I hope you reconsider what you are proposing and realize the harm that you are causing! Our state needs caring leaders not over burdening tyrants! These bills and those like them appear to be from a communist playbook , not from a State of Virginia elected delegate. Thank you for your consideration on this matter!

I oppose all these bills!

As a fellow virginian I am very disappointed in these outrageous bills proposed. They do nothing to stop criminals cause they don't follow rules or laws anyways it just hurts people trying to protect themselves from being hurt or God forbid something worse. I have lived in virginia my whole life and love this state but i also love the 2nd amendment and freedom to bear arms so please take in consideration myself and thousands of other virginian's that love the 2nd amendment and the state of Virginia and strike down these outrageous bills. Thank you for your time god bless the 2nd amendment and the state of Virginia!

All these bills are an infringement on our constitutional second amendment rights!

You ran as a middle of the road moderate ticket, and wanted to bring everyone together. all these bills go against that and alienate half of the state. You want bi partisan support? Well to get that you can not be going after law abiding citizens and take away a constitutionally protected right.

Hello, as a true Virginian whose family goes back to the founding of this state, country and fought in the revolutionary war. The anti gun bills being pushed on us are completely unconstitutional. My ancestors would be rolling in their graves right now knowing what you all are trying to do to our personal liberties, freedom and property. All of the anti gun legislation being pushed is not only unconstitutional but against previous Supreme Court rulings. You plan to turn over half of your state into criminals overnight for legally purchased items. So not only are you infringing on the 2nd Amendment but now on our 5th Amendment. 12 months in jail! Sounds like an 8th Amendment violation. True Virginians do not want these unconstitutional laws placed on us. Virginia is where freedom was won and not taken! I urge you all to vote against these unconstitutional bills. We are not California or New York. Our friends in Northern Virginia do not speak for all of Virginia anymore. My kindness regards. True Virginian.

These bills are ill-advised “solutions” in desperate search of largely non-existent problems. The 2nd amendment was quite clear. “Shall not be infringed” means exactly those words. These bills will only make law-abiding citizens less safe. Please actually consider your constituents safety instead of your partisan talking points.

I urge a vote against this, and any gun related bill, that would arguably restrict gun rights, or increase the cost of having,/buying firearms or ammunition, or create any kind of registry of such, of law abiding citizens of Virginia. Most of these bills would do nothing for saving lives, and criminals will not abide by them.

These anti-Second Amendment legislations violate the Second Amendment freedoms guaranteed by the United States Constitution and Virginia Constitution. These bills will not make Virginians safer. but will put us at risk for predatory criminals. Also, the Second Amendment wpuld protect us from a tyranical government. Who protects us from you? Do you so crave power that you must disatm us? Why do you hate fireams?

I oppose these bills. Limiting our right to defend ourselves will not reduce crime or make anyone safer, except violent criminals.

Dear Committee Chair, I am writing to respectfully urge you to OPPOSE these bills. These proposals place unconstitutional burdens on law-abiding citizens while failing to address the root causes of criminal misuse of firearms. Measures such as taxpayer-funded gun turn-in and destruction programs, knife and firearm bans at medical facilities, and magazine capacity restrictions unfairly target responsible gun owners in my community without demonstrable public safety benefits. I ask that you vote “NO” on this legislation and instead support policies that enforce existing laws and address criminal behavior, rather than restricting the rights of lawful citizens. Thank you for your time and consideration. Respectfully, Jan

My family and I hope you will reconsider all of these unconstitutional and tyrannical bills that seek to limit the God given right of citizens to defend themselves. Supporting these unconstitutional. bills as the Governor simultaneously supports the actions of Mr. Petti as a legal firearms owner, is indeed hypocrisy.

Good Morning. I respectfully oppose the following House Bills, which collectively place excessive burdens on law-abiding Virginians while offering little evidence of meaningful reductions in violent crime. These proposals raise serious concerns related to constitutional rights, due process, public safety, and cost. HB 19 (McClure) requires forfeiture of firearm rights for certain misdemeanors involving a broadly defined “dating relationship.” This imposes severe constitutional consequences without felony-level due process protections and relies on vague definitions prone to misuse. HB 21 (Helmer) allows civil lawsuits against firearm manufacturers and sellers for crimes committed with their products. This abandons long-standing liability principles by holding lawful businesses responsible for third-party criminal acts, increasing costs and reducing lawful access without improving public safety. HB 40 (Simon) criminalizes unfinished frames and receivers unless serialized, burdening lawful hobbyists and small manufacturers despite a lack of evidence that such items meaningfully drive crime. HB 93 (Bennett-Parker) mandates firearm surrender under protective orders in ways that may disarm innocent family members who are not accused of wrongdoing, undermining due process and property rights in shared households. HB 110 (Laufer) penalizes and allows towing of vehicles when a handgun is left unattended, even if secured. This may discourage lawful compliance with firearm-restricted locations by eliminating practical storage options. HB 217 (Helmer) bans commonly owned firearms and standard-capacity magazines manufactured after July 1, 2026. Such bans target arms in common lawful use and raise serious constitutional concerns while failing to address criminal misuse of existing firearms. HB 229 (Hernandez) prohibits firearms and many knives in medical facilities, removing lawful self-defense options from patients, visitors, and staff, including permit holders who have already undergone background checks. HB 626 (Callsen) restricts lawful firearm possession on college campuses, treating adult students and faculty as if they forfeit constitutional rights despite documented safety concerns and delayed emergency response times. HB 702 (Cole) establishes a taxpayer-funded firearm turn-in and destroy program with no demonstrated impact on violent crime, diverting resources from proven enforcement and prevention strategies. HB 871 (Downey) mandates specific storage methods and biometric safes in homes with minors, imposing costly, one-size-fits-all requirements that intrude into private homes and may delay access in emergencies. HB 969 (Price) creates a new state agency focused solely on firearms while ignoring broader contributors to violence such as repeat offenders, mental health access, and community-based interventions. HB 1359 (Hope) establishes a costly permit-to-purchase system with fingerprints, training mandates, and a de facto registry, creating delays and barriers to exercising a constitutional right without clear public safety benefits. Conclusion: Taken together, these bills represent a sweeping expansion of government control over lawful firearm ownership. They burden responsible citizens, weaken due process, and prioritize symbolic regulation over effective crime reduction. I urge the General Assembly to reject these measures and focus on enforcing existing laws and addressing violent criminal behavior.

Forum: These Bills are an attack on the lawful Citizen and will not stop the criminal element from doing harm. This has been proven time and time again. The intent of these Bills is to discourage the Citizenry from exercising their rights as protected by the US Constitution and the VA Constitution. These documents are explicit that our rights are being protected and not being given to us by the Govt. It is the Govt responsibility to protect our Bill of Rights and not to subvert them at the Federal and Local level. These bills seek to create a list and registry as forbidden by law. The declaration that all guns that are semi-automatic are "assault weapons" is absurd. The look of a gun does not define it as an assault weapon. These Bills have been stricken down by the highest court(s) in the land time and time again. The only reason for these bills is too attack the lawful citizen and will not do anything to stop the aggressor in his/her intent to do harm. There is significant history that illustrates that an armed populace in society is a peaceful and secure society. I respectfully oppose these Bills that attack the fundamental Bill of Rights that the Federal and State Constitutions protect. V/R, Mr. Charters

I stand with the VCDL and GOA. The proposed bills are tyrannical, these bills make it only harder on law abiding citizens. All gun laws are infringements on the Second Amendment. Just Remembering History” On April 21, 1775, Virginia’s Royal Governor, Lord Dunmore, ordered British marines to seize gunpowder from the Williamsburg powder magazine to prevent a colonial uprising. This "Gunpowder Incident" enraged colonists, leading to militia mobilization under Patrick Henry, forcing a payment for the powder and accelerating Virginia's march toward revolution. “

I oppose these bills because they are unconstitutional!!

I urge you not oppose all of these bills.

All of these bills pushing further gun control only hurt law abiding citizens and punish them for the actions of criminals. Further they aim to disarm potential victims in a lame attempt to establish “common sense” gun control that is anything but. California, Chicago, New York are the model for many of these bills and the evidence is clear that they are not effective and even harmful. If a criminal stole a car and drove it into a crowd of people, you wouldn’t hold the car’s owner responsible. You wouldn’t hold the vehicle’s manufacturer responsible. You wouldn’t pass a law that requires safe storage of vehicles. If someone exhibited a “red flag” you wouldn’t take aware their location driver’s license with no due process or investigation. We don’t do any of that because “common sense” says that it’s ridiculous. The difference between cars and firearms however is there is no Second Amendment for cars, which means that these laws make even less sense and are directly unconstitutional.

All of the aforementioned bills are a substantial attack the God given rights & the 2nd Amendment. These in fact are the opposite of good governance. How does the aforementioned reduce the size & scope of government? How does the aforementioned lead to affordability? There are no statistics that show a benefit to society! Furthermore the aforementioned will only lead to a higher government cost to the citizens while squashing the rights of the citizens!

I do not believe these bills are in alignment with the constitution of Virginia: Article I. Bill of Rights Section 13. Militia; standing armies; military subordinate to civil power That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power. Each of these will infringe on the right of the people of this state to bear arms. I expect the legislature to pass laws in accordance with the state and federal constitution, not in opposition to it. For these reasons, i am opposed to these bills.

As a resident of York County I am opposed to the bills listed above and wish for them to be rejected by this committee.

As a Virginian, I am completely opposed to HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB626, HB702, HB871, HB969, and HB1359. Similar ideas have been tried in the past in other states, and have been proven not to reduce any crime, but only serve to unnecessarily burden law-abiding citizens in the lawful exercise of their Second-Amendment rights. If "common sense" were used to try to reduce violent crime, it would be completely obvious that inanimate objects, can, by themselves, do nothing. The sole responsibility lies in the hands of the person who commits the crime, not in what object they chose to use in the perpetration of the crime. The focus of "public safety" initiatives should be keeping violent criminals off the streets, not limiting citizens of their Constitutionally -protected rights. I do not appreciate my tax dollars being used to advance this agenda, and then being further used to try to defend it in the inevitable litigation of these infringements on Virginian's rights. Thank you for your time.

All Anti-Gun bills are Unconstitutional and Impede Citizens' right to Self Defense. We, the residents of the Commonwealth of Virginia OPPOSE any and all of these and will fight each and every one of themthem

As a fellow Virginian, I urge you to please OPPOSE "gun control" bills in your committee. Concepts like an "assault weapons" ban, arbitrary magazine restrictions, "reasonable standards" for firearms businesses, and a "permit to purchase," just to name a few, do nothing to address crime in the Commonwealth. Criminals do not abide by the law, and bills like these only target law-abiding firearm owners and businesses. The General Assembly should instead pursue legislation that holds criminals accountable for their crimes, not legislation that creates new criminals overnight for lawful purchases. Many of the bills proposed have already been declared unconstitutional by multiple Supreme Court decisions. Most others are likely to be struct down in future court proceedings. Again, I urge you to OPPOSE gun control in your committee. Thank you for all that you do for Virginia. Respectfully, Mark Salamone

Unconstitutional. What part of shall not be infringed is misunderstood?

I firmly oppose any laws or policies that infringe upon my Second Amendment rights. I believe the right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental constitutional protection, and I do not support legislation that restricts law‑abiding citizens from exercising that right. Tucker Ophof Bristow, VA 20136

Stop all bills restricting our Second Amendment rights.

I strongly oppose this bill. HB 21

HB21 Status: In SubcommitteeFirearm industry members; creates standards of responsible conduct, civil liability. This law will make it impossible to sell firearms in Virginia. How do you expect a firearm manufacturer to make their guns thief prooof. The owner of the gun is responsible for safeguarding their weapon but criminals can still steal weapons. The manufacturer shouldn’t have any responsibility at that point. If someone broke into my car and found a way to steal it, it’s not Toyota’s fault, it’s the thief’s. The onus is on the citizens to not be criminal and steal guns or misuse them. Not on the manufacturer. This will make it hard for law abiding citizens, not criminals. HB40 Status: In SubcommitteePlastic firearms or receivers, unserialized firearms, etc.; transfer, etc., prohibited, penalties. We’re legislating against criminality that doesn’t exist. It should not be a criminal offense to have these. This turns normal citizens exercising their 2A rights into criminals. The actual criminals are those that plan to use their firearms against innocents. Not amateur gunsmiths with blank pieces of metal. HB 626, Delegate Callsen, restricts firearms at public institutions of higher education by requiring such firearms be part of an authorized program or activity inside a building. A solution in search of a problem. Higher education students are adults and have a right to self-defense. HB 1303, Delegate Ware, sets 90 days as the maximum number of days that the Virginia State Police can take when processing a non-resident concealed handgun permit. If the permit has not yet been approved after 90 days, then the permit is issued at that point. If the applicant is later found to be disqualified, the permit is revoked, and the applicant has to return it. This makes a lot of sense. No reason to delay law abiding citizens from being able to have access to self-defense. We cannot rely on police for 100% of the violence that happens in the community as they are not omnipresent or omnipotent. HB 217, Delegate Helmer, prohibits the sale, possession, transfer, and transport of an “assault firearm” made on or after July 1, 2026. It also prohibits sale, possession, transfer, and transport of an “assault firearm” to anyone under the age of 21. Magazines that hold more than 10 rounds and were made on or after July 1, 2026, are prohibited. The U.S. Supreme Court has said in both DC v Heller, and recently The New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen, that any firearm “in common use” is protected by the Second Amendment. The guns and magazines targeted by this bill are among the most common guns and magazines in the United States, making this bill unconstitutional. There are conservatively estimated to be over 20 million AR-15s and 700 million magazines that hold more than 10 rounds in civilian hands. HB 110, Delegate Laufer, creates a $500 civil penalty and subjects a vehicle to towing if a person leaves a visible handgun in an unattended vehicle. The car owner should not be at fault even if a criminal opens an unlocked car door to steal a firearm. It is the criminal who is solely to blame. This bill would put a handgun in the possession of, and under the control of, a tow truck company! Punish criminals and stop harassing good people.

I am a resident of Ashburn in Loudoun County, Virginia. I respectfully submit the following written testimony in opposition to the bills listed below. HB1359 – Firearm purchase requirements; penalties I oppose HB1359 because it adds additional requirements and penalties that burden law-abiding purchasers without clear evidence of reducing criminal misuse. HB1427 – Limitation on handgun purchases I oppose HB1427 because purchase limits restrict lawful ownership while failing to address how firearms are obtained by those who commit crimes. HB19 – Firearms; purchase after assault & battery of family or household member I oppose HB19 due to due process and proportionality concerns, as it restricts rights prior to full adjudication rather than focusing on enforcement of existing protections. HB21 – Firearm industry members; civil liability standards I oppose HB21 because it expands civil liability in ways that risk penalizing lawful businesses for the actions of third parties without improving public safety. HB217 – Assault firearms and certain ammunition feeding devices I oppose HB217 because it targets lawful ownership based on firearm type rather than criminal misuse and lacks evidence of meaningful public safety benefit. HB229 – Weapons prohibited in certain hospitals I oppose HB229 because blanket prohibitions rely on disarmament rather than appropriate security and enforcement in sensitive facilities. HB24 – Concealed handgun permit reciprocity I oppose HB24 because limiting reciprocity penalizes lawful permit holders without deterring criminal activity, while Virginia’s current framework has functioned effectively. HB40 – Plastic or unserialized firearms I oppose HB40 due to overbroad definitions that risk unintended impacts on lawful ownership and small businesses rather than targeting criminal conduct. HB540 – Carrying firearms in restricted locations I oppose HB540 because expanding restricted locations increases complexity and the risk of unintentional violations by law-abiding citizens. HB700 – Waiting period for firearm purchases I oppose HB700 because mandatory waiting periods delay the exercise of a constitutional right without clear evidence of reducing violent crime. HB871 – Firearm storage requirements in residences I oppose HB871 because it imposes criminal penalties through broad storage mandates that may be difficult to apply consistently and fairly. HB907 – Security requirements for firearms dealers I oppose HB907 because it adds regulatory and penalty burdens on lawful dealers without clear evidence that such measures reduce criminal misuse. For these reasons, I respectfully urge the committee to oppose the bills listed above. Thank you for the opportunity to submit written testimony for the public record.

I appose this bill.

My name is Cole Zerrenner, and I am a registered voter residing in Ashburn, Loudoun County, Virginia. I respectfully submit this written testimony in opposition to the following bills scheduled before the House Public Safety – Firearms Subcommittee: HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB626, HB702, HB871, HB969, HB1300, HB1303, and HB1359. I oppose these bills because, taken individually and collectively, they impose additional restrictions and penalties on law-abiding citizens while failing to meaningfully address criminal misuse of firearms or the underlying causes of violence. Many of these proposals expand prohibitions, create new compliance burdens, or rely on vague standards that raise concerns regarding due process, inconsistent enforcement, and unintended consequences. Several of the bills before the subcommittee emphasize preemptive restrictions or broad prohibitions rather than focusing on enforcement of existing laws, accountability for criminal conduct, or effective mental health interventions. Policies that reduce procedural safeguards or delay the exercise of constitutional rights risk undermining public confidence without clear evidence of improved public safety outcomes. I respectfully urge the subcommittee to consider whether these measures meaningfully target criminal behavior or instead primarily impact responsible Virginians who already comply with the law. Public safety is best served through targeted enforcement, due process protections, and policies that address root causes rather than symbolic or duplicative restrictions. Thank you for the opportunity to submit written testimony for the public record and for your consideration of my views. Respectfully submitted, Cole Zerrenner Ashburn, Loudoun County, Virginia

First and foremost, I fully support any comments made by Virginia Citizens Defense League, The NRA, and Gun Owners of America in regard to support for the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. As a fellow Virginian, I urge you to please OPPOSE "gun control" bills in your committee. Concepts like an "assault weapons" ban, arbitrary magazine restrictions, "reasonable standards" for firearms businesses, and a "permit to purchase," just to name a few, do nothing to address crime in the Commonwealth. Criminals do not abide by the law, and bills like these only target law-abiding firearm owners and businesses. The General Assembly should instead pursue legislation that holds criminals accountable for their crimes, not legislation that creates new criminals overnight for lawful purchases. A lot of these proposed bills are unconstitutional and may even be a civil rights violation due to the fact that they most certainly will disproportionally have a negative effect on minorities, women, and people of lower income and certainly violating an 18–20 year-old persons 2nd Amendment right to own and bear arms. If they have to work and pay taxes and be held accountable as an adult you can't legally deny them any rights under the constitution. Many of these proposed bills have already successfully been challenged at the U.S. Supreme court in rulings supporting the 2nd amendment. Examples cases- v Heller and v Bruen, so you are intentionally trying to pass bills that will not hold up in court and wasting valuable taxpayer money to pursue these bills. Again, I urge you to OPPOSE gun control in your committee. Thank you for all that you do for Virginia. Sincerely, Chris McDorman

Why I Oppose Each Bill below: HB 19 – Opposition: Punishes a non‑violent misdemeanor unrelated to firearms. Violates: Heller (2008); Hayes (4th Cir. 2009) – proportionality; Bruen (2022) – no historical basis for such a blanket ban. HB 21 – Opposition: Imposes strict liability for third‑party crimes, chilling lawful commerce. Violates: Heller (2008); Printz (1997) – cannot commandeer private actors; Bruen (2022) – no historic analogue. HB 40 – Opposition: Criminalizes already‑lawful homemade components and deprives property without compensation. Violates: Heller (2008); Miller (1939) – regulation must have a reasonable safety link; Bruen (2022); Lucas (1992) – takings. HB 93 – Opposition: Overbroad removal punishes lawful spouses and 18‑20‑year‑olds who may already possess firearms. Violates: Heller (2008); McDonald (2010); Bruen (2022) – age‑restriction lacks history; Carpenter (2018) – vague “if officer believes” standard violates due process. HB 110 – Opposition: Penalizes mere visibility and treats the gun as property that can be seized without due process. Violates: Heller (2008); Jones (2012) – towing = unlawful seizure; Bruen (2022) – no historic precedent. HB 217 – Opposition: Bars weapons in common lawful use and imposes capacity limits without historical support. Violates: Heller (2008); Bruen (2022); Miller v. Bonta (9th Cir. 2021). HB 229 – Opposition: Prevents lawful armed visitors in public medical settings without a narrow justification. Violates: Heller (2008); Bruen (2022); Katz (1967) – potential Fourth‑Amendment search issues. HB 626 – Opposition: Denies adult students the right to self‑defense on public campuses. Violates: Heller (2008); Bruen (2022); Washington v. Davis (1976) – lacks rational basis. HB 702 – Opposition: Authorizes confiscation/destruction of lawfully owned property without compensation or due process. Violates: Heller (2008); Kelo (2005) – takings require just compensation; Bruen (2022) - no historic precedent. HB 871 – Opposition: Expensive, tech‑exclusive requirement makes lawful loaded storage impracticable. Violates: Heller (2008); Bruen (2022); Willowbrook v. Olech (2000) – overinclusive impact on owners with minors. HB 969 – Opposition: Single‑issue agency risks viewpoint discrimination and may enable firearm‑specific regulations lacking constitutional footing. Violates: Heller (2008); Bruen (2022); Mathews v. Eldridge (1976) – inadequate procedural due process. HB 1359 – Opposition: Creates costly, time‑consuming barriers that effectively deny the right to acquire firearms for lawful purposes. Violates: Heller (2008); Bruen (2022); McDonald (2010); Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections (1966) – fee structure resembles a poll tax. The Virginia Constitution’s Article I § 16 protects an individual’s right to keep and bear arms, and the state Supreme Court requires any limitation to be narrowly tailored, historically grounded, and consistent with due‑process (§ 13) and takings (§ 14) protections. The bills listed: HB 19, 93, 110, 871 (mandatory surrenders/penalties); HB 21, 40, 1359 (civil‑liability or costly licensing); HB 217, 229, 626, 702 (bans on common‑use firearms or accessories); and HB 969 (a gun‑only state agency)—all impose restrictions without a clear historical analogue, over‑reach permissible regulation, and create undue financial or procedural burdens. Consequently, they conflict with Virginia’s constitutional guarantees.

I SUPPORT HB1303. A right delayed is a right denied. I OPPOSE HB19: Misdemeanors should not remove rights. I OPPOSE HB21: How could a firearm accessory seller reasonably know if they were selling a gun sling to a prohibited person? Should a car parts store be sued if they sold a seat cover for a car used in a bank robbery? I OPPOSE HB40: Even a chunk of aluminum, if sold to the public to become a frame or receiver once completed, must be serialized under this bill. The bill doesn’t grandfather existing homemade firearms. This bill is unconstitutional under Bruen. Homemade guns have been legal since before the United States existed. I OPPOSE HB93: There are multiple problems with the bill as written. If a husband and wife co-own a shotgun for home defense, for example, and the husband gets a protective order issued against him, the wife would no longer have access to that co-owned shotgun. That punishes the wife and needlessly endangers her life. Also, a person 18-20yo can legally possess rifles, shotguns, and handguns. Others right can not be removed because of the actions of another. I OPPOSE HB110: The car owner should not be at fault even if a criminal opens an unlocked car door to steal a firearm. It is the criminal who is solely to blame. I OPPOSE HB217: The U.S. Supreme Court has said in both DC v Heller, and recently in Bruen, that any firearm “in common use” is protected by the 2A. The guns and magazines targeted by this bill are among the most common guns and magazines in the US & VA, making this bill unconstitutional. I OPPOSE HB229: Disarming visitors and guests, including concealed handgun permit holders, at such facilities violates their right to protect themselves in an emergency. A U.S. District Court in the 2nd Circuit has restrained enforcement of just such a law for being unconstitutional under Bruen. I OPPOSE HB626: A solution in search of a problem. Higher education students and staff are adults and have a right to self-defense. I OPPOSE HB702: Destroying what might be perfectly functional, and possibly quite valuable, firearms is a waste of money. The State could offset any costs by selling the firearms to licensed gun dealers through an auction. This program is a “turn in” and not a “give-back” program, the government never owned them. I OPPOSE HB871: Biometric safes are more expensive than non-biometric safes. Biometric safes can be unreliable when being used under stress and they also require batteries to work. There are plenty of other locking mechanisms for safes that are more secure. I OPPOSE HB969: The Center would only be targeting violence committed using firearms and ignoring the root causes of crime, as well as all the other ways violence is inflicted on victims – knives, blunt objects, hands and feet, etc. Half of violent crimes are not committed with a firearm! I OPPOSE HB1359: This bill WILL get innocent people killed, as it will take at least two months before a person can purchase their first firearm. If they are purchasing that firearm for urgent self-defense, that is simply too long. The price to get a permit, is not equitable. Even citizens with CHPs will be limited to one handgun a month. Local law-enforcement will be handed a registry of gun owners. And gun rentals at shooting ranges will not be possible for people who have not yet got their permit or are visiting from out of state or from another country. It is sickening to see this bill even proposed.

This document breaks down my reasoning for supporting these bills.

I SUPPORT THIS BILL

Disarming the law-abiding, tax-paying citizenry of the Commonwealth is going to drive me away from this state. Stop creating unconstitutional efforts that curtail my Rights as an American Citizen. If you want to change the Right, then change the Constitution through the amendment process. Otherwise, focus on what you can really change and fund. Schools and roads. Quit wasting my hard earned money that I spend on local businesses that keep Virginians employed. I am not the only one who will vote with my feet. I left California for a reason...not you're trying to re-create it on the East coast.

Too many people with guns that shouldn’t be with guns. I know lazy gun owners who have had their items stolen. Lazy gun owners might as well be donating their legal firearms to criminals- putting them in dangerous hands should have more severe consequences. Adam T. lost his life protecting someone in a situation that could’ve been avoided if weapons weren’t involved. More strict gun laws will result in fewer cases of gun violence like this.

I SUPPORT HB21. This bill establishes basic standards of responsible conduct and makes it easier to hold the industry accountable for reckless practices that fuel illegal gun trafficking, straw purchases, or other harms in our communities. Opponents claim it violates federal law (like the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act) or the U.S. Constitution. They are mistaken. An identical approach in New York was challenged and upheld as constitutional by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in 2025. Similar accountability laws are already in place in states including California, Illinois, Colorado, New Jersey, Connecticut, and others. Firearm manufacturers and distributors handle a uniquely dangerous product. Like sellers of any potentially hazardous good, they should maintain reasonable safeguards to protect the public from negligent or reckless business practices that endanger Virginians. This is a targeted, common-sense step toward greater accountability and safer communities. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill.

I support these bills to prevent gun violence in Virginia. Attached is the story of my friend Adam Turck’s tragic death due to gun violence in August 2025, and why the Friends of Adam Turck are choosing to support these five bills. Virginians like Adam have a right to be kind and brave without being killed, and it is the job of the state to guarantee that right.

Its is vital to the safety of the community that these bills be passed. on August 2, 2025 not to far from the capital building, one of my best friends, Adam Turck, was shot and killed on a beautiful Saturday morning trying to help a woman in the middle of a domestic violence altercation. The individual who shot him was a 19 year old boy who illegally had a gun. There were several eye witnesses and 2 recordings of the event that showed that Adam did everything right in remaining calm and attempting to defuse the situation, but that was not enough. Adam was a brave, kind and caring person. He would never be able to leave someone in need, but if these laws had been in place, he may never have had to step in in this situation. His lose has devastated our community and that is why we have come together to make sure these bills get passed. I know that the situations are not unique, as tragic as that is... and something needs to be done. Please vote yes.

HB 110 I SUPPORT this bill. HB 110 prohibits leaving a handgun visible in an unattended vehicle on public property. Simply put, it requires gun owners to store the firearm out of sight—such as in the glove compartment, center console —to prevent it from being readily observable from outside. This requirement is straightforward and not onerous for responsible gun owners. Many already take this basic precaution. HB 110 will help deter gun thefts from vehicles—a major source of stolen firearms entering criminal hands. HB 110 is a reasonable, narrowly tailored measure that promotes public safety without infringing on lawful gun ownership. HB19 I SUPPORT this bill. Under current Virginia law, a person convicted of misdemeanor assault against a family or household member is prohibited from possessing a firearm. This protection currently only applies primarily to spouses, ex-spouses or those with a child in common. It does not fully cover other intimate partners. There is no reasonable basis to treat violence against a dating partner differently from violence against a spouse when it comes to preventing harm from firearms. Those convicted of domestic assault should be prohibited from possessing firearms, full stop. HB 19 is a targeted, limited expansion of existing law. It closes the dangerous “boyfriend loophole” by extending the firearm prohibition to misdemeanor convictions for assault and battery against an intimate partner. This common-sense measure will help protect victims and the Commonwealth’s citizens. HB 93 I SUPPORT this bill. Under current Virginia law, individuals subject to a protective order or convicted of misdemeanor domestic assault are prohibited from possessing firearms. However, there is no clear mechanism to ensure these prohibited individuals actually relinquish their guns, leaving survivors at continued risk. HB 93 creates a straightforward enforcement mechanism for laws already on the books. It is targeted, limited in scope, and focused on protecting survivors of domestic violence by reducing the risk of armed abusers. This common-sense measure will help safeguard the Commonwealth’s citizens without creating new prohibitions. HB 21 SUPPORT this bill. HB 21 would require firearm industry members—manufacturers, distributors, importers, and sellers—to implement “reasonable procedures, safeguards, and business practices” to prevent the sale or distribution of firearms to prohibited persons, straw purchasers (those buying for someone barred from ownership), firearm traffickers, or anyone the seller has reasonable cause to believe poses a substantial risk of gun violence or self-harm. Firearm manufacturers and distributors handle a uniquely dangerous product. Like sellers of any potentially hazardous good, they should maintain reasonable safeguards to protect the public from negligent or reckless business practices that endanger Virginians. HB 1359 I SUPPORT this bill. HB 1359 would require any person who purchases a firearm to present a valid firearms purchaser license issued by the Department of State Police. as we require vehicle owners to obtain and maintain a license before driving a car, we should require gun owners to obtain and maintain a license before possessing a firearm. Attached is information about my friend Adam, who was a victim of gun violence last year.

My friend Adam was killed late last year helping save someone from violence committed by their partner. The perpetrator pulled a gun out of his backpack and shot Adam, then turned the gun on himself. Any one of these bills could have played a role in ensuring this did not happen, and saved so many people from devastating loss. I urge you to pass these bills.

As a concerned resident, parent, and active voter, I support this bill to keep Virginians safe from gun violence.

In summary, I support House Bills 19, 93, 110, 201, 691, 696, 702, 871, 901, 909, 969, 1303, and 1359. I oppose House Bills 21, 40, 207, 217, 229, 626, 700, 907, 919. Please refer to my attached document for further explanation.

As a father, I want to raise my child in a world where doing the right thing doesn't put them in danger. My friend Adam did the right thing. He stepped in to help someone who was in a bad situation, and that decision—one he made with clear eyes and a full heart for humanity—cost him his life. While I appreciate that many constituents in this state are opposed to any restrictions on their 2nd amendment rights, there are many more who support reasonable efforts to restrict access to firearms and penalize those who are careless with the weapons they own. We cannot say with any certainty that the passing of bills like HB 19 or HB 110 would have prevented Adam's death, but we can they will save others' in the future. And that's worth fighting for.

I SUPPORT this bill. HB21 establishes basic standards of responsible conduct and makes it easier to hold the industry accountable for reckless practices that fuel illegal gun trafficking, straw purchases, or other harms in our communities. Similar accountability laws are already in place in states including California, Illinois, Colorado, New Jersey, Connecticut, and others. Firearm manufacturers and distributors handle a uniquely dangerous product. Like sellers of any potentially hazardous good, they should maintain reasonable safeguards to protect the public from negligent or reckless business practices that endanger Virginians. This is a targeted, common-sense step toward greater accountability and safer communities. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. Attached is the leave-behind from the Friends of Adam Turck.

Please vote down this Bill. This is a ridiculous bill.

I am writing in memory of my friend Adam Turck, who was murdered with a .22 caliber handgun in Shockoe Bottom in August 2025. I support the following bills because I believe they will go a long way toward ensuring that what happened to Adam doesn't happen again. HB110: I SUPPORT this bill. HB 110 prohibits leaving a handgun visible in an unattended vehicle on public property. Simply put, it requires gun owners to store the firearm out of sight—such as in the glove compartment, center console —to prevent it from being readily observable from outside. This requirement is straightforward and not onerous for responsible gun owners. Many already take this basic precaution. Importantly, HB 110 will help deter gun thefts from vehicles—a major source of stolen firearms entering criminal hands. I want to stress that I support this bill, but not the similar bill being considered by the Senate, because it imposes a civil fine instead of a criminal penalty. HB 110 is a reasonable, narrowly tailored measure that promotes public safety without infringing on lawful gun ownership. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. HB19 I SUPPORT this bill. Under current Virginia law, a person convicted of misdemeanor assault against a family or household member is prohibited from possessing a firearm. However, this protection currently only applies primarily to spouses, ex-spouses or those with a child in common. It does not fully cover other intimate partners. There is no reasonable basis to treat violence against a dating partner differently from violence against a spouse when it comes to preventing harm from firearms. HB 19 is a targeted, limited expansion of existing law. It closes the dangerous “boyfriend loophole” by extending the firearm prohibition to misdemeanor convictions for assault and battery against an intimate partner. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. HB38 Under current Virginia law, individuals subject to a protective order or convicted of misdemeanor domestic assault are prohibited from possessing firearms. However, there is no clear mechanism to ensure these prohibited individuals actually relinquish their guns, leaving survivors at continued risk. HB 93 addresses this gap. The bill also notifies the individual that law enforcement may seek a search warrant if there's reason to believe firearms have not been relinquished. HB 93 creates a straightforward enforcement mechanism for laws already on the books. It is targeted, limited in scope, and focused on protecting survivors of domestic violence by reducing the risk of armed abusers. This common-sense measure will help safeguard the Commonwealth’s citizens without creating new prohibitions. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. HB21 I SUPPORT this bill. HB 21 would require firearm industry members to implement “reasonable procedures, safeguards, and business practices” to prevent the sale or distribution of firearms to prohibited persons, straw purchasers, firearm traffickers, or anyone the seller has reasonable cause to believe poses a substantial risk of gun violence or self-harm. In short, this bill establishes basic standards of responsible conduct and makes it easier to hold the industry accountable for reckless practices that fuel illegal gun trafficking, straw purchases, or other harms in our communities. This is a targeted, common-sense step toward greater accountability and safer communities. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill.

I SUPPORT this bill. HB 21 would require firearm industry members—manufacturers, distributors, importers, and sellers—to implement “reasonable procedures, safeguards, and business practices” to prevent the sale or distribution of firearms to prohibited persons, straw purchasers (those buying for someone barred from ownership), firearm traffickers, or anyone the seller has reasonable cause to believe poses a substantial risk of gun violence or self-harm. In short, this bill establishes basic standards of responsible conduct and makes it easier to hold the industry accountable for reckless practices that fuel illegal gun trafficking, straw purchases, or other harms in our communities. Opponents claim it violates federal law (like the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act) or the U.S. Constitution. They are mistaken. An identical approach in New York was challenged and upheld as constitutional by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in 2025. Similar accountability laws are already in place in states including California, Illinois, Colorado, New Jersey, Connecticut, and others. Firearm manufacturers and distributors handle a uniquely dangerous product. Like sellers of any potentially hazardous good, they should maintain reasonable safeguards to protect the public from negligent or reckless business practices that endanger Virginians. This is a targeted, common-sense step toward greater accountability and safer communities. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill.

Comments Document

I SUPPORT THIS BILL.

I SUPPORT this bill. HB 21 would require firearm industry members—manufacturers, distributors, importers, and sellers—to implement “reasonable procedures, safeguards, and business practices” to prevent the sale or distribution of firearms to prohibited persons, straw purchasers (those buying for someone barred from ownership), firearm traffickers, or anyone the seller has reasonable cause to believe poses a substantial risk of gun violence or self-harm. In short, this bill establishes basic standards of responsible conduct and makes it easier to hold the industry accountable for reckless practices that fuel illegal gun trafficking, straw purchases, or other harms in our communities. Opponents claim it violates federal law (like the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act) or the U.S. Constitution. They are mistaken. An identical approach in New York was challenged and upheld as constitutional by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in 2025. Similar accountability laws are already in place in states including California, Illinois, Colorado, New Jersey, Connecticut, and others. Firearm manufacturers and distributors handle a uniquely dangerous product. Like sellers of any potentially hazardous good, they should maintain reasonable safeguards to protect the public from negligent or reckless business practices that endanger Virginians. This is a targeted, common-sense step toward greater accountability and safer communities. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill.

I SUPPORT HB21, HB93, and HB110. These bills are common sense gun legislature and would help keep countless Virginians safe.

Comments Document

I support these Bills

HB 110 – Firearm in unattended vehicle; civil penalties I SUPPORT this bill. HB 110 is a reasonable, narrowly tailored measure that promotes public safety without infringing on lawful gun ownership. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. HB19 – Purchase, possession, or transportation of firearm; assault and battery of a family or household member or intimate partner; penalties I SUPPORT this bill. HB 19 is a targeted, limited expansion of existing law. It closes the dangerous “boyfriend loophole” by extending the firearm prohibition to misdemeanor convictions for assault and battery against an intimate partner. This common-sense measure will help protect victims and the Commonwealth’s citizens. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. HB 93 – Firearms; transfers to another person from a prohibited person I SUPPORT this bill. HB 93 creates a straightforward enforcement mechanism for laws already on the books. It is targeted, limited in scope, and focused on protecting survivors of domestic violence by reducing the risk of armed abusers. This common-sense measure will help safeguard the Commonwealth’s citizens without creating new prohibitions. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. HB21 – Firearm industry members; creates standards of responsible conduct, civil liability (available here) I SUPPORT this bill. This is a targeted, common-sense step toward greater accountability and safer communities. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. HB 1359 – Firearm purchase requirements; penalties (available here) I SUPPORT this bill. HB 1359 would require any person who purchases a firearm to present a valid firearms purchaser license issued by the Department of State Police. This bill would have three large practical impacts: (i) Prohibit possession of firearms by anyone under age 21; (ii) require regular firearms safety training for all licensed owners to promote responsible handling and storage (iii) create a de facto waiting period: Individuals could not purchase a firearm without first obtaining a license, a process that can take up to 45 days. This would help reduce impulsive purchases that can lead to irreversible harm in our communities. Just as we require vehicle owners to obtain and maintain a license before driving a car, we should require gun owners to obtain and maintain a license before possessing a firearm. This is a targeted, common-sense step toward greater accountability and safer communities. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill.

Comments Document

I support these bills.

I stand strongly with the VCDL on these proposed laws. VA has always been a bipartisan state on gun issues, and although the second amendment has may purposes- it must be preserved to protect the citizens of this state. Overreaching federal law enforcement, and all threats domestic and foreign are kept in line by responsible firearm ownership. Gun control also impacts lower income groups, impoverished populations, and people of color disproportionately. We must preserve the 2nd amendment.

I support HB21. Americans should have civil recourse against the gun industry as we do most every other industry. We should expect the firearm industry to do its utmost to prevent straw purchases and firearm trafficking, for example, and hold manufacturers and distributors accountable for reckless behavior or practices if they do not. Accountability is a great way to force manufacturers to raise standards of safety, especially in an industry that profits off of a product, a weapon, that is the number one cause of death for children in this country.

As a concerned parent and Virginian, I support these bills.

I oppose this bill because this bill holds the manufacturer and seller of a firearm or firearm accessory liable for the misuse of the firearm. Let's use another product as an example of the absurdity of this. If Chris Hurst had killed someone in a crash when he decided to drive while intoxicated who would have been responsible? The car manufacturer? The dealership that sold him the car? The person who changed his tires or oil last? The intention of this bill is to intimidate people from conducting lawful business.

I am writing to express my strong opposition to the recently proposed bills on gun control. While I understand the intent behind these bills—to enhance public safety—I firmly believe that they will have unintended consequences that infringe on the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens. The Second Amendment guarantees "the right of individuals to keep and bear arms", and it is a fundamental part of what makes this country free. These bills being proposed would place unnecessary and burdensome restrictions on responsible gun owners, making it harder for Virginians to exercise their rights in a lawful and safe manner. Rather than focusing on restricting access to firearms, I urge the General Assembly to consider measures that target criminals and illegal activities, such as enforcing stricter penalties for those who use firearms in the commission of crimes, or improving background checks for gun purchases. It is essential to address the root causes of violence, such as mental health issues and gang-related activity, rather than punishing responsible gun owners who follow the law. Furthermore, these proposed bills could create significant logistical challenges for gun owners, particularly those who rely on their firearms for self-defense, hunting, or recreational activities. The financial burden and potential legal ramifications of complying with these new regulations would be overwhelming for many Virginians. I strongly urge you to reconsider these proposals and to focus on policies that protect both our rights and our communities. I trust that you will make the best decision for all Virginians, and I sincerely hope that you will oppose these bills.

HB21 imposes burdensome civil liability and regulatory requirements on firearm industry members. This bill creates a legal framework that could lead to excessive litigation and unintended consequences. The broad and vague standards proposed—such as preventing "substantial risk" of harm or defining "public nuisance"—could expose legitimate businesses to costly lawsuits and undermine their ability to operate effectively. This law seeks to place the blame on the industry as a whole for gun crimes instead of the criminal who actually carried out such crimes. Rather than punishing the firearm industry with sweeping regulations, we should focus on targeted measures that tackle the underlying issues of gun violence and illegal trafficking.

We support HB21 because currently the gun industry does not have any accountability measures. It is important that the gun industry raises their standards of safety in order to keep the public safe from gun violence.

This bill will hold firearms manufacturers responsible for the actions of criminals who decide to use their product as a tool for their violent gains. The criminal formulates the intent. The criminal decides the target. The criminal executes the crime. The criminal gains from the crime itself. Why is the company responsible for the criminal's actions? The company did not shove the weapon in their hand and say "Go kill that woman!". That's not even to mention the poor language of the bill, opening litigation to those that make the most minute accessories, such as holsters, flashlights, custom safety switches. Imagine a man commits a robbery with a firearm and is caught with the firearm having a custom safety. The company, who in the interest of keeping firearm operators safer with their product, is then sued for putting their product on the streets! This bill intends to keep the firearms industry wrapped up in as much litigation as possible! I do not support this bill.

HB110, Del. Laufer (D): This bill will save lives by eliminating provisions allowing any person to store their firearms in their car and preventing firearms from being stolen from cars. I SUPPORT this bill as half of all stolen guns are ones that are stolen from a car, and half of all crimes committed with a gun have a stolen gun used. This is a straightforward way to reduce these crimes and gun violence. HB19, Del. McClure (D): I SUPPORT this bill as it expands critical protections to additional relationship categories. This is a critical step to ensuring that more individuals are protected from domestic violence and gun violence. HB21, Del. Helmer (D): I SUPPORT this bill as industry accountability is a great way to force manufacturers to raise standards of safety. Firearm manufacturers and distributors must be held accountable for reckless behavior and practices that make our communities less safe. HB229, Del. Hernandez (D): I SUPPORT this bill and commonsense restrictions on gun access and believe in protecting the safety of our medical care providers. HB24, Del. Helmer (D): I SUPPORT this bill as visitors wishing to carry concealed handguns in Virginia should meet the same level of safety requirements that we require of our state’s residents. HB40, Del. Simon (D): I SUPPORT this bill as it would make it easier to prosecute and prevent crimes committed by ghost guns. HB626, Del. Callsen (D): I SUPPORT extending the protection of k-12 schools to our institutions of higher education. HB702, Del. Cole (D): I SUPPORT this bill as currently it can be incredibly difficult to find a way to get a gun destroyed that you no longer want or has come into your possession through something like inheritance. The public benefits from the creation of more drop-off point for individuals, of their own free will, to relinquish firearms to be destroyed. HB700, Hayes (D): I SUPPORT this bill as waiting periods provide law enforcement additional time to perform an accurate background check and create a “cooling off” period to prevent acts of violence or suicide attempts. HB93, Bennett-Parker: I SUPPORT this bill, as it strengthens protections for domestic violence survivors. We must establish a clear process to separate a person from their firearms who has been convicted of a domestic violence offense, or who is subject to a protective order.

I support HB21 because manufacturers and distributors should be held accountable when unsafe or reckless practices contribute to violence. Industry accountability helps encourage safer standards and prioritizes public safety.

I support the presented gun laws that will improve the Commonwealth’s safety

In 2021, my elderly stepmother shot through a closed door during an argument with my elderly father, striking him in the back and paralyzing him. My father has spent the past five years in extreme physical agony, unable to walk, paying caretakers out of pocket to hoist him in and out of bed, unable to care for himself. The lack of movement in his life has led to horrific bed sores, which become bone infections, which lead to extended hospital stays and a horrible quality of life. All this because my stepmother was allowed to have a gun. There are countless stories like this of the bullet's aftermath: of the lifelong physical and mental damage that comes from guns. It has been a horrific five years, full of physical pain and mental anguish for our entire family. I wouldn't wish this on anyone. The bills before you now will not only save lives, they will spare whole swaths of our neighborhoods from needing to deal with these horrors. One bullet, lodged in my father's spine, didn't kill him. Instead, it has shattered the life he had, his ability to work and care for himself, and his family. Each bullet we allow in our communities has the ability to do the same. His care has bankrupted him personally, and now he relies on state care and Medicaid, an avoidable burden on taxpayers. There are numerous reasons guns have no place in our society, and I hope my father's story is just one that helps make change. Please support all bills that make guns harder to access, harder to keep. Please do everything you can to keep guns out of the hands of our society. Thank you for the great work you are doing to keep Virginians safe.

This bill makes it easier to hold firearm manufacturers and distributors accountable for reckless behavior or practices that make our communities less safe. We SUPPORT this bill as industry accountability is a great way to force manufacturers to raise standards of safety.

I respectfully submit this comment in opposition to HB110, HB21, HB217, HB229, HB24, HB623, HB626, HB700, HB871, and HB916. These proposals represent a sweeping expansion of firearm regulation that raises serious constitutional concerns under both the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 13 of the Virginia Constitution. Recent Supreme Court precedent makes clear that firearm regulations must be consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Broad restrictions on commonly owned firearms, magazines, permitting, carry, storage, commerce, and industry liability extend well beyond that tradition and place undue burdens on law abiding Virginians. Several proposals also seek to impose increased taxation of firearms, ammunition, and accessories such as the proposed $500 tax on suppressors. These proposals are nothing more than a means of discouraging lawful ownership. Using taxation to create financial barriers to the exercise of a constitutional right is deeply concerning and disproportionately impacts lower income Virginians. Constitutional rights should not be accessible only to those who can afford significant additional fees or penalties. Many of these bills do not meaningfully target criminal misuse, but instead regulate the conduct of responsible citizens who already comply with existing laws. Measures such as expanded prohibitions, waiting periods, altered permitting standards, reciprocal permit limitations, storage penalties, civil liability expansion, forfeiture hurdles, location based carry bans, and punitive taxation risk criminalizing otherwise lawful behavior while doing nothing to address violent crime or its underlying causes. I respectfully urge the General Assembly to reject these proposals in their entirety. Virginians should not be asked to surrender constitutional rights through cumulative restrictions, financial barriers, or regulatory complexity that would never be tolerated if applied to any other enumerated right. Public safety and constitutional liberty are not mutually exclusive, and legislation that undermines one in the name of the other ultimately serves neither. The Commonwealth can and must pursue solutions that respect both the Constitution and the Virginians it exists to serve.

I am writing to oppose the current slate of firearm restriction bills before the General Assembly. While these proposals are framed as public safety measures, in practice they disproportionately harm marginalized Virginians — including racial minorities, LGBTQ+ individuals (especially trans people), immigrants, and low-income residents — who often face higher risks of targeted violence and slower or unequal police response. These bills add costs, delays, and bureaucratic hurdles to exercising a fundamental right. Increased fees, mandatory waiting periods, feature bans, and expanded disqualifications fall hardest on people with limited financial resources, unstable work schedules, or justified concerns about their personal safety. For many vulnerable individuals, the ability to lawfully and promptly acquire a firearm is not about ideology, but about self-defense. History shows that restrictive gun laws are most aggressively enforced in minority communities, amplifying disparities in arrests, prosecution, and legal exposure — even when no harm has occurred. Expanding civil liability, criminal penalties, and subjective risk standards increases that risk. Public safety should not come at the expense of civil rights or equal access to self-protection. Policies that price people out of their rights or delay lawful self-defense do not address the root causes of violence and instead leave the most vulnerable less safe. I respectfully urge you to oppose these bills and support approaches that protect both public safety and the rights of all Virginians, regardless of income, identity, or background. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Such bills if passed would provide little benefit to the safety of Virginia citizens. Gun violence is not a major concern in Virginia, and criminals will neither abide nor be limited by such legislation. Instead, many responsible citizens would lose their rights. There is no reason to pass such measures. In addition, many of these bills are not written to an excellent level of clarity and will spur much confusion on what remains legal or illegal.

Today’s Democrats, Democratic Socialists, and Conservatives who take away our rights when it comes to defending ourselves from tyranny, criminals, and tyranny are not protected Virginia citizens. The Left puts a bandaid over the real issues instead of using factual information and data. Some examples: metal detectors, DEI, low standards and expectations for specific careers, defund police and replace with mental counselors, lockdowns, forced vaccinations and masks. . The law abiding Virginian citizens without criminal background who register their firearms, take guns safety, and keep the firearm in a secure location are the most fundamental elements. Why is the Left still punishing the law abiding Virginian citizens instead of the criminals? Why is the Left still supporting dangerous individuals? You don’t have the decency to do what is best for our state and country. The Biden administration damaged our democracy and humanity.

I support this bill as the data and evidence show that it will reduce harm and deaths from guns. Taking this measure will ensure that guns are used responsibly and only for the intended consequences. Owning a gun is a serious responsibility and measures like this must be put into action as currently they are being misused and causing an epidemic in this country. Guns are the #1 killer of children and teens in the United States. When the impact of an item causes so much harm, measures must be put into place to protect people, especially children.

I support the following bills because guns are the number one cause of death for children in our commonwealth and our nation. HB 110 will help reduce the number of gun thefts from cars, and these thefts are on the rise. Additionally, we need to close the boyfriend loophole from domestic violence offenders (HB19).

These proposed bills are clear and direct violations of our 2nd Amendment Constitutional right. Virginia has been an upstanding example of bi-partisan gun ownership since its birth as a Commonwealth. At a time when many other constitutional rights are being directly challenged by the Federal Government, with little resistance from the Supreme Court & Congress, it is extremely ignorant and out of touch for Virginia representatives to even consider passing these unconstitutional bills. Whether it is Republicans or Democrats it seems our rights are being pinched away, piece by piece. I ask our representatives and Governor to use "common sense" and not pass these blatant violations to our guaranteed constitutional right. You representatives cannot simply pick and choose which constitutional amendments apply to citizens or we may as well not have a constitution at all.

I respectfully submit this comment as a Virginia citizen (and member of r/VAGuns) to oppose House Bill 21, which creates vague civil-liability standards for “firearm industry members” and exposes lawful businesses to expanded tort liability. The Second Amendment and Article I, § 13 of the Virginia Constitution protect the right to keep and bear arms. District of Columbia v. Heller recognized this individual right and McDonald v. City of Chicago incorporated it against the states. Under New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, firearm regulations must be grounded in historical tradition of regulation. HB 21’s civil liability regime has no historical analogue where broad manufacturer or dealer conduct standards are imposed with subjective “reasonable controls” and “public nuisance” exposure based on “foreseeable” misuse. This novel regime threatens to burden the lawful commerce of arms and accessories that are in common use for lawful purposes without reference to historical tradition, risking undue infringement on Second Amendment protected interests. There is limited evidence that expanding civil liability beyond established negligence and statutory violations reduces crime. RAND’s reviews show that while targeted accountability (e.g., against knowingly illegal trafficking) can be effective, broad tort exposure for lawful conduct lacks strong empirical support and may deter lawful supply without demonstrable public-safety benefits. The firearm industry already operates within a comprehensive federal and state regulatory framework, including background checks and prohibitions on unlawful transfers. Expanding liability without clear causal linkage to crime trends misallocates enforcement effort. HB 21’s definitions of “firearm industry member,” “firearm-related product,” and “reasonable controls” are broad and subjective, potentially encompassing routine commercial practices and benign accessories. The bill authorizes any injured person to seek injunctions and damages without proving intent or proximate causation, lowering the threshold for litigation and inviting speculative claims against retailers, manufacturers, and distributors. This is logically overbroad and redundant with existing consumer protection law and federal protections such as the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), which Congress enacted to prevent precisely this type of liability for lawful commerce. Subjective standards increase litigation risk and compliance costs, disproportionally burdening small businesses that lack resources to defend against suits with tenuous causal links to criminal misuse. Virginia’s firearm industry contributes economic activity, jobs, tax revenue, and conservation funding. Broad liability exposure threatens to chill investment and participation in lawful markets. Small dealers and manufacturers lacking deep legal resources may face outsized risk, dissuading entry and reducing competition. This could have disproportionate effects on rural economies where firearm commerce plays a measurable role. HB 21 creates a novel, poorly defined civil liability regime untethered from historical regulatory tradition, lacks empirical support as a crime-reduction measure, duplicates and expands beyond existing law, and threatens economic harm without clear public benefit. For these reasons, I respectfully urge the Committee to oppose HB 21.

I am opposed to HB21 as it is designed to disarm citizens through bankrupting the firearms industry by exposing them to never ending frivolous lawsuits. The actions allowed under this bill are the same as allowing the victims of a drunk driver to sue the car manufacturer, the liquor distiller, and the retail locations that sold both products. To anyone with common sense, this bill makes no sense, because its aims are nefarious and underhanded.

I am strongly opposed to this bill. Longstanding federal legislation, backed by the courts, has existed explicitly to prevent bad-faith actors from litigating responsible firearms companies out of existence. Not only does this bill do nothing to address actual public safety concerns, but I am concerned about the cost to the Commonwealth that will be spent defending this legislation in court for years.

I oppose HB21 on the basis that these laws in other states have almost exclusively used for lawfare against gun companies to suppress anyone from doing any firearms business in that state. We already have laws in place for negligent and illegal firearms sales. This does not need to be added to the list

SB 27 / HB 21 create new compliance duties and a civil liability regime for firearm industry members without identifying specific violent conduct newly prevented by such duties. Similar statutes in other states have generated complex, multi-year litigation involving vagueness, due process, and Second Amendment challenges. Given limited Commonwealth resources, I encourage careful evaluation of whether these measures materially improve public safety relative to strengthening enforcement of existing violent-crime laws.

As a representative of r/VAGuns, a popular online community of Virginia gun owners on the social media platform Reddit, we fully and unanimously DO NOT support this bill and others like it that blatantly violate Second Amendment rights with disregard for tradition or case law. These bills DO NOT represent practical, balanced measures that help safeguard our community, and r/VAGuns does NOT back these efforts to infringe on the rights of Virginians.

I oppose this bill. This bill unfairly targets one of the most highly regulated industries in the country—the firearms industry—by subjecting it to expansive civil liability for actions that are already illegal under existing law. Under this proposal, manufacturers and sellers could be sued not only for firearms, but even for the most benign firearm accessories, such as a butt stock, gun sling, or gun case. The bill suggests liability if these items are not deemed to have “properly” protected against theft or criminal misuse. This standard is vague, subjective, and impossible to reasonably meet. How could an accessory seller possibly know whether they are selling a gun sling or case to a prohibited person? These items are not firearms, are not regulated as firearms, and do not require background checks. Holding sellers liable under these circumstances places an unreasonable burden on lawful businesses and invites arbitrary lawsuits. If this logic were applied consistently, a car parts store could be sued for selling a seat cover or floor mat for a vehicle later used in a bank robbery. That is clearly an absurd and unjust outcome, yet this bill applies that same flawed reasoning to the firearms industry alone. The true intent and effect of this legislation is not public safety, but a chilling effect on all aspects of the firearms industry—manufacturers, retailers, and accessory sellers alike. By exposing lawful businesses to endless civil litigation, the bill discourages legal commerce without addressing the behavior of criminals who misuse stolen or illegally obtained firearms. I urge the committee to reject this bill and focus instead on enforcing existing laws and holding criminals accountable, rather than attempting to regulate an industry out of existence through civil liability.

I respectfully submit this comment in opposition to HB21. The bill would impose broad civil liability on “firearm industry members” through a flexible “reasonable controls” and “public nuisance” framework, enforceable by the Attorney General, local governments, and private plaintiffs. First, HB21 rests on the assumption that nuisance based civil liability reduces violent crime. That claim is unsupported. The RAND Corporation’s major reviews conclude that evidence for many firearm policies’ crime reduction effects remains limited or inconclusive, especially for policies aimed at the industry rather than at offenders. States that pioneered similar laws provide no clear evidence tying these statutes to measurable crime reductions. In New York, the Second Circuit upheld the state’s law only against a facial pre enforcement challenge; the court did not identify proven public safety gains. California’s nearly identical approach (AB 1594) has been preliminarily enjoined for likely conflicts with federal law, illustrating continuing uncertainty about both legality and effectiveness. Second, HB21 invites selective enforcement. It allows the Attorney General, city and county attorneys, and private litigants to pursue overlapping claims under malleable standards such as “recklessly contributing to a public nuisance.” Comparable statutes in New Jersey have already produced litigation over unclear enforcement triggers and inconsistent interpretations. Such ambiguity encourages uneven application across communities and exposes small retailers to disproportionate litigation pressure unrelated to actual wrongdoing. Third, HB21 risks significant economic and equity harms. Similar laws in New York and California have increased compliance burdens and exposure to costly suits, raising operational costs for small and minority owned FFLs. Those costs ultimately fall on working class Virginians, who already face barriers in lawful firearm access and rely heavily on affordable local dealers. Fourth, the bill is unnecessary. The conduct HB21 targets—straw purchasing, trafficking, prohibited person sales, and deceptive practices—is already criminal under Virginia and federal law. Existing enforcement tools directly address unlawful behavior without shifting liability to lawful businesses. New Jersey litigation confirms that predicate criminal statutes already provide the appropriate mechanism when violations occur. Finally, HB21 presents real constitutional and preemption concerns. Courts disagree on the reach of the PLCAA predicate exception, and California’s enjoined statute shows the risk when states extend liability to lawful, out of state commerce. Enacting HB21 would invite drawn out litigation without evidence that it would reduce harm. For these reasons, I respectfully urge the Committee to oppose HB21. Respectfully submitted. References: RAND Gun Policy Reviews (2023–2024) on limited evidence of crime reduction effects. Second Circuit decision on New York’s firearm industry statute (NSSF v. James). Preliminary injunction against California AB1594 (NSSF v. Bonta).

I am writing to oppose this legislation as a proud Virginia resident. This legislation will have no effect on public safety and will only provide an undue burden on the law abiding residents of Virginia. Other states have tried these methods and have shown no drastic reduction in gun violence. Instead, this merely prevents law abiding Virginians from fully exercising their constitutional rights. And it is clearly a constitutional right of both our nation and the state. It is the only amendment where “shall not be infringed” is expressly stated. Under the recent New York vs Bruen decision, there must be historical precedent for it to be constitutional of which there is none especially none that are not based in racist ideologies. I urge my delegates to vote no on this legislation and will be allocating my vote accordingly.

I respectfully oppose HB21, HB 217, and HB 207. These proposals would directly harm my livelihood and our ability to serve our community responsibly. They would expose small businesses to massive legal risk for lawful activity, increase costs, and force many stores to reduce services or close entirely. That doesn’t improve public safety — it just pushes responsible dealers out while doing nothing to stop criminals. These policies also restrict access to firearms that millions of ordinary, law-abiding Americans own for self-defense, sport, and training. The Second Amendment exists to protect all citizens, especially in uncertain times, and these bills move Virginia away from individual rights and toward government control. I ask you to protect both public safety and constitutional freedoms by rejecting these measures.

As a representative of r/VAGuns, a popular online community of Virginia gun owners on the social media platform Reddit, we fully and unanimously endorse this bill and others like it that promote common-sense gun laws. Our community stands united in support of the recent legislation being passed in the General Assembly, which aims to protect and strengthen our neighborhoods while respecting the rights of responsible gun owners. These bills represent practical, balanced measures that help safeguard our community, and r/VAGuns proudly backs these efforts to promote safety and responsibility across Virginia.

Simply unconstitutional. Only a tyrant would agree with this. A waste of time and money for no benefit.

This bill does more harm to law abiding citizens. This bill does nothing to curb crime or be harsher on criminals. This bill will not help secure the safety of law abiding citizens.

We oppose this bill HB21 for it adds nothing. The federal government already does background checks. Guns are traceable. If a person is shot by a sworn officer, do they get to sue and recover damages? More people are hurt by cars and alcohol. Guns save lives. This legislation would take us backwards - not forewords. There is nothing in the bill to deal with guns made in other countries. Well intentioned but missing anything of substance or improvement to the commonwealth of Virginia.

HB110 | Laufer CRIMINALISES the victim and incentivizes these types of crime to go UNREPORTED. It allows guns to fall into the hands of CRIMINALS and then you penalize person who the crime was committed against. HB21 | Helmer HB217 | Helmer HB24 | Helmer These LIMIT the gun RIGHTS of Virginians. The 2nd amendment does not grant rights to it's people, it prevents governments from taking the INALIENABLE RIGHTS away from it's people. This goes against the 2nd amendment, the Virginia Bill of rights Art I Section 13 and your oath of office. Sic Semper Tyrannis. Remember that Helmer

I support this bill because the laws regulating how guns may be sold are outdated, and members of the gun industry who skirt the law enjoy special legal protection.

I oppose the following bills. HB110 | Laufer | Firearm in unattended motor vehicle; civil penalty. This is an attempt to criminalize the victim. Where else can I person store a firearm to go into a non permissible location. This is especially important on an unexpected visit to such a location HB21 | Helmer | Firearm industry members; creates standards of responsible conduct, civil liability. This is an obvious attempt to sue businesses out of business. HB217 | Helmer | Assault firearms and certain ammunition feeding devices; importation, sale, etc., prohibited. Millions of these are already in VA and the rest of the country. According to the Bruin decision, these are already in common use. HB24 | Helmer | Concealed handgun permits; reciprocity with other states. VA enjoys one of the broadest reciprocity agreements in the country. Is this based on any evidence or just feel good measure. HB40 | Simon | Plastic firearms or receivers, unserialized firearms, etc.; transfer, etc., prohibited, penalties. Since before the creation of this country the people have had the right to produce their own firearms.

HB21 is not a good bill. There are plenty firearms related laws "on the books" already. If you are thinking about civil liability for firearms related things, what about alcohol? Per the CDC, "About 178,000 people die from excessive drinking each year." In 2023 there were 46,728 firearms related deaths. Over three times more annual deaths related to alcohol than firearms. Additionally, this could be seen as a "back door" way to suppress Constitutional Rights. This is just another bill to add to our litigious society. Suppress rights through fear of being sued. Not good.

I am here to oppose HB21. HB21 is not a public safety bill. It is a liability expansion bill designed to achieve through civil lawsuits what lawmakers cannot do directly through legislation: restrict lawful firearms and ammunition by targeting manufacturers, retailers, and distributors who are already heavily regulated and who comply with both state and federal law. This bill creates vague and subjective “standards of responsible conduct” that are not tied to criminal wrongdoing. Instead, it exposes lawful businesses to open-ended civil liability for the actions of third parties over whom they have no control. That is a fundamental departure from basic principles of justice and due process. I hope Helmer hears us Virginians when we say, DO NOT INFRINGE ON OUR RIGHTS, DONT TREAD ON ME

This commonwealth has a rich history of being a shining example of freedom. The home of “Give me liberty, or give me death” is now the home of purposed bills that disgrace the very fabric of this state. I urge you, especially in these unprecedented times, to not support any infringement of the constitution. Democrats have been given such a great opportunity to lead this state, but unconstitutional bills that take away 2nd amendment rights, that will get turned over in Supreme Court, and waste time and energy of this state, need to be shut down. Please take the temperature of your constituents, no one wants this. No one voted for this. This reeks of Bloomberg’s agenda, and not of the people who entrusted you to lead us in these troubling times.

I am writing to express my strong opposition to the anti-gun bills scheduled for consideration in your subcommittee meeting on January 29, 2026. As a law-abiding citizen who values the rights enshrined in the United States Constitution, particularly the Second Amendment, I urge you to vote against these measures that infringe upon the fundamental right to keep and bear arms. The Second Amendment guarantees the right of the people to keep and bear arms, a right that shall not be infringed. These bills, including but not limited to HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB702, HB871, HB969, and HB1359, represent direct assaults on this constitutional protection. They impose unnecessary restrictions on firearm ownership, possession, and transfer that disproportionately burden responsible gun owners while doing nothing to address the root causes of crime. It is a well-established fact that criminals, by definition, do not obey laws. Measures like bans on certain firearms (HB217), mandatory storage requirements (HB871), prohibitions on unserialized firearms (HB40), and penalties for leaving firearms in vehicles (HB110) will only disarm law-abiding citizens who follow the rules. These individuals are not the source of violent crime; rather, they are often the ones who rely on their Second Amendment rights for self-defense, hunting, and sport. Criminals will continue to acquire and use firearms illegally, unaffected by these new regulations, leaving ordinary Virginians more vulnerable. History and data show that gun control laws do not reduce crime rates but instead empower those who operate outside the law. For example, cities with strict gun laws often experience higher rates of violent crime compared to areas where law-abiding citizens can more freely exercise their rights. These bills will create more "gun-free" zones and bureaucratic hurdles that criminals ignore, effectively turning law-abiding citizens into easier targets. I respectfully request that you reject these infringement on our constitutional rights and focus instead on policies that target actual criminal behavior, such as enforcing existing laws against violent offenders and supporting mental health initiatives. Protecting the Second Amendment is essential to preserving our freedoms and ensuring public safety for all Virginians. Thank you for your time and consideration. I hope you will vote NO on these anti-Second Amendment bills. Sincerely, Bailey Pratt

In reviewing these various bills it seems that many of them disregard the Constitution that was sworn to be upheld. Additionally several have already been ruled on in various courts across the country. They serve to divide constituents especially those who vote rather than provide civil discourse and leadership. They further fail to address larger issues that plague our society. Punishing those who abide by the law and creating penalties for innocent civilians is conceptually flawed. I urge you all to reexamine the methods behind these bills and abandon them at this point. Work toward the greater good and try something that hasn’t already failed repeatedly. Truly focus on serving this great Commonwealth. It will serve all of us better in the future.

HB1303, I support. The remaining bills are unnecessary and bureaucratic. You are creating bills meant to solve statistically insignificant events. HB1359 and HB217 are particularly objectionable. Requiring a "purchaser license" infringes on the right to bear arms and is a complete duplication of existing background checks. The assault firearm definition is unconstitutional and will not stand up to legal challenge. Our tax dollars and attorney general resources will be wasted on such an obviously flawed legislation. Gun buy back programs are have proven to be a waste of tax payer dollars with no impact on gun crime statistics. HB110 is very heavy handed. Just because someone could detect a weapon in a private motor vehicle should not make that vehicle subject to confiscation by the state nor a penalty applied to the firearm owner. This is totally a way to punish firearm owners without solving any real gun violence crimes that you, as legislators, could better focus your time and effort on. Focus on enforcing existing laws and not letting habitual criminals get away with warnings or light sentencing for their crimes. That is the common sense approach. We have more than enough laws, we do not need more ways to trap law abiding citizens and our merchants with this slew of bills.

Dear Members of the Virginia House Public Safety Firearms Subcommittee: I am writing to express my deep concerns regarding several of the bills currently on the docket at today’s meeting that I believe impose overly restrictive and chilling effects on the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Virginians. As someone with over six decades of active participation in shooting sports, I feel compelled to share my perspective based on extensive experience in the responsible exercise of these constitutional rights. For more than 60 years, I have been a devoted participant in shooting sports across various disciplines. Throughout this time, I have witnessed firsthand how responsible gun ownership and proper safety training create a culture of respect for firearms and the rights they represent. I am both an NRA Certified Range Safety Officer and a United States Marine Corps Certified Range Safety Officer, credentials that reflect my commitment to the highest standards of firearm safety and education. In these roles, I have dedicated countless hours to ensuring that shooters of all skill levels understand and practice safe firearm handling. Much of the proposed legislation before your committee, in my view, risks discouraging lawful participation in shooting sports and responsible firearm ownership without demonstrably addressing criminal misuse. Overly broad restrictions often burden those who already comply with the law, while doing little to deter individuals who disregard it entirely. I respectfully urge the Subcommittee to carefully consider whether these measures strike the appropriate balance between public safety and the constitutional rights of law-abiding Virginians. Shooting sports have been an integral part of American culture and Virginia's heritage. They teach discipline, responsibility, focus, and respect. These are values that strengthen our communities. Overly burdensome regulations such as those on the docket today do not distinguish between those who respect the law and those who do not; instead, they disproportionately affect those of us who have demonstrated decades of safe and responsible firearm use. I urge this committee to carefully consider the unintended consequences of legislation that may seem reasonable in theory but proves impractical or unjust in application. The rights protected by the Second Amendment are fundamental, and any restrictions placed upon them must be narrowly tailored, clearly justified, and respectful of Virginia's long tradition of responsible gun ownership. I thank you for allowing me to submit this written response and for providing the opportunity for citizens to voice their concerns on these important matters. More importantly, I thank each of you for your service to the Commonwealth of Virginia. The work you do on behalf of our citizens is vital to our democracy, and I appreciate your willingness to consider all perspectives as you deliberate on these critical issues. Respectfully submitted, George Mather, Jr. 6212 Sudley Church Court Fairfax Station, VA 22039 Email: mather.george.6212@gmail.com Mobile: 1.703.598.8848

The bills under consideration are only going to affect those who have no intention of breaking the law. Coupled with the other bills lessening the penalties for many violent crimes, these will do nothing to prevent crime. Criminals do not follow the law. That is a textbook definition. We have plenty of laws to deal with those who perpetrate crimes. What is needed is to deal with the existing criminals. Stop what leads these people to break the law to begin with. Punish those who commit violent crimes firmly. Stop the revolving door justice that keeps them on the streets committing more crimes. Making the law abiding public defenseless while turning more violent criminals loose makes no sense. Police forces are not bodyguards! All that can be expected after calling 911 is the victim being taken to a hospital, or possibly the morgue, and an investigation, hopefully followed by an arrest. The only person that can hope to defend themselves from these violent criminals is the victim. It would be better to provide a system for more self defense classes for the public. Better help for the victims of violent crime. And fitting punishment for those who have broken the law. None of the proposed bills will do that. I hope that the Constitutional rights of the public will be considered over feel good measures. I thank you for your time in reading my comments and hope you will consider these points in voting on the proposed bills.

I urge committee members to vote against these bills, many of which infringe on our God-given rights as Americans, and some of which are already unconstitutional under existing rulings by the Supreme Court of the United States. Respectfully, a lifelong Virginian.

Hi, My name is Catherine Shultz and I’m writing this as a woman that survived almost being strangled to death, then stalked for 2 years. I was in fear of my life and I bought my first firearm and trained. My personal defense weapon saved my life and I didn’t have to pull the trigger. A piece of paper does nothing to protect survivors but I stand with VCDL & am co director of Women for Gun Rights in Va. I’m also disabled and an amputee & I can’t run from danger but I can use my firearm to protect myself. People don’t seem to understand that educating oneself vs restricting mags etc… they affect people like me and it shows me that the “gun safety” laws are simply a psychological bandage & does nothing to protect women like myself. Thank you, Catherine Shultz Women for gun rights

To the legislators; Not one of the proposed HBs should be approved. The authors of the proposed bills lack experience or insight into gun ownership or general safety of the public. Not one of these bills can be proven to save lives or stop criminal acts. What I do see is the potential for a level of state bureaucrats to create new jobs for their buddies. Let’s monitor who has a gun or who has too many bullets in their magazine. Whose family member is related to someone involved with domestic violence. This sounds like the state boys and girls are out to get their hands into Virginians pocket's again. Vote no for everyone of these HBs.

Shall not be infringed was and still is very clear. The bill of rights was written to limit the government. Please stop infringing on my god given rights.

HB19 Misdemeanors should never take away a civil right. HB21 A firearm accessory seller could not know they were selling a accessory to a prohibited person. A car parts store cannot be sued if they sell a seat cover for a car used in a bank robbery. HB40 This bill is unconstitutional, there is no analog in history or traditions of firearms with any such limitations when the Bill of Rights was adopted. Homemade guns have been legal since before the US existed. HB93 If a husband and wife co-own a shotgun and the husband gets a protective order issued against him, the wife would no longer have access to that shotgun. That punishes and needlessly endangers her life. HB110 Car owner should not be at fault for a criminal stealing a firearm. It is the criminal who is solely to blame. This bill could put a handgun in the possession of a tow truck driver that is a convicted felon. HB217 U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in both DC v Heller, and The New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen, that any firearm “in common use” is protected by the Second Amendment. Guns and magazines targeted by this bill are among the most common in the US, making this bill unconstitutional. HB229 Disarming visitors and guests, including CHP holders, violates their right to protect themselves. A U.S. District Court in the 2nd Circuit has restrained enforcement of just such a law for being unconstitutional under New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen Supreme Court ruling. HB626 Students have a right to self-defense. HB702 Destroying a functional, and possibly valuable firearms is a waste of money. State could offset costs by selling firearms to gun dealers through an auction. This program is a “turn in” and not a “give-back” program. HB871 Biometric safes are more expensive and can be unreliable when being used under stress and require batteries to work. There are other locking mechanisms that are just as secure. HB969 Center would only target violence committed using firearms and ignoring root causes of crime, as well as all the other ways violence is inflicted on victims – knives, blunt objects, hands and feet, etc. Half of violent crimes are not committed with a firearm. Term “Gun Violence” gives away true agenda: “gun violence” is a term coined by gun-control lobby to blame guns, which are inanimate objects, and not criminals that misuse guns. If a police officer shoots someone, officer gets blame, not his gun. If a criminal shoots someone, gun gets blame, not criminal. No one says, “tire iron violence” or “hand and feet violence.” It is just called “violence.” But there is a disarmament agenda with firearms and “gun violence” is just an excuse to go after firearms with more gun control. HB1300 Oppose HB1303 Oppose HB1359 Bill will get innocent people killed, it will take at least two months before a person can purchase a first firearm.  If they are purchasing that firearm for urgent self-defense, that is simply too long.  Price to get a permit, likely in hundreds of dollars, will be prohibitive for poor people and is equivalent of a poll tax.  And even with all hoops to get a permit, even citizens with a CHP will be limited to one handgun a month.  Local law-enforcement will be handed a registry of gun owners. And gun rentals at shooting ranges will not be possible for people who have not yet got their permit or are visiting from out of state or from another country.

My entire life I have taken great pride and stewardship in being a law abiding citizen of a great country. A very large part of my patriotism is the freedom and trust the founders of the nation gave me in the Second Amendment of the US constitution and Section 13 of the Virginia Bill of Rights. The anti-gun bills that have been introduced in Virginia show me that the supporters of these bills have zero regard for the Constitution, my rights as a lawful citizen and my rights to be able to defend myself and others from violent crime. The supporters of these bills have lost all sense of who the good guys are and who the bad guys are. I see this when early release is granted to hundreds of violent felons, many of which then go on to reoffend and violently prey on the very people you are supposed to protect, all for nothing more than some misdirected attempt at virtue signaling. I see this when prosecutors do not pursue charges against violent offenders in a misdirected attempt at virtue signaling. I see this when legislative efforts focus on the law-abiding and do nothing to violent felons who will not bother to be hindered by any gun laws. I see this when legislators talk about “gun violence” and do nothing about the underlying problem of “violence” and how to reduce it. I see this when I see news stories of repeat violent offenders who have been arrested for dozens of violent crimes, including murder, who end up killing someone yet again due to some form of “catch and release”. The laws are in place to remove violent felons, whether or not they use firearms, from society and prevent them from preying on your law-abiding constituents. Please use them. I urge opposition to HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB626, HB702, HB871, HB969 and HB1359. I urge support for HB1300 and HB1303.

I oppose all legislation which seeks to undermine our Constitutionally protected 2nd Amendment. Therefore, I would encourage all members to vote against these bills with a resounding NO!

As a life long Virginia resident and lawful firearms owner, I speak for myself and millions of other Virginians in saying that all of us strongly oppose any bill being introduced that restricts and infringes upon our Second Amendment rights that are guaranteed by the constitution of Virginia and of the United States. These gun control bills have been drafted under the guise of safety and crime prevention, while simultaneously doing the opposite and only increasing further resistance in both crime and safety. For decades, Virginia has been a pro-2A state where generations of families have been born into and raised on safe and responsible gun ownership. Hunting, personal protection, or simply being an enthusiast does not make someone a criminal or implies criminal intent because of the technology behind modern firearms has far surpassed the firearms of our grandfathers’s generation. Manufacturing methods and technology is ever changing, but our natural rights as law abiding citizens should never be hung in the balance and toyed with as privileges. I implore the General Assembly to please review these bills with logic, with reason, and with the hope that our state government will not make a mockery of the Second Amendment to further a political agenda not based upon fact, but upon incessant fear mongering and disarmament of the people.

Name: Brad Toohill Location: Loudoun County, Virginia I strongly oppose the following bills. These proposals punish law-abiding Virginians, undermine due process, and infringe on constitutionally protected rights while failing to address violent crime. Criminals do not follow gun laws—these bills target citizens who already do. HB 19 (McClure) This bill allows permanent loss of firearm rights based on vague “dating relationship” misdemeanors. Fundamental rights should not be stripped without clear standards and robust due process. HB 21 (Helmer) Holding firearm manufacturers and sellers liable for crimes they did not commit is unjust and dangerous. This policy attacks lawful commerce instead of criminal behavior. HB 40 (Simon) Criminalizing unfinished frames and receivers turns peaceful hobbyists into felons without evidence of crime reduction. This is regulation without results. HB 93 (Bennett-Parker) Forced firearm surrender under protective orders risks disarming innocent family members. Rights should not be suspended by accusation alone. HB 110 (Laufer) Penalizing lawful gun owners for storing a handgun in a vehicle is excessive and punitive. This bill targets responsible citizens, not criminals. HB 217 (Helmer) This bill bans commonly owned firearms and standard-capacity magazines that are clearly protected as arms in common use. It is unconstitutional and ineffective. HB 229 (Hernandez) Blanket bans on firearms and knives in medical facilities leave lawful citizens defenseless and create confusion without improving safety. HB 626 (Callsen) Disarming adults on college campuses does not enhance safety. Law-abiding individuals should not lose their right to self-defense based on location. HB 702 (Cole) Taxpayer-funded firearm turn-in and destroy programs waste public funds and show no measurable impact on crime. HB 871 (Downey) Mandated storage methods and biometric safes intrude into private homes and impose unnecessary costs on families. HB 969 (Price) Creating a new state agency focused solely on firearms expands bureaucracy while ignoring repeat offenders and enforcement failures. HB 1359 (Hope) This permit-to-purchase scheme creates delays, costs, fingerprinting, and a de facto registry. It burdens lawful ownership and disproportionately harms low-income Virginians. Virginia should focus on enforcing existing laws and prosecuting violent offenders—not restricting the rights of responsible citizens.

I urge you to oppose all of the proposed bills. None of these bills will have meaningful impact on crime committed with fire arms. The only honest way to reduce crime committed with firearms is to enforce mandatory and harsh penalties on criminals who use guns to commit crimes. Once has to realize that guns can only commit a crime in the hands of a criminal. The criminal, not the tool is the problem that needs to be addressed. A case in point: England has super strong regulations on guns. Was that effective? Did the crime rates really drop ? No, crime rates didn't drop all that much. Eliminating firearms just shifted the criminals over to using knives as their weapon of choice. These proposed regulations seem to be more aimed at annoying firearm owners, as opposed to solving any real problems. While I want to vote Democratic, these essentially useless regulations are making me seriously reconsider which party I will support in the future. Please put regulations in place to SOLVE problems, not these silly things that only provide talking points. Never forget, RESULTS are what voters want.

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence supports these bills.

Please see attachment.

Not one of these bills will make anyone safer, but rather strip the rights of law abiding citizens of which pose no threat. Maybe try enforcing or increasing the penalties for laws against murder or violent felonies that are already in place? The problem isn't guns. It's the mentally ill people who misuse them. Making good people criminals for simply owning common firearms or magazines will not make a difference to people who have no regard for law.

Thank you - see file attached

All these bills infringe on citizens AMENDMENT RIGHT we the people been lied to BY OUR Government OFFICIALS & mainly democratic officials ABIGAIL SPANBERGER is one of them

My name is Teresa Gancsos and I am with the Richmond chapter of Moms Demand Action and we support these bills. Thank you for your attention in this matter. Teresa Gancsos

As a fellow Virginian, I urge you to please OPPOSE "gun control" bills in your committee. Concepts like an "assault weapons" ban, arbitrary magazine restrictions, "reasonable standards" for firearms businesses, and a "permit to purchase," just to name a few, do nothing to address crime in the Commonwealth. Criminals do not abide by the law, and bills like these only target law-abiding firearm owners and businesses. The General Assembly should instead pursue legislation that holds criminals accountable for their crimes, not legislation that creates new criminals overnight for lawful purchases. Again, I urge you to OPPOSE gun control in your committee.

My family and I OPPOSE all these insidious, un-Constitutional anti-2A Bills you're proposing.

Dear Legislators, You have been elected to a position for the purpose of representing citizens in VA. You have taken an oath to the state and U.S. Constitution. It is not your place to push radical agendas or ideologies that clearly oppose those Constitutions. The 2nd Amendment clearly states that it “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”. Whether you agree or disagree with it is not important. Whether you appreciate firearms or hate and fear them, is not important. What is important, is that you respect my Constitutional right to own them, carry them, use them, transport them, have immediate access to them, decide for myself how I will store them in my own home. It is NOT your place to infringe upon these rights in any way. The very reason for the 2nd Amendment is for citizens to be able to repel, remove, and defend against a tyrannical government. Don’t be a tyrannical government. Remember and honor your oaths. Put aside the partisanship. Sincerely, One of millions of gun owners

All these proposed are laws are just awful. The right of self-preservation is a fundamental human right and having the best tools for self-preservation furthers that fundamental human right. Without those tools, you degrade the most important human right in the world, the right to live and live free. Suing gun dealers and manufacturers will prevent the public from acquiring guns. Banning large swaths of arms and accessories prevent the public from defending themselves with the best tool possible. All these proposed laws are bad. Bad for Virginians and bad for human rights. HB 19 (McClure) requires forfeiture of firearm rights for a “dating relationship” misdemeanor. HB 21 (Helmer) allows civil lawsuits against firearm manufacturers and sellers for crimes committed with their products. HB 40 (Simon) outlaws unfinished frames and receivers unless serialized. HB 93 (Bennett-Parker) forces firearm surrender under protective orders in a way that could disarm innocent family members. HB 110 (Laufer) imposes a civil penalty and towing if a handgun is left in an unattended vehicle. HB 217 (Helmer) bans commonly owned firearms and standard-capacity magazines made after July 1, 2026. HB 229 (Hernandez) prohibits firearms and many knives in medical facilities. HB 626 (Callsen) restricts firearms on college campuses without lawful cause. HB 702 (Cole) establishes a firearm "turn-in and destroy" program funded by taxpayers. HB 871 (Downey) mandates specific storage requirements and biometric safes in homes with minors. HB 969 (Price) creates a state gun violence prevention agency focused solely on firearms. HB 1359 (Hope) creates a costly permit-to-purchase scheme with fingerprints, training requirements, and a de facto handgun registry.

My name is Cossie Scott a lifelong Virginia resident. This is my first time speaking here. I strongly oppose HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB626, HB702, HB871, HB969, HB1300, HB1359 I do support HB1303 45% of Virginia homes own guns lawfully. Nationally, 93% of the guns associated with crime are obtained illegally. So how are any of these regulations moving the needle in illegal gun trafficking? Or attacking the root cause of violent crime? Furthermore, the majority of the average gun related crime occurs in 9 districts in Virginia (Richmond and Hampton Roads). So you are proposing punishing the entire state and every law biding gun owner for an “illegal” gun problem in Hampton and Richmond. Not to mention 63% of the gun related deaths in Virginia are suicide related. That means that all of these bills listed are not scientifically proven with sound data, but emotionally charged by political gun grabbing rhetoric and is saturated with slippery slope informal fallacies with proposed changes being made without analytical data to suggest we have a need to change. Why do we not first address Richmond and Hampton locally before pushing your unfounded ideology on the rest of the commonwealth. Gun laws do not solve for the human condition problem in those 9 districts. We would be better served spending our time, and tax dollars, addressing the poverty problem that drives violent crime, rather than trying to make law biding citizens criminals.

I’ve been a lifelong Democrat because I believe deeply in protecting working people, expanding access to healthcare, safeguarding civil rights, and investing in strong public institutions, but I’ve never fully aligned with my party on gun control. To me, supporting the Second Amendment isn’t about ideology or partisanship — it’s about personal responsibility, self-reliance, and the belief that law-abiding citizens should have the right to protect themselves and their families. I value evidence-based policy, and I worry that many proposed gun laws primarily burden responsible owners while doing little to address the root causes of violence like poverty, mental health gaps, and systemic inequality. I want safer communities, but I believe that comes from smarter enforcement, education, and prevention rather than broad restrictions that limit constitutional rights. Holding these views sometimes puts me at odds with fellow Democrats, but I see it as proof that political identity doesn’t have to mean agreeing with every plank of the platform — it means thinking critically and standing by the principles you believe in. Please vote no to any gun restrictions that are being presented.

I support these bills as indicated above.

The attachment contains my comments on the proposed bills.

Nearly half of all households in the Commonwealth own a firearm and yet Virginia has one of the lowest gun related death rates in the nation (5.6 per 100,000). Not only are you trying to solve an issue that doesn't exist, you're sacrificing your constiunts to pander towards national politics.

As a law abiding gun owner and retired military Virginia Citizen I vehemently oppose any law that opposes our Constitutional Right via the Second Amendment. All of the bills you are considering meet this criteria. Please cease and desist any band all actions that would infringe on my rights…those that our Founding Fathers of whom many were from our Great Commonwealth, believed to be self-evident. Very respectfully, Shannon J. Cornelius, USA/USAF (Ret)

I strongly urge voting against the following bills as all of them will cause undue hardship on legal gun owners, go against the spirit of the US 2nd amendment, will place firearm manufacturers in legal jeopardy solely because their products may have been used in an unlawful fashion (same as suing Ford for getting a speeding ticket). HB 19 (McClure) requires forfeiture of firearm rights for a “dating relationship” misdemeanor. HB 21 (Helmer) allows civil lawsuits against firearm manufacturers and sellers for crimes committed with their products. HB 40 (Simon) outlaws unfinished frames and receivers unless serialized. HB 93 (Bennett-Parker) forces firearm surrender under protective orders in a way that could disarm innocent family members. HB 110 (Laufer) imposes a civil penalty and towing if a handgun is left in an unattended vehicle. HB 217 (Helmer) bans commonly owned firearms and standard-capacity magazines made after July 1, 2026. HB 229 (Hernandez) prohibits firearms and many knives in medical facilities. HB 626 (Callsen) restricts firearms on college campuses without lawful cause. HB 702 (Cole) establishes a firearm "turn-in and destroy" program funded by taxpayers. HB 871 (Downey) mandates specific storage requirements and biometric safes in homes with minors. HB 969 (Price) creates a state gun violence prevention agency focused solely on firearms. HB 1359 (Hope) creates a costly permit-to-purchase scheme with fingerprints, training requirements, and a de facto handgun registry. Thank you,

I oppose the passage of these bills. HB 19, 21, 40, 93, 110, 217, 229, 626, 702, 871, 969, 1359.

The Right to Keep and Bear Arms shall not be infringed. Stop writing and putting Unconstitutional Legislation in the Virginia Code. That covers just about everything I have seen the Democratic Majority propose as new legislation. Want to live in a communist paradise - Move to Cuba - They do not get Snow and sleet there, and you will have someone to give you instructions on how to live your life.

Just to let you know, I am an independent in every sense of the word. I tend to lean left on many issues but on the subject of the second amendment I am a firm believer. I don’t think we need these new restrictions being proposed. The topic is so complex and polar I don’t know how to convince you all of the folly of this legislation except to say many of us are single issue voters regardless of how we feel about certain social issues. I know many democrats in this state who regularly use these weapons that are the subject for future restrictions or outright banning. I will try to touch on a few issues. Assault weapons and high capacity magazine are the current boogie man of the anti gun lobby and have been since the 1990s. This was originally a deliberate attempt to confuse modern civilian semiautomatic weapons with their more dangerous fully automatic assault military versions as a prelude to ban handguns. The term assault weapon is a purely political term that has no universal meaning and it was chosen to instill fear and confusion in the public’s mind. I ask you to review these laws and ask yourself which one of these features makes these weapons more dangerous than other rifles. Is a pistol grip, bayonet lug, or similar feature what makes a rifle dangerous? Or is it caliber, muzzle energy, and rate of fire? If public safety is the true goal why doesn’t this legislation address these factors instead of cosmetics? I will tell you why. Because the average hunting rifle is more powerful than an ar-15 by a wide margin. These are not overpowered rifles as some would have you believe. It’s a semiautomatic version of an intermediate powered rifle - part way between the power of a pistol and a full power hunting rifle. Did you know even Great Britain has no restrictions on weapons with military style features? Their ban is on the caliber and rate of fire. You can even have a semiautomatic uzi there witt a 50 round magazine as long as it is chambered in 22lr. Silencers have very few restrictions there as well because they protect hearing and help minimize noise pollution. Let’s talk about the legality as well. Most of these restrictions are unconstitutional because the weapons and features are in common use. It’s unconstitutional to ban any weapon that is in common use as per DC vs Heller and Brien. If the state court doesn’t overturn these unconstitutional restrictions the Supreme Court will. I will end this conversation by saying our founding fathers faced the same issues we do. At that time most governments restricted civilian arms because they wanted to remain in power. They reasoned through their dealings with Great Britain that an armed population could never be slaves to any tyrannical government or foreign power. This may sound like a tired old saying that is often made fun of. I have heard people saying things like deer don’t need bullet proof vests and you can’t fight against a government without f-16s but is this really true? The ar-15 for instance is not powerful enough to take down a large elk humanly so the bullet proof vest comment is just plain silly. That cartridge is commonly used in other rifles as a varmint round. As far as f-16s are concerned, the Taliban sure kicked us out of their country with nothing more than small arms and guerrilla tactics. Civilian resistance movements rarely fight pitch battles with tanks and fighter jets. They use hit and run tactics combined with numbers to wear the enemy down.

Dear Committee Members, I urge you to reject the blatantly unconditional and egregious anti Second Amendment bills before you. This will do nothing to curb crime, and you know that, but will make criminals out of your political opponents, as well as many of your constituents. Scencerly, Sal DeGennaro

PLEASE PROTECT OUR GUN RIGHTS AND DO NOT DEGRADE VIRGINIANS' SECOND AMENDMENT GUARANTEED RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS!

IT IS VERY FRUSTRATING TO LIVE IN A SOCIETY IN WHICH THOSE WHO ARE ELECTED TO REPRESENT ME IMMEDIATELY STEP IN AND COME UP WITH LAWS IN AN ATTEMPT TO FRAME ME AS A CRIMINAL FOR EXERCISING MY RIGHTS. IN NO WAY HAVE I BROKEN ANY EXISTING LAWS, NOR DO I OWN ANY ITEM CURRENTLY CONSIDERED ILLEGAL. THAT THESE "REPRESENTATIVES" CAN, WITH THE STROKE OF A PEN, PENALIZE ME, MAKES ME WONDER JUST WHO THEY "REPRESENT". WE DO NOT NEED MORE LAWS TO "LESSEN CRIME", WE NEED TO ENFORCE THE ONES ALREADY ON THE BOOKS. PLEASE LEAVE YOUR LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS ALONE.

Our Second Amendment is clear and succinct: "... the right of the People to keep an bear arms shall not be infringed." What I see is an example of the government overstepping its bounds under the illusion of public safety. Many of the measures including assault weapons, magazine capacities, and "ghost guns" are based on buzz words that strike fear because people do not understand them. Let us embark on a few definitions: Infringe: "act so as to limit or undermine (something); encroach on" -Oxford Dictionary. Synonyms include Erode, Impair, and Weaken. ANY legislation that limits impairs, or weakens a citizen's right to own and carry weapons is, by definiton, infringement, and therefore a violation of our beautiful country's constitution. Ghost Gun: the ATF classifies the part of the weapon containing the trigger assembly as a "firearm," colloquially called a Lower Receiver. It is possible to manufacture this part and therefore build a weapon that has no serial number and is unregistered with the police department. This takes skill and specialized, expensive tooling; these firearms sound scary, but are by and large produced by hobbyists, not killers. Assault Weapons (HB217): The limiting, reduction, and impairment of the size of magazine that one can purchase, keep, and carry is simply a violation of the 2nd amendment. Storage (HB871): The State government has no business inside my home and how my weapons are stored. I learned to handle guns at 7 years of age, children can learn. If I lock my weapons as this bill requires, I can no longer access them in an emergency. Its safer to gun-proof my children than child-proof my guns. Permit to purchase (HB1359): We do not need a permit to exercise our first amendment rights. We do not have permits to secure our rights against inappropriate search and seizure, the 4th amendment. We also do not have permits to protect ourselves from cruel and unusual punishment. No other right enumerated in the Bill of Rights requires a permit, why do we treat the 2nd amendment differently? We already strip this right from convicted criminals, we have background checks, leave us law-abiding gunowners alone. I understand these bills have good intentions. We want to see our communities safe, healthy, and thriving, and have our neighbors and friends go about their days without fear. But let us not succumb to fear to such an extent that we throw away our freedom for the illusion of heightened safety. Let's look at California, llinois, and New York, who have the strictest policies in the nation, yet rising rates of violent crimes, and instantly the illusion is dispelled. These measures do not increase safety. What they do accomplish is an erosion of freedom, disarmament of law-abiding citizens, and violation of our country's constitution. I ask you please, as your neighbor and constituent, vote NO to these measures.

HB19 It is improper to deprive citizen rights for a misdemeanor violation Deprivation of rights is part of the accepted sentence for felony crime (voting, firearms, etc) Proposed Fix – Make domestic violence and intimate partner violence a felony level crime. HB40 Causes a wide variety of hardware store supplies felony crime to own. Proposed Fix – Table bill and remove references to unfinished frames/receivers, remove references to serialization until a method of applying for serial number is available to the general public HB110 Tow truck drivers are NOT the ideal steward for firearms The tow yard is not a safe storage location Proposed fix – Police can call a locksmith and have the vehicle opened at owner expense, firearm can be removed and held at police station for recovery HB217 Large capacity varies by firearm, the most common standard capacity is 28-32 per magazine, 100 per belt Shotgun capacity is variable based on shell length If exemptions are made for police, CHP holders (who commit crimes at a rate LOWER than police) should also be exempt (DHS/ICE are making this argument stronger every day) Proposed fix – Change “High Capacity” from 10 to 60 for magazines, and 200 for belts. Define “High Capacity” for shotgun tubes based on a defined shot-shell size. Exempt CHP holders from all magazine restrictions. HB229 As with all prohibited places, if right to self defense is abridged, a duty to protect is created Secure storage should be provided, as due to Arlington Car-Free Diet, many trips are multi-modal, preventing use of anchored, steel, hidden, locking car safe storage. Proposed Fix - Security screening and armed protection must be provided in all prohibited places, failure to protect disarmed individuals to be held under strict liability. At one or more entrance, a staffed safe-storage location to be provided for weapons to be checked-in. HB871 Biometric safes are typically the WORST QUALITY OF ALL SAFES ON THE MARKET Proposed Fix – Allow for any kind of lock, or else indicate a cypher/combo/key lock. HB1300 The police commit crimes at a higher rate than CHP holders Police get paid and can buy guns normally Suggested Fix – Table and do not reintroduce, bill is not needed HB626 As with all prohibited places, if right to self defense is abridged, a duty to protect is created Secure storage should be provided, as due to Arlington Car-Free Diet, many trips are multi-modal, preventing use of anchored, steel, hidden, locking car safe storage. As with the open-carry on streets prohibition currently in place, CHP holders need to be exempted. Proposed Fix - Security screening and armed protection must be provided in all prohibited places, failure to protect disarmed individuals to be held under strict liability. At one or more entrance, a staffed safe-storage location to be provided for weapons to be checked-in. CHP holders to be exempted. HB1359 A criminal record history check is already performed for all firearm transactions DCJS training is for armed security guards and police, if all firearms owners are DCJS certified, then exemptions for armed security and police should apply to purchase permit holders Proposed Fix – Table bill and do not reintroduce, it is redundant to already existing protections, alternatively exempt all purchase permit holders from any firearms regulations that have specific exemptions for police

This bill represents a sweeping and unconstitutional attack on the long-standing right of Americans to manufacture, possess, and maintain their own firearms for lawful purposes. HB 40 would criminalize the possession, purchase, sale, and transfer of unfinished frames and receivers, as well as many home-built and unserialized firearms, even when they have been lawfully owned for years. For most of American history, private citizens have been free to build firearms for personal use without government permission, registration, or serial numbers. This practice predates the founding of our nation and was well established at the time the Second Amendment was adopted. There is no historical tradition supporting a ban on home-built firearms, making this bill incompatible with the constitutional standard set forth by the Supreme Court in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen. HB 40 does not include a meaningful grandfather clause for existing homemade firearms. As a result, thousands of law-abiding Virginians who have complied with the law for years would suddenly be turned into criminals unless they submit to costly and burdensome government registration and serialization requirements. Under this proposal, even unfinished pieces of metal or polymer could be regulated as firearms if they are merely capable of being completed. This expands government control beyond functional weapons and into raw materials, setting a dangerous precedent that allows lawmakers to regulate ordinary objects based on hypothetical future use. This bill will not stop criminals. Individuals who intend to commit violent crimes do not acquire firearms through lawful channels, nor do they submit to serialization requirements. Instead, HB 40 targets hobbyists, collectors, veterans, craftsmen, and self-reliant citizens who have harmed no one. HB 40 also raises serious privacy and due process concerns. By forcing serialization and government tracking of privately made firearms, the bill moves Virginia closer to a registry of gun owners, something that has long been rejected and criticized. As recently as 2022, California's firearm registry demonstrated the real dangers of government databases when a state website exposed the names, home addresses, and personal identifying information of thousands of gun owners, putting families at risk of harassment, targeting, and criminal exploitation. As usual, government agencies and law enforcement are exempted from these restrictions, reinforcing the message that these laws are not about safety, but about control. When the government places itself above the rules it imposes on citizens, it undermines public trust and constitutional principles. The Second Amendment protects not only the possession of firearms, but also the means of acquiring and building them. Restricting lawful home manufacture is an indirect but powerful way to suppress the exercise of a fundamental right. Public policy should focus on enforcing existing laws and prosecuting violent offenders, not criminalizing peaceful citizens who exercise their rights responsibly.

I disagree with any and all laws pertaining to our gun rights and any law that infringes our right to own,sell, trade or gift. These amendments are a total outreach of our constitutional rights and we the people will not stand for it.

These bill do nothing to address criminals and only affects law abiding gun owners. As a black man I feel they are racist as well. Vote NO to all of these bills.

I stand with Gun Owners of America and the Virginia Citizens Defense League in opposing any attempt to restrict law abiding Virginians 2nd amendment rights. These bills will do nothing to stop crime and only serve to limit the rights of the people to exercise their 2nd amendment rights. As a constituent, I urge you to OPPOSE these gun bills: HB 19, Misdemeanors should never take away a civil right. HB 21, This bill is designed to have a chilling effect on all aspects of the firearms industry. HB 40, This bill is unconstitutional, as there was no analog in the history or traditions of firearms with any such limitations at the time the Bill of Rights was adopted. Homemade guns have been legal since before the United States existed. HB 93, This disctriminates against people in the same household and also discriminates against young people who are legally allowed to own fire arms. HB 110, Punish criminals who do this, not the law abiding citizens. HB 217, The U.S. Supreme Court has said in both DC v Heller, and recently The New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen, that any firearm “in common use” is protected by the Second Amendment. The guns and magazines targeted by this bill are among the most common guns and magazines in the United States, making this bill unconstitutional. There are conservatively estimated to be over 20 million AR-15s and 700 million magazines that hold more than 10 rounds in civilian hands. HB 229, Disarming visitors and guests, including concealed handgun permit holders, at such facilities violates their right to protect themselves in an emergency. A U.S. District Court in the 2nd Circuit has restrained enforcement of just such a law for being unconstitutional under New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen Supreme Court ruling. HB 626, A solution in search of a problem. Higher education students are adults and have a right to self-defense. HB 702, The name of the program implies that the Commonwealth gives firearms to citizens and now wants citizens to give them back. That is not the case. The State does not give us our rights and does not own our property. HB 871, Biometric safes are more expensive than non-biometric safes and often times more unreliable when being used under stress, This discriminates against those people who are poor and still have a right to self protection. HB 969, we do not need to grow the state bureaucracy to study violent crime when most violent crime does not involve firearms. HB 1359, please find me a constitutional right that you have to get a permit for. There is not one and we should not be limiting the rights of the people by require a permit to exercise their 2nd amendment rights. I SUPPORT the following bill: HB 1303, 90 days is more than sufficient for the State Police to issue a non-resident permit. There is no reason that this should take longer than this.

I’m against all these worthless anti-gun / anti-freedom bills that will do nothing to reduce crime, but will only serve to reduce the freedoms of law abiding citizens. Please retract them and do something good for Virginians. Thank you.

I oppose this and all gun legislation. Second amendment is a right not a privilege.!

I do not support these bills.

I oppose any and all restrictions on our God given and Constitutionally protected Right to keep and bear arms. None of this nonsense passes constitutional muster. And will have the effect of making the lives Of law abiding citizens less safe while you are Lowering penalties for real crime and turning Law abiding citizens into criminals... These bills are nothing more than a government power grab. What part of "Shall NOT be infringed " do you not Understand??

All bills with the exception of HB 1303 are unconstitutional and I do NOT support them.

I oppose these bills

When did our state government decide that they do not have to follow our Constitution of the United States of America? The 2nd Amendment is an individual right under the Constitution that states clearly that it shall not be infringed on which in simple terms means that no government official or group has the ability to take a person's right to keep and bear arms in the United States of America. This Amendment was so important to our forefathers that it is the second thing they wrote to establish that the government does not have the ability to take your right to defend yourself against all enemies and this includes a tyrannical state government that doesn't understand plain text that our country was founded on. It doesn't matter what others opinions or feelings on the subject of the right to bear arms is because it is my right and not their's that we are talking about at this time. As a society of individuals in our country that have never agreed on things of this nature since the invention of the modern firearm we have to look no farther than our own Constitution to see that this is not a collective right of certain people that agree or disagree with the principle of firearms but infact a Constitutional right of an individual to determine there views of their personal right to bear arms. With the world in the state it is in at our present time this Constitutional right is needed more then ever because we are facing people that think that the can completely ignore the Constitution and its not even on a national level but a state level. This is also a truly sad moment of our state that is the founding place for our country as it exists from the time that we settled in this new land of an unknown world at the time but to disrespect our founding Document that started it all on top of it is the worst thing that could happen in our state for these elected officials to look at the Bill of Rights and say to themselves that those Amendment are not worth following because I have a different opinion, belief or feeling on that Amendment that I am personally going to take the individual right of every person in Virginia just because I don't want to follow these Amendments as they are written. Do you understand how this is being a tyrannical government just like the British were when they were trying to control the entire population at the time that we had the Revolution in this great land to start this great country. When people say that the 2nd Amendment is dated and need to be revised but can see the actual beauty in how our forefathers predicted that this Amendment would be necessary throughout time to even to the year 2026 were we have a government that is looking at this exact Amendment and saying no we don't have to follow that anymore because we have all these people that don't like the fact that a free person of the United States of America can purchase anything that has to do with their ability to not only protect themselves in self defense but also to protect themselves from the tyrannical government that is before us today. I'm sorry but as a person that has no affiliation to a political party or any other organization on this subject in our country I believe in our Constitution and the Amendments that were written in the Bill of Rights to protect myself, my family and my friends from people that think that they know what is best for everyone in our country on the basis that they either think they are smarter, richer or elected.

I oppose every gun-control bill pending before this committee because they are prohibited by both the United States and Virginia Constitutions. The Second Amendment provides that “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Supreme Court held that this language protects an individual right to possess firearms for lawful purposes such as self-defense, independent of militia service. The Court emphasized that the Amendment protects arms “in common use” by law-abiding citizens and forbids bans on entire classes of such arms. In McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010), the Court reaffirmed that this right is fully incorporated against the states, binding Virginia to the same constitutional limits as Congress. Virginia’s Constitution independently protects this right, stating in Article I, Section 13 that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” In New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen (2022), the Supreme Court rejected interest-balancing tests and adopted a text-history-tradition standard: if the Second Amendment’s text covers the conduct, it is presumptively protected, and the government must show the regulation is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Modern policy goals, crime statistics, or legislative preferences are insufficient. Many pending bills restrict semi-automatic rifles, including AR-style firearms that are owned by millions of Americans and commonly used for lawful purposes such as self-defense, sport shooting, and hunting. Under Heller, arms in common use cannot be banned, and the “dangerous and unusual” exception does not apply. There is no historical tradition of banning commonly owned firearms based on rate of fire, operating mechanism, or cosmetic features, and under Bruen the absence of such historical analogues is dispositive. Other bills ban magazines over ten rounds, which are standard components of many commonly owned handguns and rifles. Because magazines are integral to firearm function, such bans operate as functional prohibitions on protected firearms. There is no Founding-era or Reconstruction-era tradition of limiting ammunition capacity, making these bans unconstitutional under Bruen. Permit-to-purchase schemes likewise unconstitutionally burden a fundamental right by converting it into a government-granted privilege. The right to keep arms necessarily includes the right to acquire them, and fees, training mandates, biometric requirements, and processing delays disproportionately burden citizens and lack historical justification. These schemes invite arbitrary enforcement and indirect suppression of a constitutional right. While public safety is a legitimate concern, the Supreme Court has made clear that constitutional rights cannot be traded away through legislative cost-benefit analysis. Regulations unsupported by historical tradition fail regardless of asserted benefits. For these reasons, the pending gun-control bills before this committee are inconsistent with both the United States and Virginia Constitutions and should be rejected.

Please no more gun bans

These proposed actions would increase the amount of money that is already taken from us in taxes. They make no sense, as we have a 2.3 billion surplus. These actions only hurt Virginians. The democrat party ran on affordability, and these bills do just the opposite. The taxes on firearms, and the banning of them and accessories have already proven to do nothing but punish law abiding citizens. CRIMINALS DONT FOLLOW LAWS! Reducing manditory sentecing for rape and other horrible crimes only make us less safe. Combined with TRYING to disarm us and helping criminals you out us at risk, and rob us of our rights and money. You all should be ashamed of yourselves for being bought off. You all remind me of our flag. You are acting like tyrants. You talk of affordability, yet you are trying to take more of our money. The people will not stand for tour unconstitutional actions. You may have control for the next two years, but your political careers will be destroyed. Tou have become radical tyrants. You hate the other side so much, that you are willing to destroy us. Shame on all of you. The pendulum always swings back, and you are just guaranteeing it will swing so far back that you will wish you never did this. The destruction of our constitution, and your petty attacks are not worth the backlash that will come when the people rise up against what you believe in.

Leave my second amendment rights alone and worry about all the criminals both legal and illegal. Don't screw with law-abiding citizens who work and pay your salary

Hello, I agree and stand with the opinions of the Virginia Citizens Defense League and Gun Owners of America on these troubling bills. The right to keep and bear ares enshrined as a God given right in both the US (2nd amendment) and Virginia (article 1, section 13) Constitutions. Please do not legislate millions of peaceful, law abiding Virginians into criminals with the stroke of a pen.

Please Protect Our 2nd Amendment Rights. Thank You.

Please don’t support any Bills that restrict or infringe on my 2nd Amendment rights.

To whom it may concern, It is important to recognize that criminals, by definition, disregard existing laws and are unlikely to be deterred by the introduction of new legislation. Consequently, the implementation of additional laws often impacts only law-abiding citizens, placing new restrictions or obligations upon those who already comply with legal standards. The focus, therefore, should not be on drafting further statutes but rather on ensuring the consistent and effective enforcement of the laws currently in place. By allocating resources toward upholding existing regulations, society can enhance public safety, maintain fairness, and uphold the integrity of the justice system without unnecessarily burdening responsible citizens. Respectfully, Mr. Jones

You were elected as a protest against the President. You definitely weren't elected to cancel Virginians constitutional rights. I'm sure your big donors outside of Virginia will be happy. But last time you tried this 90 of 95 counties, Cities and Town revolted against you. Plus once your donor lists are published by the influential VCDL and the lawsuits start. The people will find out who you actually serve. Unless you represent Arlington or Fairfax all democratic seats will be in jeopardy for the next election. Finally: You take an oath to honor the constitution when you get the privilege to serve the people. Someone who immediately violates their oath has no honor and can never be trusted with authority. People will remember that when it's time to vote again. I know I will. I used to be a Democrat and donor. But I will never vote for a Democrat again.

HB 19 - In the current status of who can report who; it is wholly unwise to remove firearms for a “dating relationship” misdemeanor. Once the court costs, etc. to defend yourself and then waiting to get have weapon returned makes absolutely no sense at all. This is not a FELONY. HB 21-Weapons manufacturers are not the criminal, they only make a tool used for hunting, recreational marksmanship and self defense. Money should be spent on mental health and addiction treatment HB40 - Only criminals will use weapons without serial numbers whether made at home or they will remove serial numbers off illegally bought weapons. This only hurts lawful citizens. HB93 - would remove self defense weapons from others in the family who are lawful and have not committed any criminal activity HB 111 - This is insanity, how will the towing company comply with a chain of custody of a weapon? There is no mention of appropriately storing a gun in a gun vault in a vehicle when traveling, etc. HB 229 - Medical personnel need protecting as much as any other citizen especially in high risk areas like emergency rooms with the potential for violence from drug crazed or mentally ill persons. Trust me, I have been there. HB 626 - This would be nearly impossible to enforce as one travels thru urban universities like VCU HB 702 - This bill is directing funding to the wrong approach to control gun violence. Use the funds for mental and addiction services, gang violence, etc. HB 871 - There is not enough definition on the requirements. Safe and easy access to a firearm for home protection is something most gun owners already employ. HB 969 - This bill requires further definition of gun violence prevention. Again, using the funds for mental health, addiction and gang violence are all necessary HB 1359 - This bill would place undue cost burdens on those who dont have the means to fulfill the costly requirements thus it is in my estimation a class and racial issue and not about guns. Training is something that should be sought out by any gun owner. I urge your consideration on these bills and protect the lawful gun owners in the Commonwealth. Respectfully Please vote no

Please consider this by destroying the constitutional rights of the people of Virginia. You also will eventually come to the repercussions of your decisions, ie court action and loss of tax payer money etc.Now the 2nd amendment to the constitution in short says “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED ,basically no laws are to go against the constitution and also as per article 6 clause two of the constitution. Thank you and think wisely because your constituents as whole do not want this. Second Amendment Right to Bear Arms 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. Amdt2.1Overview of Second Amendment, Right to Bear Arms Amdt2.2Historical Background on Second Amendment Amdt2.3Early Second Amendment Jurisprudence Amdt2.4Heller and Individual Right to Firearms Amdt2.5Post-Heller Issues and Application of Second Amendment to States Amdt2.6Bruen and Concealed-Carry Licenses Amdt2.7Rahimi and Applying the Second Amendment Bruen Standard

Not one of you liberals submitted a bill to address the real evil that is using a gun. So all of these bills are designed to punish legal law abiding gun owners and protect the real criminals. Im78 years old and have owned and bought guns from the age of 15 when I purchased my first gun with money earned from a paper route. NOT ONE OF THE GUNS I'VE OWNED EVER HARMED ANYONE. IT'S AN INANIMATE OBJECT

As a veteran, I am against any so called gun control legislation that has not demonstrably proven to improve public safety while only minimally impacting individuals’ God given rights and liberties. It is unconscionable to think that elected leaders would even think about passing legislation that infringed upon individual rights merely for purposes of “doing something” without having weighed the impact on law abiding citizens and the innumerable sacrifices made to sustain and protect those rights and liberties through the years. Having served myself and also been the victim of illegal firearm use I staunchly support the 2A rights and individuals’ right to self-defense. Each person’s situation and experiences are different and they deserve to exercise their rights and liberties in a way that accommodates those circumstances, experiences, limitations, etc. So called “assault weapons” (a misnomer in itself) may have features and appearances that some persons find scary or intimidating but, to someone possessing that firearm for their own, individual law purposes, most all of those features actually improve the performance or safety related to the use of that same firearm. All semi-automatic firearms, regardless of how they might LOOK to a casual or uninformed observer basically function the same. Stocks, forearm, bipods, scopes, rails, magazines, etc. do not alter the fundamental intended purpose of this “tool.” I certainly understand those who do not appreciate firearms, in general, or who might actually be scared by their existence or appearance. But our 2A and self defense rights should never be indescribably infringed upon merely for these type reasons. There are very good reasons our fore fathers were adamant about including these inalienable rights as foundational principles in our founding documents. These foundational principles are as relevant today as they were at our founding. Anyone who is arrogant enough to think that they have studied and researched and experienced as much as the founding father scholars and thinkers should reconsider their actions carefully before indiscriminately treading upon one of our sacred rights and liberties without certifiable proof of the amount of public safety that would be realized by their actions. Anything less goes against the solemn oath you have sworn to uphold.

I oppose this bill, honor your oath

i OPPOSE any legislation that restricts 2nd amendment rights

I agree with the VCDL on these bills.

Opposite any gun laws. They will not stop any crime. Try enforcing the laws we already.

These sorts of draconian proposals severely restrict the ability of law-abiding citizens to effectively defend themselves against threats of violence. None of the proposed measures which have been inflicted on the citizenry of other states have made one iota of difference in crime levels. They HAVE however restricted law-abiding citizens from exercising their Constitutional rights via the 2nd Amendment. Vote now to cease this onslaught on the rights of law-abiding Virginians. Gun violence is perpetrated by CRIMINALS, so focus on the criminal prosecutions. Limiting the rights of law-abiding Virginians is tantamount to fascism. And as always, "When seconds count, the police are just minutes away!". That's what you are saying to Virginians. If I cannot be trusted to defend myself legally, then you cannot be trusted to run the Commonwealth.

These legislations violate many sections of the Virginia Constitution not just the U.S. Constitution. Legislations like these does nothing to prevent, curtail, deter or otherwise stop crimes or acts of violence. These legislations do not hold criminals that cannot legally possess, purchase or own firearms accountable for their possession, use or handling of a firearm. These legislations do not keep firearms out of the hands of criminals. Cliché but true rhetoric (Criminals will get guns and magazines and commit crimes regardless of the laws. These legislations are immoral, unethical and down right oppressive and serve no purpose other than to infringe upon rights and deny rights. Reminder: - 18, 19 and 20 year old men and women are entrusted in the operation, use, carry and implementation of the following in the service of our country as Servicemembers, Coast Guardsmen, National Guardsmen and Air National Guardsmen and Reservists as well as law enforcement: Semi-automatic Pistols with high capacity magazines, Semi- Automatic Rifles with 30 round magazines, machine guns, rockets, tanks, missiles, rocket Launchers etc and yet Virginia Legislators want to strip away the rights of civilians of that age group of their right to own and bear arms. That is hypocritical and it undermines the Constitution. Our nation foundation and freedom was earned through the blood and sweat of young 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20 year old men from the Revolutionary War for our independence and that of our 17 year old to 20 year old war fighters today standing tall and maintaining our soon to be 250 years of being a Constitutional Republic and our Freedom. Do not allow the stripping of the rights of these military aged men and women that serve and defend our nation, our freedom and our Constitutions. Do not insult them or slap them in the face or turn your backs on them. Fight for them because at some point we have fought and we have sacrificed for you and these young men and women will too. Any legislation that denies and deprives this age group the use, ownership while expecting them to serve in our country and have them carry, operate and use them in the defense of our nation and potentially die, be seriously injured or maimed is diabolical and is disgraceful. Magazine capacity restrictions: (Do not limit or stop the intent of criminals or those intent on committing any act of violence. We have seen the demonstrated and factual extreme actions/tactics that have been used for example: Using a vehicle to run into crowds, Vehicle Born Improvised Explosive Devises (VBIED), Improvised Explosive Devices (IED), mass stabbings, gas attacks and chemical warfare, fire, and more Constitution of Virginia - Article I. Bill of Rights Sections 1,2, 9,10,11. These legislations below, restrict the right to self- defense. Legal gun owners are not committing crimes and do not intend to committ crimes. These legislations are not about accountability for criminals. They are written to suppress and take away the rights of law abiding citizens and ro take away a means of self-defense. These legislations do not create a safer Virginia. HB110, HB1359, HB969, HB871, HB702, HB24, HB21, HB700, HB229, HB217, HB110, HB93, HB19, Example: - HB700: Denies and delays the access to firearms in an emergency situation where a victim of stalking or domestic abuse are in imminent danger. V/R Raymond Carter SFC(Retired)

I strongly oppose this bill

All of these bills are intolerable infringements of the right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment and the Constitution of Virginia. Supporting these bills is a violation of your oaths of office. In addition, as should be evident, these bills will only affect law-abiding gun owners, the very people least likely to offend. Criminals, by definition, do not obey the law. They are unlikely to obey these.

Please do not consider any anti-gun bills. Any potential law that goes against our Constitution is wrong and should not be acknowledged. We shouldn't have to pay for our rights. No innocent person should be penalized for a criminal's actions. A gun's capacity is irrelevant. If a person comments a REAL crime, they should be convected and sentenced accordingly. A right should be lost only through certain major criminal actions, not some fool's option of potential. No manufacturer should be responsible for how their product is used. The one responsible is the one in possession of said product, even if it was stolen. Our last Governor understood this. Our new Governor and her political party desperately needs to. We have seen the failures of worthless states like California, Maryland, New York and others. We don't need to be another one. No law will ever stop a crime. The law should provide proper penalties or real crimes. No law should be made for the sole purpose of controlling and wielding power over the citizens of this State or our country.

I am opposed to HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB626, HB702, HB871, HB969, and HB1359, I support HB 1300 and HB1303.

My father was born in Romania in 1933 and as a child lived under the fascism of socialism. The first thing the fascist socialists did was to confiscate guns. Nearly 400,000 Jews were slaughtered by the socialists after having been disarmed in Romania. Now socialists have taken power in Virginia by running as "moderates" and immediately showing their true selves once safely elected. Democrats, like their brethren Nazis, seek to disarm and enslave the general population. I oppose any legislation which punishes law-abiding citizens from protecting themself, their family, and their property. I oppose any legislation which punishes a citizen for potentially being robbed, as if the thief is not the problem-- the victim is treated as the criminal. I oppose any legislation which allows accusations to remove the rights of others. If I accuse every member of government of being a child abuser, are you forced to remain away from your child(ren)? I oppose Nazis and Democrats for the same reasons.

As a fellow Virginian, I urge you to please OPPOSE "gun control" bills in your committee. Concepts like an "assault weapons" ban, arbitrary magazine restrictions, "reasonable standards" for firearms businesses, and a "permit to purchase," just to name a few, do nothing to address crime in the Commonwealth. Criminals do not abide by the law, and bills like these only target law-abiding firearm owners and businesses. The General Assembly should instead pursue legislation that holds criminals accountable for their crimes, not legislation that creates new criminals overnight for lawful purchases. Again, I urge you to OPPOSE gun control in your committee. I support HB 1303 by Delegate Ware. Thank you for all that you do for Virginia.

Disarming the population is not a viable means to promote public safety. It is the duty of the individual to protect themselves from physical harm that may occur by criminal activity. It is not the responsibility of politicians or police. That is why bills like HB 19, HB 21, HB 40, HB 93, HB 229, HB 1359 are unconstitutional and put the general public in more danger as violent criminals will take advantage of unarmed civilians. HB 110 and HB 702 will promote criminal use of firearms as the firearms will be taken away from the registered owners' possession which greatly increases the likelihood the firearm will end up on the black market for resale where violent criminals obtain their weapons. HB 871 will also be ineffective as gun violence prevention means while again adding a monetary burden and serious disadvantage to law a biding citizens in the immediate face of danger. The people of Virginia do not support these policies that waste the time of politicians and money of the tax payer.

I oppose all of these unconstitutional bills.

HB 19 (McClure) requires forfeiture of firearm rights for a “dating relationship” misdemeanor. HB 21 (Helmer) allows civil lawsuits against firearm manufacturers and sellers for crimes committed with their products. HB 40 (Simon) outlaws unfinished frames and receivers unless serialized. HB 93 (Bennett-Parker) forces firearm surrender under protective orders in a way that could disarm innocent family members. HB 110 (Laufer) imposes a civil penalty and towing if a handgun is left in an unattended vehicle. HB 217 (Helmer) bans commonly owned firearms and standard-capacity magazines made after July 1, 2026. HB 229 (Hernandez) prohibits firearms and many knives in medical facilities. HB 626 (Callsen) restricts firearms on college campuses without lawful cause. HB 702 (Cole) establishes a firearm "turn-in and destroy" program funded by taxpayers. HB 871 (Downey) mandates specific storage requirements and biometric safes in homes with minors. HB 969 (Price) creates a state gun violence prevention agency focused solely on firearms. HB 1359 (Hope) creates a costly permit-to-purchase scheme with fingerprints, training requirements, and a de facto handgun registry. ALL of these bills are Unconstitutional and will cause Lawsuits and MASS NON COMPLIANCE

I oppose all these bills!

As a fellow virginian I am very disappointed in these outrageous bills proposed. They do nothing to stop criminals cause they don't follow rules or laws anyways it just hurts people trying to protect themselves from being hurt or God forbid something worse. I have lived in virginia my whole life and love this state but i also love the 2nd amendment and freedom to bear arms so please take in consideration myself and thousands of other virginian's that love the 2nd amendment and the state of Virginia and strike down these outrageous bills. Thank you for your time god bless the 2nd amendment and the state of Virginia!

All these bills are an infringement on our constitutional second amendment rights!

You ran as a middle of the road moderate ticket, and wanted to bring everyone together. all these bills go against that and alienate half of the state. You want bi partisan support? Well to get that you can not be going after law abiding citizens and take away a constitutionally protected right.

Hello, as a true Virginian whose family goes back to the founding of this state, country and fought in the revolutionary war. The anti gun bills being pushed on us are completely unconstitutional. My ancestors would be rolling in their graves right now knowing what you all are trying to do to our personal liberties, freedom and property. All of the anti gun legislation being pushed is not only unconstitutional but against previous Supreme Court rulings. You plan to turn over half of your state into criminals overnight for legally purchased items. So not only are you infringing on the 2nd Amendment but now on our 5th Amendment. 12 months in jail! Sounds like an 8th Amendment violation. True Virginians do not want these unconstitutional laws placed on us. Virginia is where freedom was won and not taken! I urge you all to vote against these unconstitutional bills. We are not California or New York. Our friends in Northern Virginia do not speak for all of Virginia anymore. My kindness regards. True Virginian.

These bills are ill-advised “solutions” in desperate search of largely non-existent problems. The 2nd amendment was quite clear. “Shall not be infringed” means exactly those words. These bills will only make law-abiding citizens less safe. Please actually consider your constituents safety instead of your partisan talking points.

I urge a vote against this, and any gun related bill, that would arguably restrict gun rights, or increase the cost of having,/buying firearms or ammunition, or create any kind of registry of such, of law abiding citizens of Virginia. Most of these bills would do nothing for saving lives, and criminals will not abide by them.

These anti-Second Amendment legislations violate the Second Amendment freedoms guaranteed by the United States Constitution and Virginia Constitution. These bills will not make Virginians safer. but will put us at risk for predatory criminals. Also, the Second Amendment wpuld protect us from a tyranical government. Who protects us from you? Do you so crave power that you must disatm us? Why do you hate fireams?

I oppose these bills. Limiting our right to defend ourselves will not reduce crime or make anyone safer, except violent criminals.

Dear Committee Chair, I am writing to respectfully urge you to OPPOSE these bills. These proposals place unconstitutional burdens on law-abiding citizens while failing to address the root causes of criminal misuse of firearms. Measures such as taxpayer-funded gun turn-in and destruction programs, knife and firearm bans at medical facilities, and magazine capacity restrictions unfairly target responsible gun owners in my community without demonstrable public safety benefits. I ask that you vote “NO” on this legislation and instead support policies that enforce existing laws and address criminal behavior, rather than restricting the rights of lawful citizens. Thank you for your time and consideration. Respectfully, Jan

My family and I hope you will reconsider all of these unconstitutional and tyrannical bills that seek to limit the God given right of citizens to defend themselves. Supporting these unconstitutional. bills as the Governor simultaneously supports the actions of Mr. Petti as a legal firearms owner, is indeed hypocrisy.

Good Morning. I respectfully oppose the following House Bills, which collectively place excessive burdens on law-abiding Virginians while offering little evidence of meaningful reductions in violent crime. These proposals raise serious concerns related to constitutional rights, due process, public safety, and cost. HB 19 (McClure) requires forfeiture of firearm rights for certain misdemeanors involving a broadly defined “dating relationship.” This imposes severe constitutional consequences without felony-level due process protections and relies on vague definitions prone to misuse. HB 21 (Helmer) allows civil lawsuits against firearm manufacturers and sellers for crimes committed with their products. This abandons long-standing liability principles by holding lawful businesses responsible for third-party criminal acts, increasing costs and reducing lawful access without improving public safety. HB 40 (Simon) criminalizes unfinished frames and receivers unless serialized, burdening lawful hobbyists and small manufacturers despite a lack of evidence that such items meaningfully drive crime. HB 93 (Bennett-Parker) mandates firearm surrender under protective orders in ways that may disarm innocent family members who are not accused of wrongdoing, undermining due process and property rights in shared households. HB 110 (Laufer) penalizes and allows towing of vehicles when a handgun is left unattended, even if secured. This may discourage lawful compliance with firearm-restricted locations by eliminating practical storage options. HB 217 (Helmer) bans commonly owned firearms and standard-capacity magazines manufactured after July 1, 2026. Such bans target arms in common lawful use and raise serious constitutional concerns while failing to address criminal misuse of existing firearms. HB 229 (Hernandez) prohibits firearms and many knives in medical facilities, removing lawful self-defense options from patients, visitors, and staff, including permit holders who have already undergone background checks. HB 626 (Callsen) restricts lawful firearm possession on college campuses, treating adult students and faculty as if they forfeit constitutional rights despite documented safety concerns and delayed emergency response times. HB 702 (Cole) establishes a taxpayer-funded firearm turn-in and destroy program with no demonstrated impact on violent crime, diverting resources from proven enforcement and prevention strategies. HB 871 (Downey) mandates specific storage methods and biometric safes in homes with minors, imposing costly, one-size-fits-all requirements that intrude into private homes and may delay access in emergencies. HB 969 (Price) creates a new state agency focused solely on firearms while ignoring broader contributors to violence such as repeat offenders, mental health access, and community-based interventions. HB 1359 (Hope) establishes a costly permit-to-purchase system with fingerprints, training mandates, and a de facto registry, creating delays and barriers to exercising a constitutional right without clear public safety benefits. Conclusion: Taken together, these bills represent a sweeping expansion of government control over lawful firearm ownership. They burden responsible citizens, weaken due process, and prioritize symbolic regulation over effective crime reduction. I urge the General Assembly to reject these measures and focus on enforcing existing laws and addressing violent criminal behavior.

Forum: These Bills are an attack on the lawful Citizen and will not stop the criminal element from doing harm. This has been proven time and time again. The intent of these Bills is to discourage the Citizenry from exercising their rights as protected by the US Constitution and the VA Constitution. These documents are explicit that our rights are being protected and not being given to us by the Govt. It is the Govt responsibility to protect our Bill of Rights and not to subvert them at the Federal and Local level. These bills seek to create a list and registry as forbidden by law. The declaration that all guns that are semi-automatic are "assault weapons" is absurd. The look of a gun does not define it as an assault weapon. These Bills have been stricken down by the highest court(s) in the land time and time again. The only reason for these bills is too attack the lawful citizen and will not do anything to stop the aggressor in his/her intent to do harm. There is significant history that illustrates that an armed populace in society is a peaceful and secure society. I respectfully oppose these Bills that attack the fundamental Bill of Rights that the Federal and State Constitutions protect. V/R, Mr. Charters

I stand with the VCDL and GOA. The proposed bills are tyrannical, these bills make it only harder on law abiding citizens. All gun laws are infringements on the Second Amendment. Just Remembering History” On April 21, 1775, Virginia’s Royal Governor, Lord Dunmore, ordered British marines to seize gunpowder from the Williamsburg powder magazine to prevent a colonial uprising. This "Gunpowder Incident" enraged colonists, leading to militia mobilization under Patrick Henry, forcing a payment for the powder and accelerating Virginia's march toward revolution. “

I oppose these bills because they are unconstitutional!!

I urge you not oppose all of these bills.

All of these bills pushing further gun control only hurt law abiding citizens and punish them for the actions of criminals. Further they aim to disarm potential victims in a lame attempt to establish “common sense” gun control that is anything but. California, Chicago, New York are the model for many of these bills and the evidence is clear that they are not effective and even harmful. If a criminal stole a car and drove it into a crowd of people, you wouldn’t hold the car’s owner responsible. You wouldn’t hold the vehicle’s manufacturer responsible. You wouldn’t pass a law that requires safe storage of vehicles. If someone exhibited a “red flag” you wouldn’t take aware their location driver’s license with no due process or investigation. We don’t do any of that because “common sense” says that it’s ridiculous. The difference between cars and firearms however is there is no Second Amendment for cars, which means that these laws make even less sense and are directly unconstitutional.

All of the aforementioned bills are a substantial attack the God given rights & the 2nd Amendment. These in fact are the opposite of good governance. How does the aforementioned reduce the size & scope of government? How does the aforementioned lead to affordability? There are no statistics that show a benefit to society! Furthermore the aforementioned will only lead to a higher government cost to the citizens while squashing the rights of the citizens!

As a resident of York County I am opposed to the bills listed above and wish for them to be rejected by this committee.

As a Virginian, I am completely opposed to HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB626, HB702, HB871, HB969, and HB1359. Similar ideas have been tried in the past in other states, and have been proven not to reduce any crime, but only serve to unnecessarily burden law-abiding citizens in the lawful exercise of their Second-Amendment rights. If "common sense" were used to try to reduce violent crime, it would be completely obvious that inanimate objects, can, by themselves, do nothing. The sole responsibility lies in the hands of the person who commits the crime, not in what object they chose to use in the perpetration of the crime. The focus of "public safety" initiatives should be keeping violent criminals off the streets, not limiting citizens of their Constitutionally -protected rights. I do not appreciate my tax dollars being used to advance this agenda, and then being further used to try to defend it in the inevitable litigation of these infringements on Virginian's rights. Thank you for your time.

All Anti-Gun bills are Unconstitutional and Impede Citizens' right to Self Defense. We, the residents of the Commonwealth of Virginia OPPOSE any and all of these and will fight each and every one of themthem

As a fellow Virginian, I urge you to please OPPOSE "gun control" bills in your committee. Concepts like an "assault weapons" ban, arbitrary magazine restrictions, "reasonable standards" for firearms businesses, and a "permit to purchase," just to name a few, do nothing to address crime in the Commonwealth. Criminals do not abide by the law, and bills like these only target law-abiding firearm owners and businesses. The General Assembly should instead pursue legislation that holds criminals accountable for their crimes, not legislation that creates new criminals overnight for lawful purchases. Many of the bills proposed have already been declared unconstitutional by multiple Supreme Court decisions. Most others are likely to be struct down in future court proceedings. Again, I urge you to OPPOSE gun control in your committee. Thank you for all that you do for Virginia. Respectfully, Mark Salamone

Unconstitutional. What part of shall not be infringed is misunderstood?

I firmly oppose any laws or policies that infringe upon my Second Amendment rights. I believe the right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental constitutional protection, and I do not support legislation that restricts law‑abiding citizens from exercising that right. Tucker Ophof Bristow, VA 20136

Stop all bills restricting our Second Amendment rights.

I strongly oppose this bill. HB 40

HB21 Status: In SubcommitteeFirearm industry members; creates standards of responsible conduct, civil liability. This law will make it impossible to sell firearms in Virginia. How do you expect a firearm manufacturer to make their guns thief prooof. The owner of the gun is responsible for safeguarding their weapon but criminals can still steal weapons. The manufacturer shouldn’t have any responsibility at that point. If someone broke into my car and found a way to steal it, it’s not Toyota’s fault, it’s the thief’s. The onus is on the citizens to not be criminal and steal guns or misuse them. Not on the manufacturer. This will make it hard for law abiding citizens, not criminals. HB40 Status: In SubcommitteePlastic firearms or receivers, unserialized firearms, etc.; transfer, etc., prohibited, penalties. We’re legislating against criminality that doesn’t exist. It should not be a criminal offense to have these. This turns normal citizens exercising their 2A rights into criminals. The actual criminals are those that plan to use their firearms against innocents. Not amateur gunsmiths with blank pieces of metal. HB 626, Delegate Callsen, restricts firearms at public institutions of higher education by requiring such firearms be part of an authorized program or activity inside a building. A solution in search of a problem. Higher education students are adults and have a right to self-defense. HB 1303, Delegate Ware, sets 90 days as the maximum number of days that the Virginia State Police can take when processing a non-resident concealed handgun permit. If the permit has not yet been approved after 90 days, then the permit is issued at that point. If the applicant is later found to be disqualified, the permit is revoked, and the applicant has to return it. This makes a lot of sense. No reason to delay law abiding citizens from being able to have access to self-defense. We cannot rely on police for 100% of the violence that happens in the community as they are not omnipresent or omnipotent. HB 217, Delegate Helmer, prohibits the sale, possession, transfer, and transport of an “assault firearm” made on or after July 1, 2026. It also prohibits sale, possession, transfer, and transport of an “assault firearm” to anyone under the age of 21. Magazines that hold more than 10 rounds and were made on or after July 1, 2026, are prohibited. The U.S. Supreme Court has said in both DC v Heller, and recently The New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen, that any firearm “in common use” is protected by the Second Amendment. The guns and magazines targeted by this bill are among the most common guns and magazines in the United States, making this bill unconstitutional. There are conservatively estimated to be over 20 million AR-15s and 700 million magazines that hold more than 10 rounds in civilian hands. HB 110, Delegate Laufer, creates a $500 civil penalty and subjects a vehicle to towing if a person leaves a visible handgun in an unattended vehicle. The car owner should not be at fault even if a criminal opens an unlocked car door to steal a firearm. It is the criminal who is solely to blame. This bill would put a handgun in the possession of, and under the control of, a tow truck company! Punish criminals and stop harassing good people.

I am a resident of Ashburn in Loudoun County, Virginia. I respectfully submit the following written testimony in opposition to the bills listed below. HB1359 – Firearm purchase requirements; penalties I oppose HB1359 because it adds additional requirements and penalties that burden law-abiding purchasers without clear evidence of reducing criminal misuse. HB1427 – Limitation on handgun purchases I oppose HB1427 because purchase limits restrict lawful ownership while failing to address how firearms are obtained by those who commit crimes. HB19 – Firearms; purchase after assault & battery of family or household member I oppose HB19 due to due process and proportionality concerns, as it restricts rights prior to full adjudication rather than focusing on enforcement of existing protections. HB21 – Firearm industry members; civil liability standards I oppose HB21 because it expands civil liability in ways that risk penalizing lawful businesses for the actions of third parties without improving public safety. HB217 – Assault firearms and certain ammunition feeding devices I oppose HB217 because it targets lawful ownership based on firearm type rather than criminal misuse and lacks evidence of meaningful public safety benefit. HB229 – Weapons prohibited in certain hospitals I oppose HB229 because blanket prohibitions rely on disarmament rather than appropriate security and enforcement in sensitive facilities. HB24 – Concealed handgun permit reciprocity I oppose HB24 because limiting reciprocity penalizes lawful permit holders without deterring criminal activity, while Virginia’s current framework has functioned effectively. HB40 – Plastic or unserialized firearms I oppose HB40 due to overbroad definitions that risk unintended impacts on lawful ownership and small businesses rather than targeting criminal conduct. HB540 – Carrying firearms in restricted locations I oppose HB540 because expanding restricted locations increases complexity and the risk of unintentional violations by law-abiding citizens. HB700 – Waiting period for firearm purchases I oppose HB700 because mandatory waiting periods delay the exercise of a constitutional right without clear evidence of reducing violent crime. HB871 – Firearm storage requirements in residences I oppose HB871 because it imposes criminal penalties through broad storage mandates that may be difficult to apply consistently and fairly. HB907 – Security requirements for firearms dealers I oppose HB907 because it adds regulatory and penalty burdens on lawful dealers without clear evidence that such measures reduce criminal misuse. For these reasons, I respectfully urge the committee to oppose the bills listed above. Thank you for the opportunity to submit written testimony for the public record.

I appose this bill.

My name is Cole Zerrenner, and I am a registered voter residing in Ashburn, Loudoun County, Virginia. I respectfully submit this written testimony in opposition to the following bills scheduled before the House Public Safety – Firearms Subcommittee: HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB626, HB702, HB871, HB969, HB1300, HB1303, and HB1359. I oppose these bills because, taken individually and collectively, they impose additional restrictions and penalties on law-abiding citizens while failing to meaningfully address criminal misuse of firearms or the underlying causes of violence. Many of these proposals expand prohibitions, create new compliance burdens, or rely on vague standards that raise concerns regarding due process, inconsistent enforcement, and unintended consequences. Several of the bills before the subcommittee emphasize preemptive restrictions or broad prohibitions rather than focusing on enforcement of existing laws, accountability for criminal conduct, or effective mental health interventions. Policies that reduce procedural safeguards or delay the exercise of constitutional rights risk undermining public confidence without clear evidence of improved public safety outcomes. I respectfully urge the subcommittee to consider whether these measures meaningfully target criminal behavior or instead primarily impact responsible Virginians who already comply with the law. Public safety is best served through targeted enforcement, due process protections, and policies that address root causes rather than symbolic or duplicative restrictions. Thank you for the opportunity to submit written testimony for the public record and for your consideration of my views. Respectfully submitted, Cole Zerrenner Ashburn, Loudoun County, Virginia

First and foremost, I fully support any comments made by Virginia Citizens Defense League, The NRA, and Gun Owners of America in regard to support for the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. As a fellow Virginian, I urge you to please OPPOSE "gun control" bills in your committee. Concepts like an "assault weapons" ban, arbitrary magazine restrictions, "reasonable standards" for firearms businesses, and a "permit to purchase," just to name a few, do nothing to address crime in the Commonwealth. Criminals do not abide by the law, and bills like these only target law-abiding firearm owners and businesses. The General Assembly should instead pursue legislation that holds criminals accountable for their crimes, not legislation that creates new criminals overnight for lawful purchases. A lot of these proposed bills are unconstitutional and may even be a civil rights violation due to the fact that they most certainly will disproportionally have a negative effect on minorities, women, and people of lower income and certainly violating an 18–20 year-old persons 2nd Amendment right to own and bear arms. If they have to work and pay taxes and be held accountable as an adult you can't legally deny them any rights under the constitution. Many of these proposed bills have already successfully been challenged at the U.S. Supreme court in rulings supporting the 2nd amendment. Examples cases- v Heller and v Bruen, so you are intentionally trying to pass bills that will not hold up in court and wasting valuable taxpayer money to pursue these bills. Again, I urge you to OPPOSE gun control in your committee. Thank you for all that you do for Virginia. Sincerely, Chris McDorman

Why I Oppose Each Bill below: HB 19 – Opposition: Punishes a non‑violent misdemeanor unrelated to firearms. Violates: Heller (2008); Hayes (4th Cir. 2009) – proportionality; Bruen (2022) – no historical basis for such a blanket ban. HB 21 – Opposition: Imposes strict liability for third‑party crimes, chilling lawful commerce. Violates: Heller (2008); Printz (1997) – cannot commandeer private actors; Bruen (2022) – no historic analogue. HB 40 – Opposition: Criminalizes already‑lawful homemade components and deprives property without compensation. Violates: Heller (2008); Miller (1939) – regulation must have a reasonable safety link; Bruen (2022); Lucas (1992) – takings. HB 93 – Opposition: Overbroad removal punishes lawful spouses and 18‑20‑year‑olds who may already possess firearms. Violates: Heller (2008); McDonald (2010); Bruen (2022) – age‑restriction lacks history; Carpenter (2018) – vague “if officer believes” standard violates due process. HB 110 – Opposition: Penalizes mere visibility and treats the gun as property that can be seized without due process. Violates: Heller (2008); Jones (2012) – towing = unlawful seizure; Bruen (2022) – no historic precedent. HB 217 – Opposition: Bars weapons in common lawful use and imposes capacity limits without historical support. Violates: Heller (2008); Bruen (2022); Miller v. Bonta (9th Cir. 2021). HB 229 – Opposition: Prevents lawful armed visitors in public medical settings without a narrow justification. Violates: Heller (2008); Bruen (2022); Katz (1967) – potential Fourth‑Amendment search issues. HB 626 – Opposition: Denies adult students the right to self‑defense on public campuses. Violates: Heller (2008); Bruen (2022); Washington v. Davis (1976) – lacks rational basis. HB 702 – Opposition: Authorizes confiscation/destruction of lawfully owned property without compensation or due process. Violates: Heller (2008); Kelo (2005) – takings require just compensation; Bruen (2022) - no historic precedent. HB 871 – Opposition: Expensive, tech‑exclusive requirement makes lawful loaded storage impracticable. Violates: Heller (2008); Bruen (2022); Willowbrook v. Olech (2000) – overinclusive impact on owners with minors. HB 969 – Opposition: Single‑issue agency risks viewpoint discrimination and may enable firearm‑specific regulations lacking constitutional footing. Violates: Heller (2008); Bruen (2022); Mathews v. Eldridge (1976) – inadequate procedural due process. HB 1359 – Opposition: Creates costly, time‑consuming barriers that effectively deny the right to acquire firearms for lawful purposes. Violates: Heller (2008); Bruen (2022); McDonald (2010); Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections (1966) – fee structure resembles a poll tax. The Virginia Constitution’s Article I § 16 protects an individual’s right to keep and bear arms, and the state Supreme Court requires any limitation to be narrowly tailored, historically grounded, and consistent with due‑process (§ 13) and takings (§ 14) protections. The bills listed: HB 19, 93, 110, 871 (mandatory surrenders/penalties); HB 21, 40, 1359 (civil‑liability or costly licensing); HB 217, 229, 626, 702 (bans on common‑use firearms or accessories); and HB 969 (a gun‑only state agency)—all impose restrictions without a clear historical analogue, over‑reach permissible regulation, and create undue financial or procedural burdens. Consequently, they conflict with Virginia’s constitutional guarantees.

I SUPPORT HB1303. A right delayed is a right denied. I OPPOSE HB19: Misdemeanors should not remove rights. I OPPOSE HB21: How could a firearm accessory seller reasonably know if they were selling a gun sling to a prohibited person? Should a car parts store be sued if they sold a seat cover for a car used in a bank robbery? I OPPOSE HB40: Even a chunk of aluminum, if sold to the public to become a frame or receiver once completed, must be serialized under this bill. The bill doesn’t grandfather existing homemade firearms. This bill is unconstitutional under Bruen. Homemade guns have been legal since before the United States existed. I OPPOSE HB93: There are multiple problems with the bill as written. If a husband and wife co-own a shotgun for home defense, for example, and the husband gets a protective order issued against him, the wife would no longer have access to that co-owned shotgun. That punishes the wife and needlessly endangers her life. Also, a person 18-20yo can legally possess rifles, shotguns, and handguns. Others right can not be removed because of the actions of another. I OPPOSE HB110: The car owner should not be at fault even if a criminal opens an unlocked car door to steal a firearm. It is the criminal who is solely to blame. I OPPOSE HB217: The U.S. Supreme Court has said in both DC v Heller, and recently in Bruen, that any firearm “in common use” is protected by the 2A. The guns and magazines targeted by this bill are among the most common guns and magazines in the US & VA, making this bill unconstitutional. I OPPOSE HB229: Disarming visitors and guests, including concealed handgun permit holders, at such facilities violates their right to protect themselves in an emergency. A U.S. District Court in the 2nd Circuit has restrained enforcement of just such a law for being unconstitutional under Bruen. I OPPOSE HB626: A solution in search of a problem. Higher education students and staff are adults and have a right to self-defense. I OPPOSE HB702: Destroying what might be perfectly functional, and possibly quite valuable, firearms is a waste of money. The State could offset any costs by selling the firearms to licensed gun dealers through an auction. This program is a “turn in” and not a “give-back” program, the government never owned them. I OPPOSE HB871: Biometric safes are more expensive than non-biometric safes. Biometric safes can be unreliable when being used under stress and they also require batteries to work. There are plenty of other locking mechanisms for safes that are more secure. I OPPOSE HB969: The Center would only be targeting violence committed using firearms and ignoring the root causes of crime, as well as all the other ways violence is inflicted on victims – knives, blunt objects, hands and feet, etc. Half of violent crimes are not committed with a firearm! I OPPOSE HB1359: This bill WILL get innocent people killed, as it will take at least two months before a person can purchase their first firearm. If they are purchasing that firearm for urgent self-defense, that is simply too long. The price to get a permit, is not equitable. Even citizens with CHPs will be limited to one handgun a month. Local law-enforcement will be handed a registry of gun owners. And gun rentals at shooting ranges will not be possible for people who have not yet got their permit or are visiting from out of state or from another country. It is sickening to see this bill even proposed.

Disarming the law-abiding, tax-paying citizenry of the Commonwealth is going to drive me away from this state. Stop creating unconstitutional efforts that curtail my Rights as an American Citizen. If you want to change the Right, then change the Constitution through the amendment process. Otherwise, focus on what you can really change and fund. Schools and roads. Quit wasting my hard earned money that I spend on local businesses that keep Virginians employed. I am not the only one who will vote with my feet. I left California for a reason...not you're trying to re-create it on the East coast.

In summary, I support House Bills 19, 93, 110, 201, 691, 696, 702, 871, 901, 909, 969, 1303, and 1359. I oppose House Bills 21, 40, 207, 217, 229, 626, 700, 907, 919. Please refer to my attached document for further explanation.

Given the lack of correlation between so called "ghost guns" and actual crimes being committed in the street, this bill is obviously in search of a problem. I oppose it.

I stand strongly with the VCDL on these proposed laws. VA has always been a bipartisan state on gun issues, and although the second amendment has may purposes- it must be preserved to protect the citizens of this state. Overreaching federal law enforcement, and all threats domestic and foreign are kept in line by responsible firearm ownership. Gun control also impacts lower income groups, impoverished populations, and people of color disproportionately. We must preserve the 2nd amendment.

I support HB40. Banning “ghost guns” (weapons that have no serial number and are often made of plastic or other parts that can pass through metal detectors) keeps us all safer. Prosecuting and preventing crimes committed by ghost guns in a step toward saving lives.

As a concerned parent and Virginian, I support these bills.

I strongly oppose this bill.

I am writing to express my strong opposition to the recently proposed bills on gun control. While I understand the intent behind these bills—to enhance public safety—I firmly believe that they will have unintended consequences that infringe on the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens. The Second Amendment guarantees "the right of individuals to keep and bear arms", and it is a fundamental part of what makes this country free. These bills being proposed would place unnecessary and burdensome restrictions on responsible gun owners, making it harder for Virginians to exercise their rights in a lawful and safe manner. Rather than focusing on restricting access to firearms, I urge the General Assembly to consider measures that target criminals and illegal activities, such as enforcing stricter penalties for those who use firearms in the commission of crimes, or improving background checks for gun purchases. It is essential to address the root causes of violence, such as mental health issues and gang-related activity, rather than punishing responsible gun owners who follow the law. Furthermore, these proposed bills could create significant logistical challenges for gun owners, particularly those who rely on their firearms for self-defense, hunting, or recreational activities. The financial burden and potential legal ramifications of complying with these new regulations would be overwhelming for many Virginians. I strongly urge you to reconsider these proposals and to focus on policies that protect both our rights and our communities. I trust that you will make the best decision for all Virginians, and I sincerely hope that you will oppose these bills.

We SUPPORT this bill as it would make it easier to prosecute and prevent crimes committed by ghost guns.

HB110, Del. Laufer (D): This bill will save lives by eliminating provisions allowing any person to store their firearms in their car and preventing firearms from being stolen from cars. I SUPPORT this bill as half of all stolen guns are ones that are stolen from a car, and half of all crimes committed with a gun have a stolen gun used. This is a straightforward way to reduce these crimes and gun violence. HB19, Del. McClure (D): I SUPPORT this bill as it expands critical protections to additional relationship categories. This is a critical step to ensuring that more individuals are protected from domestic violence and gun violence. HB21, Del. Helmer (D): I SUPPORT this bill as industry accountability is a great way to force manufacturers to raise standards of safety. Firearm manufacturers and distributors must be held accountable for reckless behavior and practices that make our communities less safe. HB229, Del. Hernandez (D): I SUPPORT this bill and commonsense restrictions on gun access and believe in protecting the safety of our medical care providers. HB24, Del. Helmer (D): I SUPPORT this bill as visitors wishing to carry concealed handguns in Virginia should meet the same level of safety requirements that we require of our state’s residents. HB40, Del. Simon (D): I SUPPORT this bill as it would make it easier to prosecute and prevent crimes committed by ghost guns. HB626, Del. Callsen (D): I SUPPORT extending the protection of k-12 schools to our institutions of higher education. HB702, Del. Cole (D): I SUPPORT this bill as currently it can be incredibly difficult to find a way to get a gun destroyed that you no longer want or has come into your possession through something like inheritance. The public benefits from the creation of more drop-off point for individuals, of their own free will, to relinquish firearms to be destroyed. HB700, Hayes (D): I SUPPORT this bill as waiting periods provide law enforcement additional time to perform an accurate background check and create a “cooling off” period to prevent acts of violence or suicide attempts. HB93, Bennett-Parker: I SUPPORT this bill, as it strengthens protections for domestic violence survivors. We must establish a clear process to separate a person from their firearms who has been convicted of a domestic violence offense, or who is subject to a protective order.

I support HB40 because ghost guns are designed to avoid accountability. Banning these weapons helps law enforcement investigate crimes and prevents dangerous firearms from ending up in the wrong hands.

In 2021, my elderly stepmother shot through a closed door during an argument with my elderly father, striking him in the back and paralyzing him. My father has spent the past five years in extreme physical agony, unable to walk, paying caretakers out of pocket to hoist him in and out of bed, unable to care for himself. The lack of movement in his life has led to horrific bed sores, which become bone infections, which lead to extended hospital stays and a horrible quality of life. All this because my stepmother was allowed to have a gun. There are countless stories like this of the bullet's aftermath: of the lifelong physical and mental damage that comes from guns. It has been a horrific five years, full of physical pain and mental anguish for our entire family. I wouldn't wish this on anyone. The bills before you now will not only save lives, they will spare whole swaths of our neighborhoods from needing to deal with these horrors. One bullet, lodged in my father's spine, didn't kill him. Instead, it has shattered the life he had, his ability to work and care for himself, and his family. Each bullet we allow in our communities has the ability to do the same. His care has bankrupted him personally, and now he relies on state care and Medicaid, an avoidable burden on taxpayers. There are numerous reasons guns have no place in our society, and I hope my father's story is just one that helps make change. Please support all bills that make guns harder to access, harder to keep. Please do everything you can to keep guns out of the hands of our society. Thank you for the great work you are doing to keep Virginians safe.

Ban “ghost guns” (weapons that have no serial number and are often made of plastic or other parts that can pass through metal detectors). We SUPPORT this bill as it would make it easier to prosecute and prevent crimes committed by ghost guns.

I am writing to oppose the current slate of firearm restriction bills before the General Assembly. While these proposals are framed as public safety measures, in practice they disproportionately harm marginalized Virginians — including racial minorities, LGBTQ+ individuals (especially trans people), immigrants, and low-income residents — who often face higher risks of targeted violence and slower or unequal police response. These bills add costs, delays, and bureaucratic hurdles to exercising a fundamental right. Increased fees, mandatory waiting periods, feature bans, and expanded disqualifications fall hardest on people with limited financial resources, unstable work schedules, or justified concerns about their personal safety. For many vulnerable individuals, the ability to lawfully and promptly acquire a firearm is not about ideology, but about self-defense. History shows that restrictive gun laws are most aggressively enforced in minority communities, amplifying disparities in arrests, prosecution, and legal exposure — even when no harm has occurred. Expanding civil liability, criminal penalties, and subjective risk standards increases that risk. Public safety should not come at the expense of civil rights or equal access to self-protection. Policies that price people out of their rights or delay lawful self-defense do not address the root causes of violence and instead leave the most vulnerable less safe. I respectfully urge you to oppose these bills and support approaches that protect both public safety and the rights of all Virginians, regardless of income, identity, or background. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Such bills if passed would provide little benefit to the safety of Virginia citizens. Gun violence is not a major concern in Virginia, and criminals will neither abide nor be limited by such legislation. Instead, many responsible citizens would lose their rights. There is no reason to pass such measures. In addition, many of these bills are not written to an excellent level of clarity and will spur much confusion on what remains legal or illegal.

I support this bill as the data and evidence show that it will reduce harm and deaths from guns. Taking this measure will ensure that guns are used responsibly and only for the intended consequences. Owning a gun is a serious responsibility and measures like this must be put into action as currently they are being misused and causing an epidemic in this country. Guns are the #1 killer of children and teens in the United States. When the impact of an item causes so much harm, measures must be put into place to protect people, especially children.

I am writing to urge you to vote NO on House Bill 40 (HB 40) in the 2026 session of the Virginia General Assembly. HB 40, as currently drafted, would broadly criminalize the manufacture, sale, transfer, and possession of certain firearms that are not readily detectable by common screening devices, expand penalties, and impose new restrictions on unserialized firearms and unfinished frames or receivers. While the stated intent of this bill is to reduce criminal use of so-called “ghost guns,” the language is overly broad and rife with constitutional and practical concerns: Unclear and overbroad definitions threaten lawful gun owners. The bill’s wording could sweep in hobbyists, gunsmiths, and individuals who legally build or modify firearms for personal use, because it prohibits “assemble” or “manufacture” without clear exemptions and could be interpreted to criminalize common activities such as transferring or selling homemade firearms parts. Second Amendment rights need protection from poorly drafted restrictions. Any law that expands felony and misdemeanor penalties related to firearms must be narrowly tailored to target true criminal activity — not put ordinary gun owners at risk of harsh punishment for actions they currently undertake legally under both federal and state law. The bill may be unconstitutional as written. By effectively banning possession or transfer of firearms or components that aren’t serialized or detectable, HB 40 raises significant due process and property rights issues. Individuals who legally own or build firearms could suddenly find themselves criminally liable without clear guidance or transition provisions. Focus on enforcement of existing laws instead of creating new penalties. Virginia already has laws against undetectable firearms; HB 40 repackages and expands this framework without evidence that existing statutes are failing. Resources would be better spent enforcing current statutes and targeting violent crime directly. Legislative clarity matters. Multiple stakeholders — including hobbyists and licensed manufacturers — have expressed confusion about how the bill would be applied in practice, indicating that the language needs substantial revision before it should be voted on. For these reasons, and because law-abiding Virginians deserve clear, constitutionally sound legislation, I respectfully ask that you vote NO on HB 40.

I support the following bills because guns are the number one cause of death for children in our commonwealth and our nation. HB 110 will help reduce the number of gun thefts from cars, and these thefts are on the rise. Additionally, we need to close the boyfriend loophole from domestic violence offenders (HB19).

HB40 is a bill that will hurt hobbyists while having no effect on removing illegal guns from the hands of criminals. Virginians and Americans have a long tradition of making firearms. It has always been legal in this country to make your own firearm, which is in keeping with our right to keep and bear arms. While technology, like CNC machines and some high end 3D printers have made it easier to manufacturer a gun, criminalizing hobbyists from making their own guns won't stop those intent on evil. For example, if someone is willing to break the existing laws regarding murder and assault, they won't care about breaking one more law that pertains to making their own firearm. But the hobbyist who likes to tinker and make his own designs will have his hobby destroyed. So I ask, what is the point of this bill? Is it to attack hobbyists? Surely it's not to reduce crime, so how does it benefit the state to criminalize a hobby?

These proposed bills are clear and direct violations of our 2nd Amendment Constitutional right. Virginia has been an upstanding example of bi-partisan gun ownership since its birth as a Commonwealth. At a time when many other constitutional rights are being directly challenged by the Federal Government, with little resistance from the Supreme Court & Congress, it is extremely ignorant and out of touch for Virginia representatives to even consider passing these unconstitutional bills. Whether it is Republicans or Democrats it seems our rights are being pinched away, piece by piece. I ask our representatives and Governor to use "common sense" and not pass these blatant violations to our guaranteed constitutional right. You representatives cannot simply pick and choose which constitutional amendments apply to citizens or we may as well not have a constitution at all.

I respectfully submit this comment as a Virginia citizen to oppose House Bill 40, which expands prohibitions on plastic, unserialized, and unfinished firearms and frames or receivers, and criminalizes broad categories of manufacture, transfer, and possession. The Second Amendment and Article I, § 13 of the Virginia Constitution protect the individual right to keep and bear arms. District of Columbia v. Heller confirmed that right extends to arms “in common use” for lawful purposes, and McDonald v. City of Chicago incorporated it against the states. Under New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn. v. Bruen, firearm regulations must be grounded in historical tradition. HB 40’s expansive ban on unserialized and unfinished firearms and frames or receivers has no parallel in the founding era or historic tradition because homemade firearms and the private manufacture of arms have been lawful since before the founding. The bill’s imposition of criminal penalties on possession or transfer of a homemade firearm absent serial numbers unduly burdens rights recognized by Heller without historical analogue and risks constitutional overbreadth. There is little empirical evidence that broad bans on unserialized or privately made firearms reduce violent crime. RAND’s systematic reviews indicate that while targeted measures against criminal trafficking show some promise, expansive prohibitions on lawful firearms without clear evidence of misuse lack demonstrable public-safety benefits. Federal law already criminalizes undetectable weapons and regulates serialization through the Undetectable Firearms Act and the National Firearms Act; replicating and expanding these provisions at the state level is redundant without any evidence of incremental benefit. HB 40 amends § 18.2-308.5 and adds § 18.2-308.5:2, making it a felony to manufacture, import, transfer, or possess any firearm or major component not meeting Virginia’s serialization and detectability thresholds. The definitions sweep broadly, potentially criminalizing individuals who lawfully build firearms for personal use, transfer unfinished receivers between private parties, or sell components absent a federal license to manufacture. Subsection E’s prohibition on transfer of firearms assembled without a federal manufacturing license appears to extend to ordinary transfers of personally constructed firearms and common parts, creating vast uncertainty and enforcement challenges. These provisions are redundant with existing federal requirements and invite arbitrary application. They also penalize benign conduct, such as the exchange of firearm parts that are not used unlawfully. Criminalizing broad classes of private firearm manufacture and transfer imposes disproportionate burdens on hobbyists, gunsmiths, and artisans who engage in lawful activity. Enforcement costs and legal uncertainties will disproportionately affect individuals lacking resources to contest charges or comply with complex serialization requirements. The bill’s effective dates risk penalizing citizens for conduct historically lawful, deepening inequities in enforcement. HB 40 criminalizes vast categories of lawful conduct concerning homemade, unserialized, and unfinished firearms and components without grounding in historical tradition, without strong empirical support, and in ways that are redundant with federal law and overbroad in application. For these reasons, I respectfully urge the Committee to oppose HB 40.

I oppose HB40 based on the fact that this bill only penalizes hobbyists and existing gun owners while ignoring the technological realities around us. This bill is meant to prevent "ghost guns" in which a crime is committed by someone who obtained a gun without a serial number. These guns are also frequently fitted with already illegal "glock switches." This manufacturing is often times not done by the offender but by a supplier due to the fact that (despite what may be said by some) these are not easy to get right even with jigs. That supplier who finishes the gun then illegally supplies the gun by breaking a prohibition on legal sale and frequently by providing a gun to a felon. These situations therefore include at least one criminal act and usually include multiple. Adding another law will not stop the situation. Some may think that this will at least stop the sale of 80% lowers. It will, but these lowers are just as easily 3D printed and that cannot be stopped. This scenario we all wish to prevent is illegal on many levels. One more law won't save anyone's life or prevent these crimes. It will only punish the hobbyist who tinkers with gun manufacturing as has been tradition for centuries in this nation.

HB 40 expands prohibitions on certain categories of firearms and components to advance traceability objectives. However, the bill does not define a new violent criminal conduct category. Where previously lawful manufacturers, builders, or possessors are affected, this raises additional constitutional considerations, including under the Takings Clause, and may increase litigation risk and cost for the Commonwealth. Ensuring clear historical analogues and tailored enforcement standards would enhance constitutional durability.

I oppose and support VCDL position. This bill makes unfinished firearm frames and receivers, as well as un-serialized commercially made firearms, unlawful to possess, purchase, sell, or transfer unless they are serialized. Even a simple piece of aluminum, if sold to the public with the intention of becoming a frame or receiver once completed, would require serialization under this legislation. Alarmingly, the bill does not grandfather existing homemade firearms. This proposal is unconstitutional. Under the Supreme Court’s ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, any restriction on the right to keep and bear arms must be consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. There is no historical analog for sweeping restrictions on the possession of unfinished or homemade firearms at the time the Bill of Rights was adopted. Homemade firearms have been legal in America since before the founding of the United States, and this bill would strip law-abiding citizens of a centuries-old right without precedent. Moreover, the legislation exempts government itself from these restrictions, highlighting a double standard that punishes citizens while allowing the state to retain privileges denied to the public. For these reasons, this bill is both unconstitutional and fundamentally unfair. I urge the committee to reject it and preserve the lawful right of citizens to manufacture firearms for personal use, as protected by the Second Amendment.

I submit this comment in opposition to HB40. While the stated intent is to regulate undetectable firearms and unserialized components, HB40 layers new criminal penalties onto areas already governed by comprehensive federal law, and expands Virginia’s code in ways that are duplicative, ineffective, and disproportionately harmful to lawful owners. First, the bill’s detectability provisions are unnecessary. Federal law has prohibited undetectable firearms for decades, and Virginia already criminalizes possession and manufacture of such weapons. HB40 largely reenacts existing prohibitions, while adding new definitional language related to detection devices and “major components.” These expansions are not supported by demonstrated enforcement gaps and invite conflict with federal standards that already regulate detectability, materials, and construction. Second, HB40’s new serialization and unfinished frame criminalization provisions raise significant practical and enforcement concerns. The bill would create a Class 1 misdemeanor (elevated to a Class 4 felony for subsequent offenses) for mere possession of any completed or unfinished frame or receiver lacking a serial number, unless serialized by a federal licensee. It also creates parallel penalties for any firearm without a serial number. These provisions take effect in 2027. There is no evidence that criminalizing possession of unserialized components reduces violent crime. Trace difficulty does not equate to public safety risk, and most recovered “ghost guns” are linked to broader criminal conduct already punishable under existing law. Empirical reviews show limited or inconclusive evidence that serialization mandates affect violent crime outcomes. Third, HB40’s impact would fall most heavily on law abiding hobbyists, home builders, lower income gun owners, and those possessing older or inherited firearms lacking modern markings. Many such individuals have no malicious intent and rely on home assembly as an affordable avenue to lawful ownership. Criminalizing passive possession transforms ordinary law-abiding Virginians into felons without any showing of harmful conduct. This disproportionately affects communities with fewer commercial FFL options and increases economic disparity in lawful access. Fourth, HB40 is redundant. Trafficking, possession by prohibited persons, obliteration of serial numbers, straw purchases, and manufacture of prohibited weapons are already criminal under Virginia and federal law. Existing laws provide direct tools to target actual criminal misuse. HB40 adds parallel offenses that risk inconsistent enforcement and symbolic prosecution rather than addressing violent actors. Most concerning, HB40 merges two unrelated policy domains (plastic detectability and unserialized components) into a single expansion of state authority, despite the absence of evidence that these measures reduce crime or close genuine enforcement gaps. For Virginians acting lawfully, the bill imposes substantial penalties divorced from demonstrated harm. For these reasons, I respectfully urge the Committee to oppose HB40. Respectfully submitted.

I am writing as a resident of Glen Allen to strongly oppose both HB217 and HB40. Together, these bills represent a direct attack on the rights, property, and traditions of law-abiding Virginians, while doing nothing to deter actual violent crime. Regarding HB217, the proposed "assault firearm" ban is fundamentally flawed. It categorizes firearms based on cosmetic features and ergonomic accessories—such as pistol grips, adjustable stocks, and threaded barrels—rather than their mechanical function. As a firearm owner, I rely on these standard features for safety, control, and hearing protection (via suppressors). Criminalizing these common mechanical characteristics turns thousands of peaceful citizens into felons overnight for possessing property that is in common use for lawful purposes. Furthermore, the ban on magazines holding more than 10 rounds puts law-abiding citizens at a disadvantage against criminals who will inevitably ignore such restrictions. Regarding HB40, I find the prohibition on home-built and 3D-printed firearms to be equally egregious. This legislation targets the "maker" community and hobbyists who enjoy the engineering challenge of building their own firearms—a tradition that predates the founding of this country. The broad definition of "unfinished frames" threatens to criminalize harmless manufacturing projects and stifles technological innovation. Criminals, by definition, will not obey a mandate to serialize their illicit weapons. This bill only punishes enthusiasts by creating a legal minefield for those who build their own tools, effectively destroying a legitimate hobby. These bills ignore the reality that criminals do not follow the law. Instead of targeting violent offenders, this legislation focuses on harassing responsible gun owners, taxing our time and resources, and confiscating our legally acquired property. I urge you to vote NO on both HB217 and HB40.

I am writing to oppose this legislation as a proud Virginia resident. This legislation will have no effect on public safety and will only provide an undue burden on the law abiding residents of Virginia. Other states have tried these methods and have shown no drastic reduction in gun violence. Instead, this merely prevents law abiding Virginians from fully exercising their constitutional rights. And it is clearly a constitutional right of both our nation and the state. It is the only amendment where “shall not be infringed” is expressly stated. Under the recent New York vs Bruen decision, there must be historical precedent for it to be constitutional of which there is none especially none that are not based in racist ideologies. I urge my delegates to vote no on this legislation and will be allocating my vote accordingly.

As a representative of r/VAGuns, a popular online community of Virginia gun owners on the social media platform Reddit, we fully and unanimously endorse this bill and others like it that promote common-sense gun laws. Our community stands united in support of the recent legislation being passed in the General Assembly, which aims to protect and strengthen our neighborhoods while respecting the rights of responsible gun owners. These bills represent practical, balanced measures that help safeguard our community, and r/VAGuns proudly backs these efforts to promote safety and responsibility across Virginia.

This bill does more harm to law abiding citizens. This bill does nothing to curb crime or be harsher on criminals. This bill will not help secure the safety of law abiding citizens.

My friends and I OPPOSE this bill. Virginia has a long history of home gunsmithing. People are federally allowed to make fire arms for personal use. While some point to emotional words like "ghost gun", the F.B.I. records show very few ghost guns are used. We are a country of "do it yourselfers." Partially drilled frames help improve the safety and accuracy of home projects. Unless someone can show real numbers and real benefits to the commonwealth of Virginia, this is a bad law. I'm sorry Mr. Simon but it misses the mark. It would be restrictive to the future of our people to pass this bill.

I support this bill because ghost guns are becoming a weapon of choice for violent criminals, gun traffickers and other legally prohibited persons, as well as right-wing extremists.

I oppose the following bills. HB110 | Laufer | Firearm in unattended motor vehicle; civil penalty. This is an attempt to criminalize the victim. Where else can I person store a firearm to go into a non permissible location. This is especially important on an unexpected visit to such a location HB21 | Helmer | Firearm industry members; creates standards of responsible conduct, civil liability. This is an obvious attempt to sue businesses out of business. HB217 | Helmer | Assault firearms and certain ammunition feeding devices; importation, sale, etc., prohibited. Millions of these are already in VA and the rest of the country. According to the Bruin decision, these are already in common use. HB24 | Helmer | Concealed handgun permits; reciprocity with other states. VA enjoys one of the broadest reciprocity agreements in the country. Is this based on any evidence or just feel good measure. HB40 | Simon | Plastic firearms or receivers, unserialized firearms, etc.; transfer, etc., prohibited, penalties. Since before the creation of this country the people have had the right to produce their own firearms.

I OPPOSE HB40 HB40 significantly expands criminal penalties around firearm components and possession while failing to demonstrate any measurable public-safety benefit. The bill relies on broad definitions, severe penalties, and future prohibitions that risk criminalizing otherwise lawful conduct by ordinary Virginians—including hobbyists, collectors, builders, and individuals who have no criminal intent. The manufacture and possession of firearms and components have long existed in American history, including in Virginia, where home manufacture and private ownership predate the Commonwealth itself. Treating unfinished parts or unserialized components as inherently criminal, absent any violent act or intent, represents a sharp departure from that tradition and from the constitutional principle that punishment should be tied to misuse, not mere possession. HB40 also raises serious due process and fairness concerns. The bill’s structure turns technical compliance errors into criminal offenses and escalates penalties for conduct that causes no harm. This approach invites selective enforcement and disproportionately impacts minorities, working-class citizens, and those without access to legal resources—groups historically most affected by overbroad criminal statutes. Criminals do not follow serialization requirements, do not obtain firearms through lawful channels, and are not deterred by additional paperwork-based prohibitions. Expanding criminal liability for parts and components does nothing to address violent crime, while increasing the risk that peaceful citizens will be turned into felons for technical or future violations. The Supreme Court has made clear that firearms and related components commonly used for lawful purposes are protected under the Second Amendment. Laws that prohibit possession without evidence of dangerous conduct are constitutionally suspect and undermine respect for the rule of law.

While not a particularly visible group, home gunsmithing has been a time honored tradition in this country and specifically Virginia since before the ratification of the constitution. In an attempt to prevent the use of 3d printed handguns in crimes (something that is already illegal many times over by the way, which might prompt you to ask why you'd expect making it even more illegal to have any effect on its occurrence) you are criminalizing thousands of otherwise law abiding Virginian hobbyists, many of whom produce firearms that require a great deal of skill to craft and that are wholly different from anything that has ever turned up at a crime. This bill is also poorly written as it fails to consider that firearms were even not federally required to have a serial number before 1968, and as such outlaws the possession of an untold number of antique firearms and will turn countless Virginians into felons, likely without them even realizing it. Additionally, the idea of an entirely plastic firearm that is invisible to a metal detector seems to have first been popularized (to the best of my knowledge) by the Diehard movies, which repeatedly refer to a glock made out of porcelain. No glocks have ever been made out of porcelain, this is not a thing and I have no idea where they got that from. In real life, people *have* successfully produced single shot, essentially single use handguns made entirely from plastic, but these have generally been wildly impractical, borderline dangerous devices that can't withstand more than a couple shots. They are also extremely uncommon and largely separate from the firearms being used to commit crimes, and I'm unaware of one having ever been actually used in connection to a crime

While not a particularly visible group, home gunsmithing has been a time honored tradition in this country and specifically Virginia since before the ratification of the constitution. In an attempt to prevent the use of 3d printed handguns in crimes (something that is already illegal many times over by the way, which might prompt you to ask why you'd expect making it even more illegal to have any effect on its occurrence) you are criminalizing thousands of otherwise law abiding Virginian hobbyists, many of whom produce firearms that require a great deal of skill to craft and that are wholly different from anything that has ever turned up at a crime. This bill is also poorly written as it fails to consider that firearms were even not federally required to have a serial number before 1968, and as such outlaws the possession of an untold number of antique firearms and will turn countless Virginians into felons, likely without them even realizing it. Additionally, the idea of an entirely plastic firearm that is invisible to a metal detector seems to have first been popularized (to the best of my knowledge) by the Diehard movies, which repeatedly refer to a glock made out of porcelain. No glocks have ever been made out of porcelain, this is not a thing and I have no idea where they got that from. In real life, people *have* successfully produced single shot, essentially single use handguns made entirely from plastic, but these have generally been wildly impractical, borderline dangerous devices that can't withstand more than a couple shots. They are also extremely uncommon and largely separate from the firearms being used to commit crimes, and I'm unaware of one having ever been actually used in connection to a crime

These proposed laws are onerous and unconstitutional. No person who swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution should be able to support this in good conscience. This is a disgrace to the legislature, the people, and this State.

HB217: This is an attempt at limiting the rights of Virginians in the face of our national and state constitutions. Further, it is out of line with current constitutional legal scholarship as established by the Bruen ruling in 2022. As a responsible gun owner I believe we should hold ourselves to high standards and that training, safe storage, and mental health care should be among our priorities. However, this law does not reflect that the majority of firearm deaths occur via suicide or accident with handguns. This applies to violent crimes as well, handguns, not so called assault weapons are used in the outstanding majority of instances. HB24: concealed handgun reciprocity should not end at state lines, carry is part of our constitutional right and the state of Virginia should do everything in its power to ensure reciprocity from as many states as possible and offer reciprocity in return so that 2nd amendment rights are not infringed. HB40: Manufacture of arms is in line with the 2nd amendment tradition of our country. Requiring arbitrarily assigned serial numbers and limiting means of manufacture serves no purpose other than to infringe on the rights of the people. Further, what many fail to understand is that the production of arms, especially those made by means of 3d printing is not as simple as pressing a button. Time, design work, and other accessory parts are necessary. The danger is not that criminals can buy a 3d printer and print as many guns as they’d like at the press of the button. The issue is that we have representatives who do not understand or are too intellectually dishonest to admit that manufacture of arms to include those 3d printed is not simple, straightforward, or causing any major spike in crime.

This commonwealth has a rich history of being a shining example of freedom. The home of “Give me liberty, or give me death” is now the home of purposed bills that disgrace the very fabric of this state. I urge you, especially in these unprecedented times, to not support any infringement of the constitution. Democrats have been given such a great opportunity to lead this state, but unconstitutional bills that take away 2nd amendment rights, that will get turned over in Supreme Court, and waste time and energy of this state, need to be shut down. Please take the temperature of your constituents, no one wants this. No one voted for this. This reeks of Bloomberg’s agenda, and not of the people who entrusted you to lead us in these troubling times.

I am writing to express my strong opposition to the anti-gun bills scheduled for consideration in your subcommittee meeting on January 29, 2026. As a law-abiding citizen who values the rights enshrined in the United States Constitution, particularly the Second Amendment, I urge you to vote against these measures that infringe upon the fundamental right to keep and bear arms. The Second Amendment guarantees the right of the people to keep and bear arms, a right that shall not be infringed. These bills, including but not limited to HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB702, HB871, HB969, and HB1359, represent direct assaults on this constitutional protection. They impose unnecessary restrictions on firearm ownership, possession, and transfer that disproportionately burden responsible gun owners while doing nothing to address the root causes of crime. It is a well-established fact that criminals, by definition, do not obey laws. Measures like bans on certain firearms (HB217), mandatory storage requirements (HB871), prohibitions on unserialized firearms (HB40), and penalties for leaving firearms in vehicles (HB110) will only disarm law-abiding citizens who follow the rules. These individuals are not the source of violent crime; rather, they are often the ones who rely on their Second Amendment rights for self-defense, hunting, and sport. Criminals will continue to acquire and use firearms illegally, unaffected by these new regulations, leaving ordinary Virginians more vulnerable. History and data show that gun control laws do not reduce crime rates but instead empower those who operate outside the law. For example, cities with strict gun laws often experience higher rates of violent crime compared to areas where law-abiding citizens can more freely exercise their rights. These bills will create more "gun-free" zones and bureaucratic hurdles that criminals ignore, effectively turning law-abiding citizens into easier targets. I respectfully request that you reject these infringement on our constitutional rights and focus instead on policies that target actual criminal behavior, such as enforcing existing laws against violent offenders and supporting mental health initiatives. Protecting the Second Amendment is essential to preserving our freedoms and ensuring public safety for all Virginians. Thank you for your time and consideration. I hope you will vote NO on these anti-Second Amendment bills. Sincerely, Bailey Pratt

In reviewing these various bills it seems that many of them disregard the Constitution that was sworn to be upheld. Additionally several have already been ruled on in various courts across the country. They serve to divide constituents especially those who vote rather than provide civil discourse and leadership. They further fail to address larger issues that plague our society. Punishing those who abide by the law and creating penalties for innocent civilians is conceptually flawed. I urge you all to reexamine the methods behind these bills and abandon them at this point. Work toward the greater good and try something that hasn’t already failed repeatedly. Truly focus on serving this great Commonwealth. It will serve all of us better in the future.

As a friend of Adam Turck, the most important thing I want to say first is that Adam was light. He was warmth. He was grace. He loved Superman. He loved his dog Lana. He loved acting. He loved fitness. He loved people. He loved life. He loved with his whole heart and his whole mind and he never let the weight of the world stop him from seeing the good in anyone and everyone. These bills are not only important to the family and friends Adam cultivated in Richmond, but to our community as a whole. Adam did everything right on August 2nd, 2025. He saw a woman in a domestic situation while walking his dog, Lana. He stepped in to try and de-escalate the situation, called the police and never letting that woman out of his sight. He did everything right and it wasn’t enough. A 19-year-old kid pulled a handgun from his backpack and shot Adam in the head. He then turned the gun on himself. That young kid took two lives that day when he never should have been able to put that woman or Adam in that position. He had pending assault charges and was only 19. Any one of the bills The Friends of Adam Turck are supporting today could have saved Adam’s life if they had already been in place. Adam was a superhero in this community, but he shouldn’t have had to be. He should still be here. Lighting up the Richmond Theater Stages, The gym he was a personal trainer at, and the lives of the people who loved him most. The city of Richmond should have long ago implemented gun safety and prevention laws that could have kept Adam here with us today. While no amount of wanting or wishing can bring him back, we can let it not be in vain, by making lasting change that prevents anyone else in Richmond from having to feel the pain we feel with the absence of Adam. He brought light to Richmond, The Theater, The Fitness Industry, and each and every life he touched. Please vote yes on HB 19, HB 21, HB 93, HB 110, and HB 1359

HB1303, I support. The remaining bills are unnecessary and bureaucratic. You are creating bills meant to solve statistically insignificant events. HB1359 and HB217 are particularly objectionable. Requiring a "purchaser license" infringes on the right to bear arms and is a complete duplication of existing background checks. The assault firearm definition is unconstitutional and will not stand up to legal challenge. Our tax dollars and attorney general resources will be wasted on such an obviously flawed legislation. Gun buy back programs are have proven to be a waste of tax payer dollars with no impact on gun crime statistics. HB110 is very heavy handed. Just because someone could detect a weapon in a private motor vehicle should not make that vehicle subject to confiscation by the state nor a penalty applied to the firearm owner. This is totally a way to punish firearm owners without solving any real gun violence crimes that you, as legislators, could better focus your time and effort on. Focus on enforcing existing laws and not letting habitual criminals get away with warnings or light sentencing for their crimes. That is the common sense approach. We have more than enough laws, we do not need more ways to trap law abiding citizens and our merchants with this slew of bills.

The bills under consideration are only going to affect those who have no intention of breaking the law. Coupled with the other bills lessening the penalties for many violent crimes, these will do nothing to prevent crime. Criminals do not follow the law. That is a textbook definition. We have plenty of laws to deal with those who perpetrate crimes. What is needed is to deal with the existing criminals. Stop what leads these people to break the law to begin with. Punish those who commit violent crimes firmly. Stop the revolving door justice that keeps them on the streets committing more crimes. Making the law abiding public defenseless while turning more violent criminals loose makes no sense. Police forces are not bodyguards! All that can be expected after calling 911 is the victim being taken to a hospital, or possibly the morgue, and an investigation, hopefully followed by an arrest. The only person that can hope to defend themselves from these violent criminals is the victim. It would be better to provide a system for more self defense classes for the public. Better help for the victims of violent crime. And fitting punishment for those who have broken the law. None of the proposed bills will do that. I hope that the Constitutional rights of the public will be considered over feel good measures. I thank you for your time in reading my comments and hope you will consider these points in voting on the proposed bills.

I urge committee members to vote against these bills, many of which infringe on our God-given rights as Americans, and some of which are already unconstitutional under existing rulings by the Supreme Court of the United States. Respectfully, a lifelong Virginian.

Hi, My name is Catherine Shultz and I’m writing this as a woman that survived almost being strangled to death, then stalked for 2 years. I was in fear of my life and I bought my first firearm and trained. My personal defense weapon saved my life and I didn’t have to pull the trigger. A piece of paper does nothing to protect survivors but I stand with VCDL & am co director of Women for Gun Rights in Va. I’m also disabled and an amputee & I can’t run from danger but I can use my firearm to protect myself. People don’t seem to understand that educating oneself vs restricting mags etc… they affect people like me and it shows me that the “gun safety” laws are simply a psychological bandage & does nothing to protect women like myself. Thank you, Catherine Shultz Women for gun rights

To the legislators; Not one of the proposed HBs should be approved. The authors of the proposed bills lack experience or insight into gun ownership or general safety of the public. Not one of these bills can be proven to save lives or stop criminal acts. What I do see is the potential for a level of state bureaucrats to create new jobs for their buddies. Let’s monitor who has a gun or who has too many bullets in their magazine. Whose family member is related to someone involved with domestic violence. This sounds like the state boys and girls are out to get their hands into Virginians pocket's again. Vote no for everyone of these HBs.

Shall not be infringed was and still is very clear. The bill of rights was written to limit the government. Please stop infringing on my god given rights.

HB19 Misdemeanors should never take away a civil right. HB21 A firearm accessory seller could not know they were selling a accessory to a prohibited person. A car parts store cannot be sued if they sell a seat cover for a car used in a bank robbery. HB40 This bill is unconstitutional, there is no analog in history or traditions of firearms with any such limitations when the Bill of Rights was adopted. Homemade guns have been legal since before the US existed. HB93 If a husband and wife co-own a shotgun and the husband gets a protective order issued against him, the wife would no longer have access to that shotgun. That punishes and needlessly endangers her life. HB110 Car owner should not be at fault for a criminal stealing a firearm. It is the criminal who is solely to blame. This bill could put a handgun in the possession of a tow truck driver that is a convicted felon. HB217 U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in both DC v Heller, and The New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen, that any firearm “in common use” is protected by the Second Amendment. Guns and magazines targeted by this bill are among the most common in the US, making this bill unconstitutional. HB229 Disarming visitors and guests, including CHP holders, violates their right to protect themselves. A U.S. District Court in the 2nd Circuit has restrained enforcement of just such a law for being unconstitutional under New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen Supreme Court ruling. HB626 Students have a right to self-defense. HB702 Destroying a functional, and possibly valuable firearms is a waste of money. State could offset costs by selling firearms to gun dealers through an auction. This program is a “turn in” and not a “give-back” program. HB871 Biometric safes are more expensive and can be unreliable when being used under stress and require batteries to work. There are other locking mechanisms that are just as secure. HB969 Center would only target violence committed using firearms and ignoring root causes of crime, as well as all the other ways violence is inflicted on victims – knives, blunt objects, hands and feet, etc. Half of violent crimes are not committed with a firearm. Term “Gun Violence” gives away true agenda: “gun violence” is a term coined by gun-control lobby to blame guns, which are inanimate objects, and not criminals that misuse guns. If a police officer shoots someone, officer gets blame, not his gun. If a criminal shoots someone, gun gets blame, not criminal. No one says, “tire iron violence” or “hand and feet violence.” It is just called “violence.” But there is a disarmament agenda with firearms and “gun violence” is just an excuse to go after firearms with more gun control. HB1300 Oppose HB1303 Oppose HB1359 Bill will get innocent people killed, it will take at least two months before a person can purchase a first firearm.  If they are purchasing that firearm for urgent self-defense, that is simply too long.  Price to get a permit, likely in hundreds of dollars, will be prohibitive for poor people and is equivalent of a poll tax.  And even with all hoops to get a permit, even citizens with a CHP will be limited to one handgun a month.  Local law-enforcement will be handed a registry of gun owners. And gun rentals at shooting ranges will not be possible for people who have not yet got their permit or are visiting from out of state or from another country.

My entire life I have taken great pride and stewardship in being a law abiding citizen of a great country. A very large part of my patriotism is the freedom and trust the founders of the nation gave me in the Second Amendment of the US constitution and Section 13 of the Virginia Bill of Rights. The anti-gun bills that have been introduced in Virginia show me that the supporters of these bills have zero regard for the Constitution, my rights as a lawful citizen and my rights to be able to defend myself and others from violent crime. The supporters of these bills have lost all sense of who the good guys are and who the bad guys are. I see this when early release is granted to hundreds of violent felons, many of which then go on to reoffend and violently prey on the very people you are supposed to protect, all for nothing more than some misdirected attempt at virtue signaling. I see this when prosecutors do not pursue charges against violent offenders in a misdirected attempt at virtue signaling. I see this when legislative efforts focus on the law-abiding and do nothing to violent felons who will not bother to be hindered by any gun laws. I see this when legislators talk about “gun violence” and do nothing about the underlying problem of “violence” and how to reduce it. I see this when I see news stories of repeat violent offenders who have been arrested for dozens of violent crimes, including murder, who end up killing someone yet again due to some form of “catch and release”. The laws are in place to remove violent felons, whether or not they use firearms, from society and prevent them from preying on your law-abiding constituents. Please use them. I urge opposition to HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB626, HB702, HB871, HB969 and HB1359. I urge support for HB1300 and HB1303.

I oppose all legislation which seeks to undermine our Constitutionally protected 2nd Amendment. Therefore, I would encourage all members to vote against these bills with a resounding NO!

As a life long Virginia resident and lawful firearms owner, I speak for myself and millions of other Virginians in saying that all of us strongly oppose any bill being introduced that restricts and infringes upon our Second Amendment rights that are guaranteed by the constitution of Virginia and of the United States. These gun control bills have been drafted under the guise of safety and crime prevention, while simultaneously doing the opposite and only increasing further resistance in both crime and safety. For decades, Virginia has been a pro-2A state where generations of families have been born into and raised on safe and responsible gun ownership. Hunting, personal protection, or simply being an enthusiast does not make someone a criminal or implies criminal intent because of the technology behind modern firearms has far surpassed the firearms of our grandfathers’s generation. Manufacturing methods and technology is ever changing, but our natural rights as law abiding citizens should never be hung in the balance and toyed with as privileges. I implore the General Assembly to please review these bills with logic, with reason, and with the hope that our state government will not make a mockery of the Second Amendment to further a political agenda not based upon fact, but upon incessant fear mongering and disarmament of the people.

I SUPPORT this bill. Under current Virginia law, individuals subject to a protective order or convicted of misdemeanor domestic assault are prohibited from possessing firearms. However, there is no clear mechanism to ensure these prohibited individuals actually relinquish their guns, leaving survivors at continued risk. HB 93 addresses this gap by requiring the prohibited person to promptly: (a) surrender the firearm(s) to law enforcement, (b) sell them to a licensed firearms dealer, or (c) transfer or sell them to another person who is legally allowed to possess firearms, is at least 21 years old, does not live with the prohibited person, and provide proof of the transfer (including transferee details) to the court. The bill also notifies the individual that law enforcement may seek a search warrant if there's reason to believe firearms have not been relinquished. HB 93 creates a straightforward enforcement mechanism for laws already on the books. It is targeted, limited in scope, and focused on protecting survivors of domestic violence by reducing the risk of armed abusers. This common-sense measure will help safeguard the Commonwealth’s citizens without creating new prohibitions. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill.

Name: Brad Toohill Location: Loudoun County, Virginia I strongly oppose the following bills. These proposals punish law-abiding Virginians, undermine due process, and infringe on constitutionally protected rights while failing to address violent crime. Criminals do not follow gun laws—these bills target citizens who already do. HB 19 (McClure) This bill allows permanent loss of firearm rights based on vague “dating relationship” misdemeanors. Fundamental rights should not be stripped without clear standards and robust due process. HB 21 (Helmer) Holding firearm manufacturers and sellers liable for crimes they did not commit is unjust and dangerous. This policy attacks lawful commerce instead of criminal behavior. HB 40 (Simon) Criminalizing unfinished frames and receivers turns peaceful hobbyists into felons without evidence of crime reduction. This is regulation without results. HB 93 (Bennett-Parker) Forced firearm surrender under protective orders risks disarming innocent family members. Rights should not be suspended by accusation alone. HB 110 (Laufer) Penalizing lawful gun owners for storing a handgun in a vehicle is excessive and punitive. This bill targets responsible citizens, not criminals. HB 217 (Helmer) This bill bans commonly owned firearms and standard-capacity magazines that are clearly protected as arms in common use. It is unconstitutional and ineffective. HB 229 (Hernandez) Blanket bans on firearms and knives in medical facilities leave lawful citizens defenseless and create confusion without improving safety. HB 626 (Callsen) Disarming adults on college campuses does not enhance safety. Law-abiding individuals should not lose their right to self-defense based on location. HB 702 (Cole) Taxpayer-funded firearm turn-in and destroy programs waste public funds and show no measurable impact on crime. HB 871 (Downey) Mandated storage methods and biometric safes intrude into private homes and impose unnecessary costs on families. HB 969 (Price) Creating a new state agency focused solely on firearms expands bureaucracy while ignoring repeat offenders and enforcement failures. HB 1359 (Hope) This permit-to-purchase scheme creates delays, costs, fingerprinting, and a de facto registry. It burdens lawful ownership and disproportionately harms low-income Virginians. Virginia should focus on enforcing existing laws and prosecuting violent offenders—not restricting the rights of responsible citizens.

I urge you to oppose all of the proposed bills. None of these bills will have meaningful impact on crime committed with fire arms. The only honest way to reduce crime committed with firearms is to enforce mandatory and harsh penalties on criminals who use guns to commit crimes. Once has to realize that guns can only commit a crime in the hands of a criminal. The criminal, not the tool is the problem that needs to be addressed. A case in point: England has super strong regulations on guns. Was that effective? Did the crime rates really drop ? No, crime rates didn't drop all that much. Eliminating firearms just shifted the criminals over to using knives as their weapon of choice. These proposed regulations seem to be more aimed at annoying firearm owners, as opposed to solving any real problems. While I want to vote Democratic, these essentially useless regulations are making me seriously reconsider which party I will support in the future. Please put regulations in place to SOLVE problems, not these silly things that only provide talking points. Never forget, RESULTS are what voters want.

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence supports these bills.

Not one of these bills will make anyone safer, but rather strip the rights of law abiding citizens of which pose no threat. Maybe try enforcing or increasing the penalties for laws against murder or violent felonies that are already in place? The problem isn't guns. It's the mentally ill people who misuse them. Making good people criminals for simply owning common firearms or magazines will not make a difference to people who have no regard for law.

Thank you - see file attached

All these bills infringe on citizens AMENDMENT RIGHT we the people been lied to BY OUR Government OFFICIALS & mainly democratic officials ABIGAIL SPANBERGER is one of them

My name is Teresa Gancsos and I am with the Richmond chapter of Moms Demand Action and we support these bills. Thank you for your attention in this matter. Teresa Gancsos

As a fellow Virginian, I urge you to please OPPOSE "gun control" bills in your committee. Concepts like an "assault weapons" ban, arbitrary magazine restrictions, "reasonable standards" for firearms businesses, and a "permit to purchase," just to name a few, do nothing to address crime in the Commonwealth. Criminals do not abide by the law, and bills like these only target law-abiding firearm owners and businesses. The General Assembly should instead pursue legislation that holds criminals accountable for their crimes, not legislation that creates new criminals overnight for lawful purchases. Again, I urge you to OPPOSE gun control in your committee.

My family and I OPPOSE all these insidious, un-Constitutional anti-2A Bills you're proposing.

Dear Legislators, You have been elected to a position for the purpose of representing citizens in VA. You have taken an oath to the state and U.S. Constitution. It is not your place to push radical agendas or ideologies that clearly oppose those Constitutions. The 2nd Amendment clearly states that it “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”. Whether you agree or disagree with it is not important. Whether you appreciate firearms or hate and fear them, is not important. What is important, is that you respect my Constitutional right to own them, carry them, use them, transport them, have immediate access to them, decide for myself how I will store them in my own home. It is NOT your place to infringe upon these rights in any way. The very reason for the 2nd Amendment is for citizens to be able to repel, remove, and defend against a tyrannical government. Don’t be a tyrannical government. Remember and honor your oaths. Put aside the partisanship. Sincerely, One of millions of gun owners

All these proposed are laws are just awful. The right of self-preservation is a fundamental human right and having the best tools for self-preservation furthers that fundamental human right. Without those tools, you degrade the most important human right in the world, the right to live and live free. Suing gun dealers and manufacturers will prevent the public from acquiring guns. Banning large swaths of arms and accessories prevent the public from defending themselves with the best tool possible. All these proposed laws are bad. Bad for Virginians and bad for human rights. HB 19 (McClure) requires forfeiture of firearm rights for a “dating relationship” misdemeanor. HB 21 (Helmer) allows civil lawsuits against firearm manufacturers and sellers for crimes committed with their products. HB 40 (Simon) outlaws unfinished frames and receivers unless serialized. HB 93 (Bennett-Parker) forces firearm surrender under protective orders in a way that could disarm innocent family members. HB 110 (Laufer) imposes a civil penalty and towing if a handgun is left in an unattended vehicle. HB 217 (Helmer) bans commonly owned firearms and standard-capacity magazines made after July 1, 2026. HB 229 (Hernandez) prohibits firearms and many knives in medical facilities. HB 626 (Callsen) restricts firearms on college campuses without lawful cause. HB 702 (Cole) establishes a firearm "turn-in and destroy" program funded by taxpayers. HB 871 (Downey) mandates specific storage requirements and biometric safes in homes with minors. HB 969 (Price) creates a state gun violence prevention agency focused solely on firearms. HB 1359 (Hope) creates a costly permit-to-purchase scheme with fingerprints, training requirements, and a de facto handgun registry.

My name is Cossie Scott a lifelong Virginia resident. This is my first time speaking here. I strongly oppose HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB626, HB702, HB871, HB969, HB1300, HB1359 I do support HB1303 45% of Virginia homes own guns lawfully. Nationally, 93% of the guns associated with crime are obtained illegally. So how are any of these regulations moving the needle in illegal gun trafficking? Or attacking the root cause of violent crime? Furthermore, the majority of the average gun related crime occurs in 9 districts in Virginia (Richmond and Hampton Roads). So you are proposing punishing the entire state and every law biding gun owner for an “illegal” gun problem in Hampton and Richmond. Not to mention 63% of the gun related deaths in Virginia are suicide related. That means that all of these bills listed are not scientifically proven with sound data, but emotionally charged by political gun grabbing rhetoric and is saturated with slippery slope informal fallacies with proposed changes being made without analytical data to suggest we have a need to change. Why do we not first address Richmond and Hampton locally before pushing your unfounded ideology on the rest of the commonwealth. Gun laws do not solve for the human condition problem in those 9 districts. We would be better served spending our time, and tax dollars, addressing the poverty problem that drives violent crime, rather than trying to make law biding citizens criminals.

I’ve been a lifelong Democrat because I believe deeply in protecting working people, expanding access to healthcare, safeguarding civil rights, and investing in strong public institutions, but I’ve never fully aligned with my party on gun control. To me, supporting the Second Amendment isn’t about ideology or partisanship — it’s about personal responsibility, self-reliance, and the belief that law-abiding citizens should have the right to protect themselves and their families. I value evidence-based policy, and I worry that many proposed gun laws primarily burden responsible owners while doing little to address the root causes of violence like poverty, mental health gaps, and systemic inequality. I want safer communities, but I believe that comes from smarter enforcement, education, and prevention rather than broad restrictions that limit constitutional rights. Holding these views sometimes puts me at odds with fellow Democrats, but I see it as proof that political identity doesn’t have to mean agreeing with every plank of the platform — it means thinking critically and standing by the principles you believe in. Please vote no to any gun restrictions that are being presented.

I support these bills as indicated above.

The attachment contains my comments on the proposed bills.

Nearly half of all households in the Commonwealth own a firearm and yet Virginia has one of the lowest gun related death rates in the nation (5.6 per 100,000). Not only are you trying to solve an issue that doesn't exist, you're sacrificing your constiunts to pander towards national politics.

As a law abiding gun owner and retired military Virginia Citizen I vehemently oppose any law that opposes our Constitutional Right via the Second Amendment. All of the bills you are considering meet this criteria. Please cease and desist any band all actions that would infringe on my rights…those that our Founding Fathers of whom many were from our Great Commonwealth, believed to be self-evident. Very respectfully, Shannon J. Cornelius, USA/USAF (Ret)

I strongly urge voting against the following bills as all of them will cause undue hardship on legal gun owners, go against the spirit of the US 2nd amendment, will place firearm manufacturers in legal jeopardy solely because their products may have been used in an unlawful fashion (same as suing Ford for getting a speeding ticket). HB 19 (McClure) requires forfeiture of firearm rights for a “dating relationship” misdemeanor. HB 21 (Helmer) allows civil lawsuits against firearm manufacturers and sellers for crimes committed with their products. HB 40 (Simon) outlaws unfinished frames and receivers unless serialized. HB 93 (Bennett-Parker) forces firearm surrender under protective orders in a way that could disarm innocent family members. HB 110 (Laufer) imposes a civil penalty and towing if a handgun is left in an unattended vehicle. HB 217 (Helmer) bans commonly owned firearms and standard-capacity magazines made after July 1, 2026. HB 229 (Hernandez) prohibits firearms and many knives in medical facilities. HB 626 (Callsen) restricts firearms on college campuses without lawful cause. HB 702 (Cole) establishes a firearm "turn-in and destroy" program funded by taxpayers. HB 871 (Downey) mandates specific storage requirements and biometric safes in homes with minors. HB 969 (Price) creates a state gun violence prevention agency focused solely on firearms. HB 1359 (Hope) creates a costly permit-to-purchase scheme with fingerprints, training requirements, and a de facto handgun registry. Thank you,

I oppose the passage of these bills. HB 19, 21, 40, 93, 110, 217, 229, 626, 702, 871, 969, 1359.

The Right to Keep and Bear Arms shall not be infringed. Stop writing and putting Unconstitutional Legislation in the Virginia Code. That covers just about everything I have seen the Democratic Majority propose as new legislation. Want to live in a communist paradise - Move to Cuba - They do not get Snow and sleet there, and you will have someone to give you instructions on how to live your life.

Just to let you know, I am an independent in every sense of the word. I tend to lean left on many issues but on the subject of the second amendment I am a firm believer. I don’t think we need these new restrictions being proposed. The topic is so complex and polar I don’t know how to convince you all of the folly of this legislation except to say many of us are single issue voters regardless of how we feel about certain social issues. I know many democrats in this state who regularly use these weapons that are the subject for future restrictions or outright banning. I will try to touch on a few issues. Assault weapons and high capacity magazine are the current boogie man of the anti gun lobby and have been since the 1990s. This was originally a deliberate attempt to confuse modern civilian semiautomatic weapons with their more dangerous fully automatic assault military versions as a prelude to ban handguns. The term assault weapon is a purely political term that has no universal meaning and it was chosen to instill fear and confusion in the public’s mind. I ask you to review these laws and ask yourself which one of these features makes these weapons more dangerous than other rifles. Is a pistol grip, bayonet lug, or similar feature what makes a rifle dangerous? Or is it caliber, muzzle energy, and rate of fire? If public safety is the true goal why doesn’t this legislation address these factors instead of cosmetics? I will tell you why. Because the average hunting rifle is more powerful than an ar-15 by a wide margin. These are not overpowered rifles as some would have you believe. It’s a semiautomatic version of an intermediate powered rifle - part way between the power of a pistol and a full power hunting rifle. Did you know even Great Britain has no restrictions on weapons with military style features? Their ban is on the caliber and rate of fire. You can even have a semiautomatic uzi there witt a 50 round magazine as long as it is chambered in 22lr. Silencers have very few restrictions there as well because they protect hearing and help minimize noise pollution. Let’s talk about the legality as well. Most of these restrictions are unconstitutional because the weapons and features are in common use. It’s unconstitutional to ban any weapon that is in common use as per DC vs Heller and Brien. If the state court doesn’t overturn these unconstitutional restrictions the Supreme Court will. I will end this conversation by saying our founding fathers faced the same issues we do. At that time most governments restricted civilian arms because they wanted to remain in power. They reasoned through their dealings with Great Britain that an armed population could never be slaves to any tyrannical government or foreign power. This may sound like a tired old saying that is often made fun of. I have heard people saying things like deer don’t need bullet proof vests and you can’t fight against a government without f-16s but is this really true? The ar-15 for instance is not powerful enough to take down a large elk humanly so the bullet proof vest comment is just plain silly. That cartridge is commonly used in other rifles as a varmint round. As far as f-16s are concerned, the Taliban sure kicked us out of their country with nothing more than small arms and guerrilla tactics. Civilian resistance movements rarely fight pitch battles with tanks and fighter jets. They use hit and run tactics combined with numbers to wear the enemy down.

Dear Committee Members, I urge you to reject the blatantly unconditional and egregious anti Second Amendment bills before you. This will do nothing to curb crime, and you know that, but will make criminals out of your political opponents, as well as many of your constituents. Scencerly, Sal DeGennaro

PLEASE PROTECT OUR GUN RIGHTS AND DO NOT DEGRADE VIRGINIANS' SECOND AMENDMENT GUARANTEED RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS!

IT IS VERY FRUSTRATING TO LIVE IN A SOCIETY IN WHICH THOSE WHO ARE ELECTED TO REPRESENT ME IMMEDIATELY STEP IN AND COME UP WITH LAWS IN AN ATTEMPT TO FRAME ME AS A CRIMINAL FOR EXERCISING MY RIGHTS. IN NO WAY HAVE I BROKEN ANY EXISTING LAWS, NOR DO I OWN ANY ITEM CURRENTLY CONSIDERED ILLEGAL. THAT THESE "REPRESENTATIVES" CAN, WITH THE STROKE OF A PEN, PENALIZE ME, MAKES ME WONDER JUST WHO THEY "REPRESENT". WE DO NOT NEED MORE LAWS TO "LESSEN CRIME", WE NEED TO ENFORCE THE ONES ALREADY ON THE BOOKS. PLEASE LEAVE YOUR LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS ALONE.

Our Second Amendment is clear and succinct: "... the right of the People to keep an bear arms shall not be infringed." What I see is an example of the government overstepping its bounds under the illusion of public safety. Many of the measures including assault weapons, magazine capacities, and "ghost guns" are based on buzz words that strike fear because people do not understand them. Let us embark on a few definitions: Infringe: "act so as to limit or undermine (something); encroach on" -Oxford Dictionary. Synonyms include Erode, Impair, and Weaken. ANY legislation that limits impairs, or weakens a citizen's right to own and carry weapons is, by definiton, infringement, and therefore a violation of our beautiful country's constitution. Ghost Gun: the ATF classifies the part of the weapon containing the trigger assembly as a "firearm," colloquially called a Lower Receiver. It is possible to manufacture this part and therefore build a weapon that has no serial number and is unregistered with the police department. This takes skill and specialized, expensive tooling; these firearms sound scary, but are by and large produced by hobbyists, not killers. Assault Weapons (HB217): The limiting, reduction, and impairment of the size of magazine that one can purchase, keep, and carry is simply a violation of the 2nd amendment. Storage (HB871): The State government has no business inside my home and how my weapons are stored. I learned to handle guns at 7 years of age, children can learn. If I lock my weapons as this bill requires, I can no longer access them in an emergency. Its safer to gun-proof my children than child-proof my guns. Permit to purchase (HB1359): We do not need a permit to exercise our first amendment rights. We do not have permits to secure our rights against inappropriate search and seizure, the 4th amendment. We also do not have permits to protect ourselves from cruel and unusual punishment. No other right enumerated in the Bill of Rights requires a permit, why do we treat the 2nd amendment differently? We already strip this right from convicted criminals, we have background checks, leave us law-abiding gunowners alone. I understand these bills have good intentions. We want to see our communities safe, healthy, and thriving, and have our neighbors and friends go about their days without fear. But let us not succumb to fear to such an extent that we throw away our freedom for the illusion of heightened safety. Let's look at California, llinois, and New York, who have the strictest policies in the nation, yet rising rates of violent crimes, and instantly the illusion is dispelled. These measures do not increase safety. What they do accomplish is an erosion of freedom, disarmament of law-abiding citizens, and violation of our country's constitution. I ask you please, as your neighbor and constituent, vote NO to these measures.

While domestic violence is a serious issue that deserves careful and responsible policy responses, HB 93 takes an overly broad and constitutionally flawed approach that punishes innocent people, undermines due process, and places law-abiding families at greater risk. This bill requires individuals subject to protective orders or certain convictions to surrender, sell, or transfer their firearms, even when those firearms are jointly owned with a spouse or family member who has committed no wrongdoing. In practical terms, this means that a husband's prior legal issue could deprive his wife of access to a firearm she co-owns for home defense, leaving her more vulnerable to endangerment to her life. Rather than enhancing safety, this bill may actively endanger innocent people. HB 93 also raises serious due process concerns. Protective orders are often issued on a temporary basis and sometimes without full evidentiary hearings. Under this bill, a person could lose access to a fundamental constitutional right based on an allegation rather than a final judicial determination. This undermines the presumption of innocence and opens the door to abuse of the legal system. The bill further authorizes law enforcement to seek search warrants based on subjective beliefs that firearms have not been surrendered. This provision invites intrusive government searches and threatens Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures. Additionally, HB 93 arbitrarily prohibits individuals between the ages of 18 and 20 from retaining firearms on behalf of affected family members, even though Virginia law recognizes that adults in this age range may lawfully possess rifles, shotguns, and handguns. This inconsistent treatment unfairly targets young adults and strips them of rights that the law otherwise recognizes. There is also no evidence that blanket firearm surrender policies reduce domestic violence. Individuals who intend to commit violent acts are unlikely to comply with surrender orders, while those who do comply are overwhelmingly the people who pose no threat to public safety. Once again, this proposal reflects a pattern of lawmakers responding to complex social problems by expanding government power and restricting constitutional rights, rather than focusing on targeted enforcement against genuinely dangerous individuals. Policies addressing domestic violence must be balanced, constitutional, and focused on protecting victims without punishing innocent family members. HB 93 fails that test.

I disagree with any and all laws pertaining to our gun rights and any law that infringes our right to own,sell, trade or gift. These amendments are a total outreach of our constitutional rights and we the people will not stand for it.

These bill do nothing to address criminals and only affects law abiding gun owners. As a black man I feel they are racist as well. Vote NO to all of these bills.

I stand with Gun Owners of America and the Virginia Citizens Defense League in opposing any attempt to restrict law abiding Virginians 2nd amendment rights. These bills will do nothing to stop crime and only serve to limit the rights of the people to exercise their 2nd amendment rights. As a constituent, I urge you to OPPOSE these gun bills: HB 19, Misdemeanors should never take away a civil right. HB 21, This bill is designed to have a chilling effect on all aspects of the firearms industry. HB 40, This bill is unconstitutional, as there was no analog in the history or traditions of firearms with any such limitations at the time the Bill of Rights was adopted. Homemade guns have been legal since before the United States existed. HB 93, This disctriminates against people in the same household and also discriminates against young people who are legally allowed to own fire arms. HB 110, Punish criminals who do this, not the law abiding citizens. HB 217, The U.S. Supreme Court has said in both DC v Heller, and recently The New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen, that any firearm “in common use” is protected by the Second Amendment. The guns and magazines targeted by this bill are among the most common guns and magazines in the United States, making this bill unconstitutional. There are conservatively estimated to be over 20 million AR-15s and 700 million magazines that hold more than 10 rounds in civilian hands. HB 229, Disarming visitors and guests, including concealed handgun permit holders, at such facilities violates their right to protect themselves in an emergency. A U.S. District Court in the 2nd Circuit has restrained enforcement of just such a law for being unconstitutional under New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen Supreme Court ruling. HB 626, A solution in search of a problem. Higher education students are adults and have a right to self-defense. HB 702, The name of the program implies that the Commonwealth gives firearms to citizens and now wants citizens to give them back. That is not the case. The State does not give us our rights and does not own our property. HB 871, Biometric safes are more expensive than non-biometric safes and often times more unreliable when being used under stress, This discriminates against those people who are poor and still have a right to self protection. HB 969, we do not need to grow the state bureaucracy to study violent crime when most violent crime does not involve firearms. HB 1359, please find me a constitutional right that you have to get a permit for. There is not one and we should not be limiting the rights of the people by require a permit to exercise their 2nd amendment rights. I SUPPORT the following bill: HB 1303, 90 days is more than sufficient for the State Police to issue a non-resident permit. There is no reason that this should take longer than this.

I’m against all these worthless anti-gun / anti-freedom bills that will do nothing to reduce crime, but will only serve to reduce the freedoms of law abiding citizens. Please retract them and do something good for Virginians. Thank you.

Virginia opposes all these illegal unconstitutional bills. The second amendment is a right not a privilege.! I oppose these bills as an individual taxpayer.

I do not support these bills.

I oppose any and all restrictions on our God given and Constitutionally protected Right to keep and bear arms. None of this nonsense passes constitutional muster. And will have the effect of making the lives Of law abiding citizens less safe while you are Lowering penalties for real crime and turning Law abiding citizens into criminals... These bills are nothing more than a government power grab. What part of "Shall NOT be infringed " do you not Understand??

All bills with the exception of HB 1303 are unconstitutional and I do NOT support them.

I oppose these bills

When did our state government decide that they do not have to follow our Constitution of the United States of America? The 2nd Amendment is an individual right under the Constitution that states clearly that it shall not be infringed on which in simple terms means that no government official or group has the ability to take a person's right to keep and bear arms in the United States of America. This Amendment was so important to our forefathers that it is the second thing they wrote to establish that the government does not have the ability to take your right to defend yourself against all enemies and this includes a tyrannical state government that doesn't understand plain text that our country was founded on. It doesn't matter what others opinions or feelings on the subject of the right to bear arms is because it is my right and not their's that we are talking about at this time. As a society of individuals in our country that have never agreed on things of this nature since the invention of the modern firearm we have to look no farther than our own Constitution to see that this is not a collective right of certain people that agree or disagree with the principle of firearms but infact a Constitutional right of an individual to determine there views of their personal right to bear arms. With the world in the state it is in at our present time this Constitutional right is needed more then ever because we are facing people that think that the can completely ignore the Constitution and its not even on a national level but a state level. This is also a truly sad moment of our state that is the founding place for our country as it exists from the time that we settled in this new land of an unknown world at the time but to disrespect our founding Document that started it all on top of it is the worst thing that could happen in our state for these elected officials to look at the Bill of Rights and say to themselves that those Amendment are not worth following because I have a different opinion, belief or feeling on that Amendment that I am personally going to take the individual right of every person in Virginia just because I don't want to follow these Amendments as they are written. Do you understand how this is being a tyrannical government just like the British were when they were trying to control the entire population at the time that we had the Revolution in this great land to start this great country. When people say that the 2nd Amendment is dated and need to be revised but can see the actual beauty in how our forefathers predicted that this Amendment would be necessary throughout time to even to the year 2026 were we have a government that is looking at this exact Amendment and saying no we don't have to follow that anymore because we have all these people that don't like the fact that a free person of the United States of America can purchase anything that has to do with their ability to not only protect themselves in self defense but also to protect themselves from the tyrannical government that is before us today. I'm sorry but as a person that has no affiliation to a political party or any other organization on this subject in our country I believe in our Constitution and the Amendments that were written in the Bill of Rights to protect myself, my family and my friends from people that think that they know what is best for everyone in our country on the basis that they either think they are smarter, richer or elected.

I oppose every gun-control bill pending before this committee because they are prohibited by both the United States and Virginia Constitutions. The Second Amendment provides that “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Supreme Court held that this language protects an individual right to possess firearms for lawful purposes such as self-defense, independent of militia service. The Court emphasized that the Amendment protects arms “in common use” by law-abiding citizens and forbids bans on entire classes of such arms. In McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010), the Court reaffirmed that this right is fully incorporated against the states, binding Virginia to the same constitutional limits as Congress. Virginia’s Constitution independently protects this right, stating in Article I, Section 13 that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” In New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen (2022), the Supreme Court rejected interest-balancing tests and adopted a text-history-tradition standard: if the Second Amendment’s text covers the conduct, it is presumptively protected, and the government must show the regulation is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Modern policy goals, crime statistics, or legislative preferences are insufficient. Many pending bills restrict semi-automatic rifles, including AR-style firearms that are owned by millions of Americans and commonly used for lawful purposes such as self-defense, sport shooting, and hunting. Under Heller, arms in common use cannot be banned, and the “dangerous and unusual” exception does not apply. There is no historical tradition of banning commonly owned firearms based on rate of fire, operating mechanism, or cosmetic features, and under Bruen the absence of such historical analogues is dispositive. Other bills ban magazines over ten rounds, which are standard components of many commonly owned handguns and rifles. Because magazines are integral to firearm function, such bans operate as functional prohibitions on protected firearms. There is no Founding-era or Reconstruction-era tradition of limiting ammunition capacity, making these bans unconstitutional under Bruen. Permit-to-purchase schemes likewise unconstitutionally burden a fundamental right by converting it into a government-granted privilege. The right to keep arms necessarily includes the right to acquire them, and fees, training mandates, biometric requirements, and processing delays disproportionately burden citizens and lack historical justification. These schemes invite arbitrary enforcement and indirect suppression of a constitutional right. While public safety is a legitimate concern, the Supreme Court has made clear that constitutional rights cannot be traded away through legislative cost-benefit analysis. Regulations unsupported by historical tradition fail regardless of asserted benefits. For these reasons, the pending gun-control bills before this committee are inconsistent with both the United States and Virginia Constitutions and should be rejected.

Please no more gun bans

These proposed actions would increase the amount of money that is already taken from us in taxes. They make no sense, as we have a 2.3 billion surplus. These actions only hurt Virginians. The democrat party ran on affordability, and these bills do just the opposite. The taxes on firearms, and the banning of them and accessories have already proven to do nothing but punish law abiding citizens. CRIMINALS DONT FOLLOW LAWS! Reducing manditory sentecing for rape and other horrible crimes only make us less safe. Combined with TRYING to disarm us and helping criminals you out us at risk, and rob us of our rights and money. You all should be ashamed of yourselves for being bought off. You all remind me of our flag. You are acting like tyrants. You talk of affordability, yet you are trying to take more of our money. The people will not stand for tour unconstitutional actions. You may have control for the next two years, but your political careers will be destroyed. Tou have become radical tyrants. You hate the other side so much, that you are willing to destroy us. Shame on all of you. The pendulum always swings back, and you are just guaranteeing it will swing so far back that you will wish you never did this. The destruction of our constitution, and your petty attacks are not worth the backlash that will come when the people rise up against what you believe in.

Leave my second amendment rights alone and worry about all the criminals both legal and illegal. Don't screw with law-abiding citizens who work and pay your salary

Hello, I agree and stand with the opinions of the Virginia Citizens Defense League and Gun Owners of America on these troubling bills. The right to keep and bear ares enshrined as a God given right in both the US (2nd amendment) and Virginia (article 1, section 13) Constitutions. Please do not legislate millions of peaceful, law abiding Virginians into criminals with the stroke of a pen.

Please Protect Our 2nd Amendment Rights. Thank You.

Please don’t support any Bills that restrict or infringe on my 2nd Amendment rights.

To whom it may concern, It is important to recognize that criminals, by definition, disregard existing laws and are unlikely to be deterred by the introduction of new legislation. Consequently, the implementation of additional laws often impacts only law-abiding citizens, placing new restrictions or obligations upon those who already comply with legal standards. The focus, therefore, should not be on drafting further statutes but rather on ensuring the consistent and effective enforcement of the laws currently in place. By allocating resources toward upholding existing regulations, society can enhance public safety, maintain fairness, and uphold the integrity of the justice system without unnecessarily burdening responsible citizens. Respectfully, Mr. Jones

You were elected as a protest against the President. You definitely weren't elected to cancel Virginians constitutional rights. I'm sure your big donors outside of Virginia will be happy. But last time you tried this 90 of 95 counties, Cities and Town revolted against you. Plus once your donor lists are published by the influential VCDL and the lawsuits start. The people will find out who you actually serve. Unless you represent Arlington or Fairfax all democratic seats will be in jeopardy for the next election. Finally: You take an oath to honor the constitution when you get the privilege to serve the people. Someone who immediately violates their oath has no honor and can never be trusted with authority. People will remember that when it's time to vote again. I know I will. I used to be a Democrat and donor. But I will never vote for a Democrat again.

HB 19 - In the current status of who can report who; it is wholly unwise to remove firearms for a “dating relationship” misdemeanor. Once the court costs, etc. to defend yourself and then waiting to get have weapon returned makes absolutely no sense at all. This is not a FELONY. HB 21-Weapons manufacturers are not the criminal, they only make a tool used for hunting, recreational marksmanship and self defense. Money should be spent on mental health and addiction treatment HB40 - Only criminals will use weapons without serial numbers whether made at home or they will remove serial numbers off illegally bought weapons. This only hurts lawful citizens. HB93 - would remove self defense weapons from others in the family who are lawful and have not committed any criminal activity HB 111 - This is insanity, how will the towing company comply with a chain of custody of a weapon? There is no mention of appropriately storing a gun in a gun vault in a vehicle when traveling, etc. HB 229 - Medical personnel need protecting as much as any other citizen especially in high risk areas like emergency rooms with the potential for violence from drug crazed or mentally ill persons. Trust me, I have been there. HB 626 - This would be nearly impossible to enforce as one travels thru urban universities like VCU HB 702 - This bill is directing funding to the wrong approach to control gun violence. Use the funds for mental and addiction services, gang violence, etc. HB 871 - There is not enough definition on the requirements. Safe and easy access to a firearm for home protection is something most gun owners already employ. HB 969 - This bill requires further definition of gun violence prevention. Again, using the funds for mental health, addiction and gang violence are all necessary HB 1359 - This bill would place undue cost burdens on those who dont have the means to fulfill the costly requirements thus it is in my estimation a class and racial issue and not about guns. Training is something that should be sought out by any gun owner. I urge your consideration on these bills and protect the lawful gun owners in the Commonwealth. Respectfully Please vote no

Please consider this by destroying the constitutional rights of the people of Virginia. You also will eventually come to the repercussions of your decisions, ie court action and loss of tax payer money etc.Now the 2nd amendment to the constitution in short says “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED ,basically no laws are to go against the constitution and also as per article 6 clause two of the constitution. Thank you and think wisely because your constituents as whole do not want this. Second Amendment Right to Bear Arms 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. Amdt2.1Overview of Second Amendment, Right to Bear Arms Amdt2.2Historical Background on Second Amendment Amdt2.3Early Second Amendment Jurisprudence Amdt2.4Heller and Individual Right to Firearms Amdt2.5Post-Heller Issues and Application of Second Amendment to States Amdt2.6Bruen and Concealed-Carry Licenses Amdt2.7Rahimi and Applying the Second Amendment Bruen Standard

Not one of you liberals submitted a bill to address the real evil that is using a gun. So all of these bills are designed to punish legal law abiding gun owners and protect the real criminals. Im78 years old and have owned and bought guns from the age of 15 when I purchased my first gun with money earned from a paper route. NOT ONE OF THE GUNS I'VE OWNED EVER HARMED ANYONE. IT'S AN INANIMATE OBJECT

As a veteran, I am against any so called gun control legislation that has not demonstrably proven to improve public safety while only minimally impacting individuals’ God given rights and liberties. It is unconscionable to think that elected leaders would even think about passing legislation that infringed upon individual rights merely for purposes of “doing something” without having weighed the impact on law abiding citizens and the innumerable sacrifices made to sustain and protect those rights and liberties through the years. Having served myself and also been the victim of illegal firearm use I staunchly support the 2A rights and individuals’ right to self-defense. Each person’s situation and experiences are different and they deserve to exercise their rights and liberties in a way that accommodates those circumstances, experiences, limitations, etc. So called “assault weapons” (a misnomer in itself) may have features and appearances that some persons find scary or intimidating but, to someone possessing that firearm for their own, individual law purposes, most all of those features actually improve the performance or safety related to the use of that same firearm. All semi-automatic firearms, regardless of how they might LOOK to a casual or uninformed observer basically function the same. Stocks, forearm, bipods, scopes, rails, magazines, etc. do not alter the fundamental intended purpose of this “tool.” I certainly understand those who do not appreciate firearms, in general, or who might actually be scared by their existence or appearance. But our 2A and self defense rights should never be indescribably infringed upon merely for these type reasons. There are very good reasons our fore fathers were adamant about including these inalienable rights as foundational principles in our founding documents. These foundational principles are as relevant today as they were at our founding. Anyone who is arrogant enough to think that they have studied and researched and experienced as much as the founding father scholars and thinkers should reconsider their actions carefully before indiscriminately treading upon one of our sacred rights and liberties without certifiable proof of the amount of public safety that would be realized by their actions. Anything less goes against the solemn oath you have sworn to uphold.

I oppose this bill, honor your oath

i OPPOSE any legislation that restricts 2nd amendment rights

I agree with the VCDL on these bills.

Opposite any gun laws. They will not stop any crime. Try enforcing the laws we already.

I support this bill

These sorts of draconian proposals severely restrict the ability of law-abiding citizens to effectively defend themselves against threats of violence. None of the proposed measures which have been inflicted on the citizenry of other states have made one iota of difference in crime levels. They HAVE however restricted law-abiding citizens from exercising their Constitutional rights via the 2nd Amendment. Vote now to cease this onslaught on the rights of law-abiding Virginians. Gun violence is perpetrated by CRIMINALS, so focus on the criminal prosecutions. Limiting the rights of law-abiding Virginians is tantamount to fascism. And as always, "When seconds count, the police are just minutes away!". That's what you are saying to Virginians. If I cannot be trusted to defend myself legally, then you cannot be trusted to run the Commonwealth.

These legislations violate many sections of the Virginia Constitution not just the U.S. Constitution. Legislations like these does nothing to prevent, curtail, deter or otherwise stop crimes or acts of violence. These legislations do not hold criminals that cannot legally possess, purchase or own firearms accountable for their possession, use or handling of a firearm. These legislations do not keep firearms out of the hands of criminals. Cliché but true rhetoric (Criminals will get guns and magazines and commit crimes regardless of the laws. These legislations are immoral, unethical and down right oppressive and serve no purpose other than to infringe upon rights and deny rights. Reminder: - 18, 19 and 20 year old men and women are entrusted in the operation, use, carry and implementation of the following in the service of our country as Servicemembers, Coast Guardsmen, National Guardsmen and Air National Guardsmen and Reservists as well as law enforcement: Semi-automatic Pistols with high capacity magazines, Semi- Automatic Rifles with 30 round magazines, machine guns, rockets, tanks, missiles, rocket Launchers etc and yet Virginia Legislators want to strip away the rights of civilians of that age group of their right to own and bear arms. That is hypocritical and it undermines the Constitution. Our nation foundation and freedom was earned through the blood and sweat of young 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20 year old men from the Revolutionary War for our independence and that of our 17 year old to 20 year old war fighters today standing tall and maintaining our soon to be 250 years of being a Constitutional Republic and our Freedom. Do not allow the stripping of the rights of these military aged men and women that serve and defend our nation, our freedom and our Constitutions. Do not insult them or slap them in the face or turn your backs on them. Fight for them because at some point we have fought and we have sacrificed for you and these young men and women will too. Any legislation that denies and deprives this age group the use, ownership while expecting them to serve in our country and have them carry, operate and use them in the defense of our nation and potentially die, be seriously injured or maimed is diabolical and is disgraceful. Magazine capacity restrictions: (Do not limit or stop the intent of criminals or those intent on committing any act of violence. We have seen the demonstrated and factual extreme actions/tactics that have been used for example: Using a vehicle to run into crowds, Vehicle Born Improvised Explosive Devises (VBIED), Improvised Explosive Devices (IED), mass stabbings, gas attacks and chemical warfare, fire, and more Constitution of Virginia - Article I. Bill of Rights Sections 1,2, 9,10,11. These legislations below, restrict the right to self- defense. Legal gun owners are not committing crimes and do not intend to committ crimes. These legislations are not about accountability for criminals. They are written to suppress and take away the rights of law abiding citizens and ro take away a means of self-defense. These legislations do not create a safer Virginia. HB110, HB1359, HB969, HB871, HB702, HB24, HB21, HB700, HB229, HB217, HB110, HB93, HB19, Example: - HB700: Denies and delays the access to firearms in an emergency situation where a victim of stalking or domestic abuse are in imminent danger. V/R Raymond Carter SFC(Retired)

I strongly oppose this bill

All of these bills are intolerable infringements of the right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment and the Constitution of Virginia. Supporting these bills is a violation of your oaths of office. In addition, as should be evident, these bills will only affect law-abiding gun owners, the very people least likely to offend. Criminals, by definition, do not obey the law. They are unlikely to obey these.

Please do not consider any anti-gun bills. Any potential law that goes against our Constitution is wrong and should not be acknowledged. We shouldn't have to pay for our rights. No innocent person should be penalized for a criminal's actions. A gun's capacity is irrelevant. If a person comments a REAL crime, they should be convected and sentenced accordingly. A right should be lost only through certain major criminal actions, not some fool's option of potential. No manufacturer should be responsible for how their product is used. The one responsible is the one in possession of said product, even if it was stolen. Our last Governor understood this. Our new Governor and her political party desperately needs to. We have seen the failures of worthless states like California, Maryland, New York and others. We don't need to be another one. No law will ever stop a crime. The law should provide proper penalties or real crimes. No law should be made for the sole purpose of controlling and wielding power over the citizens of this State or our country.

I am opposed to HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB626, HB702, HB871, HB969, and HB1359, I support HB 1300 and HB1303.

My father was born in Romania in 1933 and as a child lived under the fascism of socialism. The first thing the fascist socialists did was to confiscate guns. Nearly 400,000 Jews were slaughtered by the socialists after having been disarmed in Romania. Now socialists have taken power in Virginia by running as "moderates" and immediately showing their true selves once safely elected. Democrats, like their brethren Nazis, seek to disarm and enslave the general population. I oppose any legislation which punishes law-abiding citizens from protecting themself, their family, and their property. I oppose any legislation which punishes a citizen for potentially being robbed, as if the thief is not the problem-- the victim is treated as the criminal. I oppose any legislation which allows accusations to remove the rights of others. If I accuse every member of government of being a child abuser, are you forced to remain away from your child(ren)? I oppose Nazis and Democrats for the same reasons.

As a fellow Virginian, I urge you to please OPPOSE "gun control" bills in your committee. Concepts like an "assault weapons" ban, arbitrary magazine restrictions, "reasonable standards" for firearms businesses, and a "permit to purchase," just to name a few, do nothing to address crime in the Commonwealth. Criminals do not abide by the law, and bills like these only target law-abiding firearm owners and businesses. The General Assembly should instead pursue legislation that holds criminals accountable for their crimes, not legislation that creates new criminals overnight for lawful purchases. Again, I urge you to OPPOSE gun control in your committee. I support HB 1303 by Delegate Ware. Thank you for all that you do for Virginia.

Disarming the population is not a viable means to promote public safety. It is the duty of the individual to protect themselves from physical harm that may occur by criminal activity. It is not the responsibility of politicians or police. That is why bills like HB 19, HB 21, HB 40, HB 93, HB 229, HB 1359 are unconstitutional and put the general public in more danger as violent criminals will take advantage of unarmed civilians. HB 110 and HB 702 will promote criminal use of firearms as the firearms will be taken away from the registered owners' possession which greatly increases the likelihood the firearm will end up on the black market for resale where violent criminals obtain their weapons. HB 871 will also be ineffective as gun violence prevention means while again adding a monetary burden and serious disadvantage to law a biding citizens in the immediate face of danger. The people of Virginia do not support these policies that waste the time of politicians and money of the tax payer.

I oppose all of these unconstitutional bills.

HB 19 (McClure) requires forfeiture of firearm rights for a “dating relationship” misdemeanor. HB 21 (Helmer) allows civil lawsuits against firearm manufacturers and sellers for crimes committed with their products. HB 40 (Simon) outlaws unfinished frames and receivers unless serialized. HB 93 (Bennett-Parker) forces firearm surrender under protective orders in a way that could disarm innocent family members. HB 110 (Laufer) imposes a civil penalty and towing if a handgun is left in an unattended vehicle. HB 217 (Helmer) bans commonly owned firearms and standard-capacity magazines made after July 1, 2026. HB 229 (Hernandez) prohibits firearms and many knives in medical facilities. HB 626 (Callsen) restricts firearms on college campuses without lawful cause. HB 702 (Cole) establishes a firearm "turn-in and destroy" program funded by taxpayers. HB 871 (Downey) mandates specific storage requirements and biometric safes in homes with minors. HB 969 (Price) creates a state gun violence prevention agency focused solely on firearms. HB 1359 (Hope) creates a costly permit-to-purchase scheme with fingerprints, training requirements, and a de facto handgun registry. ALL of these bills are Unconstitutional and will cause Lawsuits and MASS NON COMPLIANCE

I oppose all these bills!

As a fellow virginian I am very disappointed in these outrageous bills proposed. They do nothing to stop criminals cause they don't follow rules or laws anyways it just hurts people trying to protect themselves from being hurt or God forbid something worse. I have lived in virginia my whole life and love this state but i also love the 2nd amendment and freedom to bear arms so please take in consideration myself and thousands of other virginian's that love the 2nd amendment and the state of Virginia and strike down these outrageous bills. Thank you for your time god bless the 2nd amendment and the state of Virginia!

All these bills are an infringement on our constitutional second amendment rights!

You ran as a middle of the road moderate ticket, and wanted to bring everyone together. all these bills go against that and alienate half of the state. You want bi partisan support? Well to get that you can not be going after law abiding citizens and take away a constitutionally protected right.

Hello, as a true Virginian whose family goes back to the founding of this state, country and fought in the revolutionary war. The anti gun bills being pushed on us are completely unconstitutional. My ancestors would be rolling in their graves right now knowing what you all are trying to do to our personal liberties, freedom and property. All of the anti gun legislation being pushed is not only unconstitutional but against previous Supreme Court rulings. You plan to turn over half of your state into criminals overnight for legally purchased items. So not only are you infringing on the 2nd Amendment but now on our 5th Amendment. 12 months in jail! Sounds like an 8th Amendment violation. True Virginians do not want these unconstitutional laws placed on us. Virginia is where freedom was won and not taken! I urge you all to vote against these unconstitutional bills. We are not California or New York. Our friends in Northern Virginia do not speak for all of Virginia anymore. My kindness regards. True Virginian.

These bills are ill-advised “solutions” in desperate search of largely non-existent problems. The 2nd amendment was quite clear. “Shall not be infringed” means exactly those words. These bills will only make law-abiding citizens less safe. Please actually consider your constituents safety instead of your partisan talking points.

I urge a vote against this, and any gun related bill, that would arguably restrict gun rights, or increase the cost of having,/buying firearms or ammunition, or create any kind of registry of such, of law abiding citizens of Virginia. Most of these bills would do nothing for saving lives, and criminals will not abide by them.

These anti-Second Amendment legislations violate the Second Amendment freedoms guaranteed by the United States Constitution and Virginia Constitution. These bills will not make Virginians safer. but will put us at risk for predatory criminals. Also, the Second Amendment wpuld protect us from a tyranical government. Who protects us from you? Do you so crave power that you must disatm us? Why do you hate fireams?

I oppose these bills. Limiting our right to defend ourselves will not reduce crime or make anyone safer, except violent criminals.

Dear Committee Chair, I am writing to respectfully urge you to OPPOSE these bills. These proposals place unconstitutional burdens on law-abiding citizens while failing to address the root causes of criminal misuse of firearms. Measures such as taxpayer-funded gun turn-in and destruction programs, knife and firearm bans at medical facilities, and magazine capacity restrictions unfairly target responsible gun owners in my community without demonstrable public safety benefits. I ask that you vote “NO” on this legislation and instead support policies that enforce existing laws and address criminal behavior, rather than restricting the rights of lawful citizens. Thank you for your time and consideration. Respectfully, Jan

My family and I hope you will reconsider all of these unconstitutional and tyrannical bills that seek to limit the God given right of citizens to defend themselves. Supporting these unconstitutional. bills as the Governor simultaneously supports the actions of Mr. Petti as a legal firearms owner, is indeed hypocrisy.

Good Morning. I respectfully oppose the following House Bills, which collectively place excessive burdens on law-abiding Virginians while offering little evidence of meaningful reductions in violent crime. These proposals raise serious concerns related to constitutional rights, due process, public safety, and cost. HB 19 (McClure) requires forfeiture of firearm rights for certain misdemeanors involving a broadly defined “dating relationship.” This imposes severe constitutional consequences without felony-level due process protections and relies on vague definitions prone to misuse. HB 21 (Helmer) allows civil lawsuits against firearm manufacturers and sellers for crimes committed with their products. This abandons long-standing liability principles by holding lawful businesses responsible for third-party criminal acts, increasing costs and reducing lawful access without improving public safety. HB 40 (Simon) criminalizes unfinished frames and receivers unless serialized, burdening lawful hobbyists and small manufacturers despite a lack of evidence that such items meaningfully drive crime. HB 93 (Bennett-Parker) mandates firearm surrender under protective orders in ways that may disarm innocent family members who are not accused of wrongdoing, undermining due process and property rights in shared households. HB 110 (Laufer) penalizes and allows towing of vehicles when a handgun is left unattended, even if secured. This may discourage lawful compliance with firearm-restricted locations by eliminating practical storage options. HB 217 (Helmer) bans commonly owned firearms and standard-capacity magazines manufactured after July 1, 2026. Such bans target arms in common lawful use and raise serious constitutional concerns while failing to address criminal misuse of existing firearms. HB 229 (Hernandez) prohibits firearms and many knives in medical facilities, removing lawful self-defense options from patients, visitors, and staff, including permit holders who have already undergone background checks. HB 626 (Callsen) restricts lawful firearm possession on college campuses, treating adult students and faculty as if they forfeit constitutional rights despite documented safety concerns and delayed emergency response times. HB 702 (Cole) establishes a taxpayer-funded firearm turn-in and destroy program with no demonstrated impact on violent crime, diverting resources from proven enforcement and prevention strategies. HB 871 (Downey) mandates specific storage methods and biometric safes in homes with minors, imposing costly, one-size-fits-all requirements that intrude into private homes and may delay access in emergencies. HB 969 (Price) creates a new state agency focused solely on firearms while ignoring broader contributors to violence such as repeat offenders, mental health access, and community-based interventions. HB 1359 (Hope) establishes a costly permit-to-purchase system with fingerprints, training mandates, and a de facto registry, creating delays and barriers to exercising a constitutional right without clear public safety benefits. Conclusion: Taken together, these bills represent a sweeping expansion of government control over lawful firearm ownership. They burden responsible citizens, weaken due process, and prioritize symbolic regulation over effective crime reduction. I urge the General Assembly to reject these measures and focus on enforcing existing laws and addressing violent criminal behavior.

Forum: These Bills are an attack on the lawful Citizen and will not stop the criminal element from doing harm. This has been proven time and time again. The intent of these Bills is to discourage the Citizenry from exercising their rights as protected by the US Constitution and the VA Constitution. These documents are explicit that our rights are being protected and not being given to us by the Govt. It is the Govt responsibility to protect our Bill of Rights and not to subvert them at the Federal and Local level. These bills seek to create a list and registry as forbidden by law. The declaration that all guns that are semi-automatic are "assault weapons" is absurd. The look of a gun does not define it as an assault weapon. These Bills have been stricken down by the highest court(s) in the land time and time again. The only reason for these bills is too attack the lawful citizen and will not do anything to stop the aggressor in his/her intent to do harm. There is significant history that illustrates that an armed populace in society is a peaceful and secure society. I respectfully oppose these Bills that attack the fundamental Bill of Rights that the Federal and State Constitutions protect. V/R, Mr. Charters

I stand with the VCDL and GOA. The proposed bills are tyrannical, these bills make it only harder on law abiding citizens. All gun laws are infringements on the Second Amendment. Just Remembering History” On April 21, 1775, Virginia’s Royal Governor, Lord Dunmore, ordered British marines to seize gunpowder from the Williamsburg powder magazine to prevent a colonial uprising. This "Gunpowder Incident" enraged colonists, leading to militia mobilization under Patrick Henry, forcing a payment for the powder and accelerating Virginia's march toward revolution. “

I oppose these bills because they are unconstitutional!!

I urge you not oppose all of these bills.

All of these bills pushing further gun control only hurt law abiding citizens and punish them for the actions of criminals. Further they aim to disarm potential victims in a lame attempt to establish “common sense” gun control that is anything but. California, Chicago, New York are the model for many of these bills and the evidence is clear that they are not effective and even harmful. If a criminal stole a car and drove it into a crowd of people, you wouldn’t hold the car’s owner responsible. You wouldn’t hold the vehicle’s manufacturer responsible. You wouldn’t pass a law that requires safe storage of vehicles. If someone exhibited a “red flag” you wouldn’t take aware their location driver’s license with no due process or investigation. We don’t do any of that because “common sense” says that it’s ridiculous. The difference between cars and firearms however is there is no Second Amendment for cars, which means that these laws make even less sense and are directly unconstitutional.

All of the aforementioned bills are a substantial attack the God given rights & the 2nd Amendment. These in fact are the opposite of good governance. How does the aforementioned reduce the size & scope of government? How does the aforementioned lead to affordability? There are no statistics that show a benefit to society! Furthermore the aforementioned will only lead to a higher government cost to the citizens while squashing the rights of the citizens!

HB-93: There are multiple problems with the bill as written. If a husband and wife co-own a shotgun for home defense, for example, and the husband gets a protective order issued against him, the wife would no longer have access to that co-owned shotgun. That punishes the wife and needlessly endangers her life. There is also the question of not allowing a person 18 to 20-years-old to retain the guns. A person in that age range can legally possess rifles, shotguns, and handguns. Young adults should be able to hold the guns. HB 1359: this is a poll tax. You will restrict the constitutional rights of minorities and the poor. Shame on you.

As a resident of York County I am opposed to the bills listed above and wish for them to be rejected by this committee.

As a Virginian, I am completely opposed to HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB626, HB702, HB871, HB969, and HB1359. Similar ideas have been tried in the past in other states, and have been proven not to reduce any crime, but only serve to unnecessarily burden law-abiding citizens in the lawful exercise of their Second-Amendment rights. If "common sense" were used to try to reduce violent crime, it would be completely obvious that inanimate objects, can, by themselves, do nothing. The sole responsibility lies in the hands of the person who commits the crime, not in what object they chose to use in the perpetration of the crime. The focus of "public safety" initiatives should be keeping violent criminals off the streets, not limiting citizens of their Constitutionally -protected rights. I do not appreciate my tax dollars being used to advance this agenda, and then being further used to try to defend it in the inevitable litigation of these infringements on Virginian's rights. Thank you for your time.

All Anti-Gun bills are Unconstitutional and Impede Citizens' right to Self Defense. We, the residents of the Commonwealth of Virginia OPPOSE any and all of these and will fight each and every one of themthem

As a fellow Virginian, I urge you to please OPPOSE "gun control" bills in your committee. Concepts like an "assault weapons" ban, arbitrary magazine restrictions, "reasonable standards" for firearms businesses, and a "permit to purchase," just to name a few, do nothing to address crime in the Commonwealth. Criminals do not abide by the law, and bills like these only target law-abiding firearm owners and businesses. The General Assembly should instead pursue legislation that holds criminals accountable for their crimes, not legislation that creates new criminals overnight for lawful purchases. Many of the bills proposed have already been declared unconstitutional by multiple Supreme Court decisions. Most others are likely to be struct down in future court proceedings. Again, I urge you to OPPOSE gun control in your committee. Thank you for all that you do for Virginia. Respectfully, Mark Salamone

Unconstitutional. What part of shall not be infringed is misunderstood?

I firmly oppose any laws or policies that infringe upon my Second Amendment rights. I believe the right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental constitutional protection, and I do not support legislation that restricts law‑abiding citizens from exercising that right. Tucker Ophof Bristow, VA 20136

Stop all bills restricting our Second Amendment rights.

I strongly oppose this bill. HB 93

I appose this bill.

My name is Cole Zerrenner, and I am a registered voter residing in Ashburn, Loudoun County, Virginia. I respectfully submit this written testimony in opposition to the following bills scheduled before the House Public Safety – Firearms Subcommittee: HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB626, HB702, HB871, HB969, HB1300, HB1303, and HB1359. I oppose these bills because, taken individually and collectively, they impose additional restrictions and penalties on law-abiding citizens while failing to meaningfully address criminal misuse of firearms or the underlying causes of violence. Many of these proposals expand prohibitions, create new compliance burdens, or rely on vague standards that raise concerns regarding due process, inconsistent enforcement, and unintended consequences. Several of the bills before the subcommittee emphasize preemptive restrictions or broad prohibitions rather than focusing on enforcement of existing laws, accountability for criminal conduct, or effective mental health interventions. Policies that reduce procedural safeguards or delay the exercise of constitutional rights risk undermining public confidence without clear evidence of improved public safety outcomes. I respectfully urge the subcommittee to consider whether these measures meaningfully target criminal behavior or instead primarily impact responsible Virginians who already comply with the law. Public safety is best served through targeted enforcement, due process protections, and policies that address root causes rather than symbolic or duplicative restrictions. Thank you for the opportunity to submit written testimony for the public record and for your consideration of my views. Respectfully submitted, Cole Zerrenner Ashburn, Loudoun County, Virginia

First and foremost, I fully support any comments made by Virginia Citizens Defense League, The NRA, and Gun Owners of America in regard to support for the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. As a fellow Virginian, I urge you to please OPPOSE "gun control" bills in your committee. Concepts like an "assault weapons" ban, arbitrary magazine restrictions, "reasonable standards" for firearms businesses, and a "permit to purchase," just to name a few, do nothing to address crime in the Commonwealth. Criminals do not abide by the law, and bills like these only target law-abiding firearm owners and businesses. The General Assembly should instead pursue legislation that holds criminals accountable for their crimes, not legislation that creates new criminals overnight for lawful purchases. A lot of these proposed bills are unconstitutional and may even be a civil rights violation due to the fact that they most certainly will disproportionally have a negative effect on minorities, women, and people of lower income and certainly violating an 18–20 year-old persons 2nd Amendment right to own and bear arms. If they have to work and pay taxes and be held accountable as an adult you can't legally deny them any rights under the constitution. Many of these proposed bills have already successfully been challenged at the U.S. Supreme court in rulings supporting the 2nd amendment. Examples cases- v Heller and v Bruen, so you are intentionally trying to pass bills that will not hold up in court and wasting valuable taxpayer money to pursue these bills. Again, I urge you to OPPOSE gun control in your committee. Thank you for all that you do for Virginia. Sincerely, Chris McDorman

Why I Oppose Each Bill below: HB 19 – Opposition: Punishes a non‑violent misdemeanor unrelated to firearms. Violates: Heller (2008); Hayes (4th Cir. 2009) – proportionality; Bruen (2022) – no historical basis for such a blanket ban. HB 21 – Opposition: Imposes strict liability for third‑party crimes, chilling lawful commerce. Violates: Heller (2008); Printz (1997) – cannot commandeer private actors; Bruen (2022) – no historic analogue. HB 40 – Opposition: Criminalizes already‑lawful homemade components and deprives property without compensation. Violates: Heller (2008); Miller (1939) – regulation must have a reasonable safety link; Bruen (2022); Lucas (1992) – takings. HB 93 – Opposition: Overbroad removal punishes lawful spouses and 18‑20‑year‑olds who may already possess firearms. Violates: Heller (2008); McDonald (2010); Bruen (2022) – age‑restriction lacks history; Carpenter (2018) – vague “if officer believes” standard violates due process. HB 110 – Opposition: Penalizes mere visibility and treats the gun as property that can be seized without due process. Violates: Heller (2008); Jones (2012) – towing = unlawful seizure; Bruen (2022) – no historic precedent. HB 217 – Opposition: Bars weapons in common lawful use and imposes capacity limits without historical support. Violates: Heller (2008); Bruen (2022); Miller v. Bonta (9th Cir. 2021). HB 229 – Opposition: Prevents lawful armed visitors in public medical settings without a narrow justification. Violates: Heller (2008); Bruen (2022); Katz (1967) – potential Fourth‑Amendment search issues. HB 626 – Opposition: Denies adult students the right to self‑defense on public campuses. Violates: Heller (2008); Bruen (2022); Washington v. Davis (1976) – lacks rational basis. HB 702 – Opposition: Authorizes confiscation/destruction of lawfully owned property without compensation or due process. Violates: Heller (2008); Kelo (2005) – takings require just compensation; Bruen (2022) - no historic precedent. HB 871 – Opposition: Expensive, tech‑exclusive requirement makes lawful loaded storage impracticable. Violates: Heller (2008); Bruen (2022); Willowbrook v. Olech (2000) – overinclusive impact on owners with minors. HB 969 – Opposition: Single‑issue agency risks viewpoint discrimination and may enable firearm‑specific regulations lacking constitutional footing. Violates: Heller (2008); Bruen (2022); Mathews v. Eldridge (1976) – inadequate procedural due process. HB 1359 – Opposition: Creates costly, time‑consuming barriers that effectively deny the right to acquire firearms for lawful purposes. Violates: Heller (2008); Bruen (2022); McDonald (2010); Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections (1966) – fee structure resembles a poll tax. The Virginia Constitution’s Article I § 16 protects an individual’s right to keep and bear arms, and the state Supreme Court requires any limitation to be narrowly tailored, historically grounded, and consistent with due‑process (§ 13) and takings (§ 14) protections. The bills listed: HB 19, 93, 110, 871 (mandatory surrenders/penalties); HB 21, 40, 1359 (civil‑liability or costly licensing); HB 217, 229, 626, 702 (bans on common‑use firearms or accessories); and HB 969 (a gun‑only state agency)—all impose restrictions without a clear historical analogue, over‑reach permissible regulation, and create undue financial or procedural burdens. Consequently, they conflict with Virginia’s constitutional guarantees.

I SUPPORT HB1303. A right delayed is a right denied. I OPPOSE HB19: Misdemeanors should not remove rights. I OPPOSE HB21: How could a firearm accessory seller reasonably know if they were selling a gun sling to a prohibited person? Should a car parts store be sued if they sold a seat cover for a car used in a bank robbery? I OPPOSE HB40: Even a chunk of aluminum, if sold to the public to become a frame or receiver once completed, must be serialized under this bill. The bill doesn’t grandfather existing homemade firearms. This bill is unconstitutional under Bruen. Homemade guns have been legal since before the United States existed. I OPPOSE HB93: There are multiple problems with the bill as written. If a husband and wife co-own a shotgun for home defense, for example, and the husband gets a protective order issued against him, the wife would no longer have access to that co-owned shotgun. That punishes the wife and needlessly endangers her life. Also, a person 18-20yo can legally possess rifles, shotguns, and handguns. Others right can not be removed because of the actions of another. I OPPOSE HB110: The car owner should not be at fault even if a criminal opens an unlocked car door to steal a firearm. It is the criminal who is solely to blame. I OPPOSE HB217: The U.S. Supreme Court has said in both DC v Heller, and recently in Bruen, that any firearm “in common use” is protected by the 2A. The guns and magazines targeted by this bill are among the most common guns and magazines in the US & VA, making this bill unconstitutional. I OPPOSE HB229: Disarming visitors and guests, including concealed handgun permit holders, at such facilities violates their right to protect themselves in an emergency. A U.S. District Court in the 2nd Circuit has restrained enforcement of just such a law for being unconstitutional under Bruen. I OPPOSE HB626: A solution in search of a problem. Higher education students and staff are adults and have a right to self-defense. I OPPOSE HB702: Destroying what might be perfectly functional, and possibly quite valuable, firearms is a waste of money. The State could offset any costs by selling the firearms to licensed gun dealers through an auction. This program is a “turn in” and not a “give-back” program, the government never owned them. I OPPOSE HB871: Biometric safes are more expensive than non-biometric safes. Biometric safes can be unreliable when being used under stress and they also require batteries to work. There are plenty of other locking mechanisms for safes that are more secure. I OPPOSE HB969: The Center would only be targeting violence committed using firearms and ignoring the root causes of crime, as well as all the other ways violence is inflicted on victims – knives, blunt objects, hands and feet, etc. Half of violent crimes are not committed with a firearm! I OPPOSE HB1359: This bill WILL get innocent people killed, as it will take at least two months before a person can purchase their first firearm. If they are purchasing that firearm for urgent self-defense, that is simply too long. The price to get a permit, is not equitable. Even citizens with CHPs will be limited to one handgun a month. Local law-enforcement will be handed a registry of gun owners. And gun rentals at shooting ranges will not be possible for people who have not yet got their permit or are visiting from out of state or from another country. It is sickening to see this bill even proposed.

This document breaks down my reasoning for supporting these bills.

I SUPPORT THIS BILL

Disarming the law-abiding, tax-paying citizenry of the Commonwealth is going to drive me away from this state. Stop creating unconstitutional efforts that curtail my Rights as an American Citizen. If you want to change the Right, then change the Constitution through the amendment process. Otherwise, focus on what you can really change and fund. Schools and roads. Quit wasting my hard earned money that I spend on local businesses that keep Virginians employed. I am not the only one who will vote with my feet. I left California for a reason...not you're trying to re-create it on the East coast.

Too many people with guns that shouldn’t be with guns. I know lazy gun owners who have had their items stolen. Lazy gun owners might as well be donating their legal firearms to criminals- putting them in dangerous hands should have more severe consequences. Adam T. lost his life protecting someone in a situation that could’ve been avoided if weapons weren’t involved. More strict gun laws will result in fewer cases of gun violence like this.

I SUPPORT HB93 Under the current law: Any person convicted of assaulting a family member is prohibited from possessing a firearm. When a court issues a protective order against an abuser to protect someone from family abuse or an act of violence the abuser is prohibited from possessing a firearm as long as the protective order remains in effect. The abuser is required to surrender their weapon to court, or transfer it to another person. HB93 would prohibit the abuser from transferring their guns to anyone who currently lives with the abuser (helping ensure the abuser does not have access to that weapon). HB93 would also prohibit the abuser from transferring their gun to someone under the age of 21. On August 2, 2025, my friend, Adam Turck, while deescalating a domestic dispute, became the victim of gun violence. Adam saved a life that day, but tragically lost his own. This occurred on a neighborhood street in Richmond, VA -- in broad day light. The shooter then turned the firearm on himself, ending another life. Had this bill been in effect, there is a strong chance that no lives would have been lost that day. We count on lawmakers such as yourselves to pass effective gun safety laws like HB93 and save these lives BEFORE tragedy strikes. Before we lose our innocent. Before we lose our heroes. This law is designed to save lives. I SUPPORT IT. This law is designed to protect the abused. I SUPPORT IT.

I support these bills to prevent gun violence in Virginia. Attached is the story of my friend Adam Turck’s tragic death due to gun violence in August 2025, and why the Friends of Adam Turck are choosing to support these five bills. Virginians like Adam have a right to be kind and brave without being killed, and it is the job of the state to guarantee that right.

Its is vital to the safety of the community that these bills be passed. on August 2, 2025 not to far from the capital building, one of my best friends, Adam Turck, was shot and killed on a beautiful Saturday morning trying to help a woman in the middle of a domestic violence altercation. The individual who shot him was a 19 year old boy who illegally had a gun. There were several eye witnesses and 2 recordings of the event that showed that Adam did everything right in remaining calm and attempting to defuse the situation, but that was not enough. Adam was a brave, kind and caring person. He would never be able to leave someone in need, but if these laws had been in place, he may never have had to step in in this situation. His lose has devastated our community and that is why we have come together to make sure these bills get passed. I know that the situations are not unique, as tragic as that is... and something needs to be done. Please vote yes.

HB 110 I SUPPORT this bill. HB 110 prohibits leaving a handgun visible in an unattended vehicle on public property. Simply put, it requires gun owners to store the firearm out of sight—such as in the glove compartment, center console —to prevent it from being readily observable from outside. This requirement is straightforward and not onerous for responsible gun owners. Many already take this basic precaution. HB 110 will help deter gun thefts from vehicles—a major source of stolen firearms entering criminal hands. HB 110 is a reasonable, narrowly tailored measure that promotes public safety without infringing on lawful gun ownership. HB19 I SUPPORT this bill. Under current Virginia law, a person convicted of misdemeanor assault against a family or household member is prohibited from possessing a firearm. This protection currently only applies primarily to spouses, ex-spouses or those with a child in common. It does not fully cover other intimate partners. There is no reasonable basis to treat violence against a dating partner differently from violence against a spouse when it comes to preventing harm from firearms. Those convicted of domestic assault should be prohibited from possessing firearms, full stop. HB 19 is a targeted, limited expansion of existing law. It closes the dangerous “boyfriend loophole” by extending the firearm prohibition to misdemeanor convictions for assault and battery against an intimate partner. This common-sense measure will help protect victims and the Commonwealth’s citizens. HB 93 I SUPPORT this bill. Under current Virginia law, individuals subject to a protective order or convicted of misdemeanor domestic assault are prohibited from possessing firearms. However, there is no clear mechanism to ensure these prohibited individuals actually relinquish their guns, leaving survivors at continued risk. HB 93 creates a straightforward enforcement mechanism for laws already on the books. It is targeted, limited in scope, and focused on protecting survivors of domestic violence by reducing the risk of armed abusers. This common-sense measure will help safeguard the Commonwealth’s citizens without creating new prohibitions. HB 21 SUPPORT this bill. HB 21 would require firearm industry members—manufacturers, distributors, importers, and sellers—to implement “reasonable procedures, safeguards, and business practices” to prevent the sale or distribution of firearms to prohibited persons, straw purchasers (those buying for someone barred from ownership), firearm traffickers, or anyone the seller has reasonable cause to believe poses a substantial risk of gun violence or self-harm. Firearm manufacturers and distributors handle a uniquely dangerous product. Like sellers of any potentially hazardous good, they should maintain reasonable safeguards to protect the public from negligent or reckless business practices that endanger Virginians. HB 1359 I SUPPORT this bill. HB 1359 would require any person who purchases a firearm to present a valid firearms purchaser license issued by the Department of State Police. as we require vehicle owners to obtain and maintain a license before driving a car, we should require gun owners to obtain and maintain a license before possessing a firearm. Attached is information about my friend Adam, who was a victim of gun violence last year.

My friend Adam was killed late last year helping save someone from violence committed by their partner. The perpetrator pulled a gun out of his backpack and shot Adam, then turned the gun on himself. Any one of these bills could have played a role in ensuring this did not happen, and saved so many people from devastating loss. I urge you to pass these bills.

As a concerned resident, parent, and active voter, I support this bill to keep Virginians safe from gun violence.

In summary, I support House Bills 19, 93, 110, 201, 691, 696, 702, 871, 901, 909, 969, 1303, and 1359. I oppose House Bills 21, 40, 207, 217, 229, 626, 700, 907, 919. Please refer to my attached document for further explanation.

As a father, I want to raise my child in a world where doing the right thing doesn't put them in danger. My friend Adam did the right thing. He stepped in to help someone who was in a bad situation, and that decision—one he made with clear eyes and a full heart for humanity—cost him his life. While I appreciate that many constituents in this state are opposed to any restrictions on their 2nd amendment rights, there are many more who support reasonable efforts to restrict access to firearms and penalize those who are careless with the weapons they own. We cannot say with any certainty that the passing of bills like HB 19 or HB 110 would have prevented Adam's death, but we can they will save others' in the future. And that's worth fighting for.

I SUPPORT this bill. HB 93 creates a straightforward enforcement mechanism for laws already on the books (surrender, sell, transfer). It is targeted, limited in scope, and focused on protecting survivors of domestic violence by reducing the risk of armed abusers. This common-sense measure will help safeguard the Commonwealth’s citizens without creating new prohibitions. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. Attached is the leave-behind from the Friends of Adam Turck, who was murdered protecting a neighbor from their abuser.

I am writing in memory of my friend Adam Turck, who was murdered with a .22 caliber handgun in Shockoe Bottom in August 2025. I support the following bills because I believe they will go a long way toward ensuring that what happened to Adam doesn't happen again. HB110: I SUPPORT this bill. HB 110 prohibits leaving a handgun visible in an unattended vehicle on public property. Simply put, it requires gun owners to store the firearm out of sight—such as in the glove compartment, center console —to prevent it from being readily observable from outside. This requirement is straightforward and not onerous for responsible gun owners. Many already take this basic precaution. Importantly, HB 110 will help deter gun thefts from vehicles—a major source of stolen firearms entering criminal hands. I want to stress that I support this bill, but not the similar bill being considered by the Senate, because it imposes a civil fine instead of a criminal penalty. HB 110 is a reasonable, narrowly tailored measure that promotes public safety without infringing on lawful gun ownership. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. HB19 I SUPPORT this bill. Under current Virginia law, a person convicted of misdemeanor assault against a family or household member is prohibited from possessing a firearm. However, this protection currently only applies primarily to spouses, ex-spouses or those with a child in common. It does not fully cover other intimate partners. There is no reasonable basis to treat violence against a dating partner differently from violence against a spouse when it comes to preventing harm from firearms. HB 19 is a targeted, limited expansion of existing law. It closes the dangerous “boyfriend loophole” by extending the firearm prohibition to misdemeanor convictions for assault and battery against an intimate partner. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. HB38 Under current Virginia law, individuals subject to a protective order or convicted of misdemeanor domestic assault are prohibited from possessing firearms. However, there is no clear mechanism to ensure these prohibited individuals actually relinquish their guns, leaving survivors at continued risk. HB 93 addresses this gap. The bill also notifies the individual that law enforcement may seek a search warrant if there's reason to believe firearms have not been relinquished. HB 93 creates a straightforward enforcement mechanism for laws already on the books. It is targeted, limited in scope, and focused on protecting survivors of domestic violence by reducing the risk of armed abusers. This common-sense measure will help safeguard the Commonwealth’s citizens without creating new prohibitions. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. HB21 I SUPPORT this bill. HB 21 would require firearm industry members to implement “reasonable procedures, safeguards, and business practices” to prevent the sale or distribution of firearms to prohibited persons, straw purchasers, firearm traffickers, or anyone the seller has reasonable cause to believe poses a substantial risk of gun violence or self-harm. In short, this bill establishes basic standards of responsible conduct and makes it easier to hold the industry accountable for reckless practices that fuel illegal gun trafficking, straw purchases, or other harms in our communities. This is a targeted, common-sense step toward greater accountability and safer communities. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill.

I SUPPORT this bill. Under current Virginia law, individuals subject to a protective order or convicted of misdemeanor domestic assault are prohibited from possessing firearms. However, there is no clear mechanism to ensure these prohibited individuals actually relinquish their guns, leaving survivors at continued risk. HB 93 addresses this gap by requiring the prohibited person to promptly: (a) surrender the firearm(s) to law enforcement, (b) sell them to a licensed firearms dealer, or (c) transfer or sell them to another person who is legally allowed to possess firearms, is at least 21 years old, does not live with the prohibited person, and provide proof of the transfer (including transferee details) to the court. The bill also notifies the individual that law enforcement may seek a search warrant if there's reason to believe firearms have not been relinquished. HB 93 creates a straightforward enforcement mechanism for laws already on the books. It is targeted, limited in scope, and focused on protecting survivors of domestic violence by reducing the risk of armed abusers. This common-sense measure will help safeguard the Commonwealth’s citizens without creating new prohibitions. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill.

Comments Document

I SUPPORT THIS BILL.

I SUPPORT this bill. Under current Virginia law, individuals subject to a protective order or convicted of misdemeanor domestic assault are prohibited from possessing firearms. However, there is no clear mechanism to ensure these prohibited individuals actually relinquish their guns, leaving survivors at continued risk. HB 93 addresses this gap by requiring the prohibited person to promptly: (a) surrender the firearm(s) to law enforcement, (b) sell them to a licensed firearms dealer, or (c) transfer or sell them to another person who is legally allowed to possess firearms, is at least 21 years old, does not live with the prohibited person, and provide proof of the transfer (including transferee details) to the court. The bill also notifies the individual that law enforcement may seek a search warrant if there's reason to believe firearms have not been relinquished. HB 93 creates a straightforward enforcement mechanism for laws already on the books. It is targeted, limited in scope, and focused on protecting survivors of domestic violence by reducing the risk of armed abusers. This common-sense measure will help safeguard the Commonwealth’s citizens without creating new prohibitions. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill.

I SUPPORT HB21, HB93, and HB110. These bills are common sense gun legislature and would help keep countless Virginians safe.

Comments Document

I support these Bills

HB 110 – Firearm in unattended vehicle; civil penalties I SUPPORT this bill. HB 110 is a reasonable, narrowly tailored measure that promotes public safety without infringing on lawful gun ownership. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. HB19 – Purchase, possession, or transportation of firearm; assault and battery of a family or household member or intimate partner; penalties I SUPPORT this bill. HB 19 is a targeted, limited expansion of existing law. It closes the dangerous “boyfriend loophole” by extending the firearm prohibition to misdemeanor convictions for assault and battery against an intimate partner. This common-sense measure will help protect victims and the Commonwealth’s citizens. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. HB 93 – Firearms; transfers to another person from a prohibited person I SUPPORT this bill. HB 93 creates a straightforward enforcement mechanism for laws already on the books. It is targeted, limited in scope, and focused on protecting survivors of domestic violence by reducing the risk of armed abusers. This common-sense measure will help safeguard the Commonwealth’s citizens without creating new prohibitions. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. HB21 – Firearm industry members; creates standards of responsible conduct, civil liability (available here) I SUPPORT this bill. This is a targeted, common-sense step toward greater accountability and safer communities. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. HB 1359 – Firearm purchase requirements; penalties (available here) I SUPPORT this bill. HB 1359 would require any person who purchases a firearm to present a valid firearms purchaser license issued by the Department of State Police. This bill would have three large practical impacts: (i) Prohibit possession of firearms by anyone under age 21; (ii) require regular firearms safety training for all licensed owners to promote responsible handling and storage (iii) create a de facto waiting period: Individuals could not purchase a firearm without first obtaining a license, a process that can take up to 45 days. This would help reduce impulsive purchases that can lead to irreversible harm in our communities. Just as we require vehicle owners to obtain and maintain a license before driving a car, we should require gun owners to obtain and maintain a license before possessing a firearm. This is a targeted, common-sense step toward greater accountability and safer communities. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill.

Comments Document

I support these bills.

I stand strongly with the VCDL on these proposed laws. VA has always been a bipartisan state on gun issues, and although the second amendment has may purposes- it must be preserved to protect the citizens of this state. Overreaching federal law enforcement, and all threats domestic and foreign are kept in line by responsible firearm ownership. Gun control also impacts lower income groups, impoverished populations, and people of color disproportionately. We must preserve the 2nd amendment.

As a concerned parent and Virginian, I support these bills.

I strongly oppose this bill.

I am writing to express my strong opposition to the recently proposed bills on gun control. While I understand the intent behind these bills—to enhance public safety—I firmly believe that they will have unintended consequences that infringe on the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens. The Second Amendment guarantees "the right of individuals to keep and bear arms", and it is a fundamental part of what makes this country free. These bills being proposed would place unnecessary and burdensome restrictions on responsible gun owners, making it harder for Virginians to exercise their rights in a lawful and safe manner. Rather than focusing on restricting access to firearms, I urge the General Assembly to consider measures that target criminals and illegal activities, such as enforcing stricter penalties for those who use firearms in the commission of crimes, or improving background checks for gun purchases. It is essential to address the root causes of violence, such as mental health issues and gang-related activity, rather than punishing responsible gun owners who follow the law. Furthermore, these proposed bills could create significant logistical challenges for gun owners, particularly those who rely on their firearms for self-defense, hunting, or recreational activities. The financial burden and potential legal ramifications of complying with these new regulations would be overwhelming for many Virginians. I strongly urge you to reconsider these proposals and to focus on policies that protect both our rights and our communities. I trust that you will make the best decision for all Virginians, and I sincerely hope that you will oppose these bills.

We SUPPORT this bill, as it strengthens protections for domestic violence survivors.

HB110, Del. Laufer (D): This bill will save lives by eliminating provisions allowing any person to store their firearms in their car and preventing firearms from being stolen from cars. I SUPPORT this bill as half of all stolen guns are ones that are stolen from a car, and half of all crimes committed with a gun have a stolen gun used. This is a straightforward way to reduce these crimes and gun violence. HB19, Del. McClure (D): I SUPPORT this bill as it expands critical protections to additional relationship categories. This is a critical step to ensuring that more individuals are protected from domestic violence and gun violence. HB21, Del. Helmer (D): I SUPPORT this bill as industry accountability is a great way to force manufacturers to raise standards of safety. Firearm manufacturers and distributors must be held accountable for reckless behavior and practices that make our communities less safe. HB229, Del. Hernandez (D): I SUPPORT this bill and commonsense restrictions on gun access and believe in protecting the safety of our medical care providers. HB24, Del. Helmer (D): I SUPPORT this bill as visitors wishing to carry concealed handguns in Virginia should meet the same level of safety requirements that we require of our state’s residents. HB40, Del. Simon (D): I SUPPORT this bill as it would make it easier to prosecute and prevent crimes committed by ghost guns. HB626, Del. Callsen (D): I SUPPORT extending the protection of k-12 schools to our institutions of higher education. HB702, Del. Cole (D): I SUPPORT this bill as currently it can be incredibly difficult to find a way to get a gun destroyed that you no longer want or has come into your possession through something like inheritance. The public benefits from the creation of more drop-off point for individuals, of their own free will, to relinquish firearms to be destroyed. HB700, Hayes (D): I SUPPORT this bill as waiting periods provide law enforcement additional time to perform an accurate background check and create a “cooling off” period to prevent acts of violence or suicide attempts. HB93, Bennett-Parker: I SUPPORT this bill, as it strengthens protections for domestic violence survivors. We must establish a clear process to separate a person from their firearms who has been convicted of a domestic violence offense, or who is subject to a protective order.

Adam Turck was shot and killed in August of 2025 when he saw someone in trouble and intervened to help. He was in his early 30's and beloved in both the theater and weightlifting community here in RVA. Lets not make his loss of life be in vain. Gun ownership is already at an all time high, so it makes sense to enact laws that reflect that. These four bills are not trying to take away anyone's guns. They are trying to create deterrents to tragic events like the one that happened to Adam. Please dont be swayed by the ugly rhetoric that I have read in some of the comments. We can enact a few common sense gun safety laws without people fearing that their guns will be taken away. That is an old argument and one that is never going to be realized. So lets move on from that and do what we can to ensure the public safety as much as possible. Thanks for your consideration of: HB 93, HB 702, HB 110, and HB 19

I support HB93 because it establishes a clear process to separate individuals convicted of domestic violence offenses — or subject to protective orders — from their firearms. This bill strengthens protections for survivors and helps prevent further harm.

In 2021, my elderly stepmother shot through a closed door during an argument with my elderly father, striking him in the back and paralyzing him. My father has spent the past five years in extreme physical agony, unable to walk, paying caretakers out of pocket to hoist him in and out of bed, unable to care for himself. The lack of movement in his life has led to horrific bed sores, which become bone infections, which lead to extended hospital stays and a horrible quality of life. All this because my stepmother was allowed to have a gun. There are countless stories like this of the bullet's aftermath: of the lifelong physical and mental damage that comes from guns. It has been a horrific five years, full of physical pain and mental anguish for our entire family. I wouldn't wish this on anyone. The bills before you now will not only save lives, they will spare whole swaths of our neighborhoods from needing to deal with these horrors. One bullet, lodged in my father's spine, didn't kill him. Instead, it has shattered the life he had, his ability to work and care for himself, and his family. Each bullet we allow in our communities has the ability to do the same. His care has bankrupted him personally, and now he relies on state care and Medicaid, an avoidable burden on taxpayers. There are numerous reasons guns have no place in our society, and I hope my father's story is just one that helps make change. Please support all bills that make guns harder to access, harder to keep. Please do everything you can to keep guns out of the hands of our society. Thank you for the great work you are doing to keep Virginians safe.

Establish a clear process to separate a person from their firearms who has been convicted of a domestic violence offense, or who is subject to a protective order. We SUPPORT this bill, as it strengthens protections for domestic violence survivors.

I am writing to oppose the current slate of firearm restriction bills before the General Assembly. While these proposals are framed as public safety measures, in practice they disproportionately harm marginalized Virginians — including racial minorities, LGBTQ+ individuals (especially trans people), immigrants, and low-income residents — who often face higher risks of targeted violence and slower or unequal police response. These bills add costs, delays, and bureaucratic hurdles to exercising a fundamental right. Increased fees, mandatory waiting periods, feature bans, and expanded disqualifications fall hardest on people with limited financial resources, unstable work schedules, or justified concerns about their personal safety. For many vulnerable individuals, the ability to lawfully and promptly acquire a firearm is not about ideology, but about self-defense. History shows that restrictive gun laws are most aggressively enforced in minority communities, amplifying disparities in arrests, prosecution, and legal exposure — even when no harm has occurred. Expanding civil liability, criminal penalties, and subjective risk standards increases that risk. Public safety should not come at the expense of civil rights or equal access to self-protection. Policies that price people out of their rights or delay lawful self-defense do not address the root causes of violence and instead leave the most vulnerable less safe. I respectfully urge you to oppose these bills and support approaches that protect both public safety and the rights of all Virginians, regardless of income, identity, or background. Thank you for your time and consideration.

I support this bill as the data and evidence show that it will reduce harm and deaths from guns. Taking this measure will ensure that guns are used responsibly and only for the intended consequences. Owning a gun is a serious responsibility and measures like this must be put into action as currently they are being misused and causing an epidemic in this country. Guns are the #1 killer of children and teens in the United States. When the impact of an item causes so much harm, measures must be put into place to protect people, especially children.

I support the following bills because guns are the number one cause of death for children in our commonwealth and our nation. HB 110 will help reduce the number of gun thefts from cars, and these thefts are on the rise. Additionally, we need to close the boyfriend loophole from domestic violence offenders (HB19).

These proposed bills are clear and direct violations of our 2nd Amendment Constitutional right. Virginia has been an upstanding example of bi-partisan gun ownership since its birth as a Commonwealth. At a time when many other constitutional rights are being directly challenged by the Federal Government, with little resistance from the Supreme Court & Congress, it is extremely ignorant and out of touch for Virginia representatives to even consider passing these unconstitutional bills. Whether it is Republicans or Democrats it seems our rights are being pinched away, piece by piece. I ask our representatives and Governor to use "common sense" and not pass these blatant violations to our guaranteed constitutional right. You representatives cannot simply pick and choose which constitutional amendments apply to citizens or we may as well not have a constitution at all.

I submit this comment in opposition to HB93. The bill tightens transfer and surrender rules for persons prohibited by protective orders or a qualifying conviction, adding (1) a categorical 21‑and‑over requirement for any transferee, (2) a no‑same‑residence rule, (3) a mandatory reporting obligation to the clerk naming and obtaining the signature of the transferee/FFL/law‑enforcement agency, and (4) advisement of search‑warrant exposure if an officer believes firearms remain in the person’s possession. I. Due Process and Overbreadth Protective orders are often civil, frequently issued ex parte at the outset, and can rest on preponderance findings. HB93 layers new custodial burdens that go well beyond disarmament during the order’s pendency. The bill requires the prohibited person to identify and document a third party by name, address, and signature with the court and warns of warrant exposure based on an officer’s belief that not all firearms were relinquished. Those mandates operate irrespective of bad faith or risk behavior, and they expand state leverage without tailoring to imminent danger. That is overbroad. The added reporting and signature‑capture transform a temporary disability into an intrusive registry of private parties who have committed no offense, while the warrant advisement risks normalizing searches on thin predicates. None of these expansions is necessary to accomplish the already‑lawful objective of removing firearms from a prohibited person during the order. II. Disparate Impact and Practical Harm HB93’s 21‑plus transferee rule and no‑co‑residence rule will predictably harm households that rely on shared firearms for lawful defense. In a common scenario, a spouse co‑owns a home‑defense shotgun; HB93 would bar transfer to that co‑owner if she resides in the same dwelling, and would bar transfer to a trusted adult family member aged 18–20 despite lawful possession otherwise. This increases storage and transportation costs, exposes families to longer periods without lawful access, and disproportionately burdens lower‑income households and minority communities that lack nearby FFLs or off‑site storage. III. Redundancy and Alternatives Existing Virginia law already prohibits possession by the respondent during the order period and authorizes surrender to law enforcement or transfer consistent with law. HB93 adds procedural tripwires—age, residency, paperwork, and warrant advisement—without evidence that these added hurdles reduce violence. More focused approaches exist: prompt hearings with clear notice, narrow and reviewable surrender logistics, and strict sanctions for proven noncompliance. Those tools directly address risk while respecting due process. HB93 turns a temporary civil disability into an expansive administrative control regime that risks selective enforcement and disparate household harms, while offering no evidence‑based gains in safety. I respectfully urge the Committee to oppose HB93. Respectfully submitted.

I am writing to oppose this legislation as a proud Virginia resident. This legislation will have no effect on public safety and will only provide an undue burden on the law abiding residents of Virginia. Other states have tried these methods and have shown no drastic reduction in gun violence. Instead, this merely prevents law abiding Virginians from fully exercising their constitutional rights. And it is clearly a constitutional right of both our nation and the state. It is the only amendment where “shall not be infringed” is expressly stated. Under the recent New York vs Bruen decision, there must be historical precedent for it to be constitutional of which there is none especially none that are not based in racist ideologies. I urge my delegates to vote no on this legislation and will be allocating my vote accordingly.

As a representative of r/VAGuns, a popular online community of Virginia gun owners on the social media platform Reddit, we fully and unanimously endorse this bill and others like it that promote common-sense gun laws. Our community stands united in support of the recent legislation being passed in the General Assembly, which aims to protect and strengthen our neighborhoods while respecting the rights of responsible gun owners. These bills represent practical, balanced measures that help safeguard our community, and r/VAGuns proudly backs these efforts to promote safety and responsibility across Virginia.

I support this bill because requiring abusers to turn in guns after a conviction ensures they can’t keep weapons they already have at home and use them to do more harm.

Sunshine

I am writing to express my strong opposition to the anti-gun bills scheduled for consideration in your subcommittee meeting on January 29, 2026. As a law-abiding citizen who values the rights enshrined in the United States Constitution, particularly the Second Amendment, I urge you to vote against these measures that infringe upon the fundamental right to keep and bear arms. The Second Amendment guarantees the right of the people to keep and bear arms, a right that shall not be infringed. These bills, including but not limited to HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB702, HB871, HB969, and HB1359, represent direct assaults on this constitutional protection. They impose unnecessary restrictions on firearm ownership, possession, and transfer that disproportionately burden responsible gun owners while doing nothing to address the root causes of crime. It is a well-established fact that criminals, by definition, do not obey laws. Measures like bans on certain firearms (HB217), mandatory storage requirements (HB871), prohibitions on unserialized firearms (HB40), and penalties for leaving firearms in vehicles (HB110) will only disarm law-abiding citizens who follow the rules. These individuals are not the source of violent crime; rather, they are often the ones who rely on their Second Amendment rights for self-defense, hunting, and sport. Criminals will continue to acquire and use firearms illegally, unaffected by these new regulations, leaving ordinary Virginians more vulnerable. History and data show that gun control laws do not reduce crime rates but instead empower those who operate outside the law. For example, cities with strict gun laws often experience higher rates of violent crime compared to areas where law-abiding citizens can more freely exercise their rights. These bills will create more "gun-free" zones and bureaucratic hurdles that criminals ignore, effectively turning law-abiding citizens into easier targets. I respectfully request that you reject these infringement on our constitutional rights and focus instead on policies that target actual criminal behavior, such as enforcing existing laws against violent offenders and supporting mental health initiatives. Protecting the Second Amendment is essential to preserving our freedoms and ensuring public safety for all Virginians. Thank you for your time and consideration. I hope you will vote NO on these anti-Second Amendment bills. Sincerely, Bailey Pratt

In reviewing these various bills it seems that many of them disregard the Constitution that was sworn to be upheld. Additionally several have already been ruled on in various courts across the country. They serve to divide constituents especially those who vote rather than provide civil discourse and leadership. They further fail to address larger issues that plague our society. Punishing those who abide by the law and creating penalties for innocent civilians is conceptually flawed. I urge you all to reexamine the methods behind these bills and abandon them at this point. Work toward the greater good and try something that hasn’t already failed repeatedly. Truly focus on serving this great Commonwealth. It will serve all of us better in the future.

As a friend of Adam Turck, the most important thing I want to say first is that Adam was light. He was warmth. He was grace. He loved Superman. He loved his dog Lana. He loved acting. He loved fitness. He loved people. He loved life. He loved with his whole heart and his whole mind and he never let the weight of the world stop him from seeing the good in anyone and everyone. These bills are not only important to the family and friends Adam cultivated in Richmond, but to our community as a whole. Adam did everything right on August 2nd, 2025. He saw a woman in a domestic situation while walking his dog, Lana. He stepped in to try and de-escalate the situation, called the police and never letting that woman out of his sight. He did everything right and it wasn’t enough. A 19-year-old kid pulled a handgun from his backpack and shot Adam in the head. He then turned the gun on himself. That young kid took two lives that day when he never should have been able to put that woman or Adam in that position. He had pending assault charges and was only 19. Any one of the bills The Friends of Adam Turck are supporting today could have saved Adam’s life if they had already been in place. Adam was a superhero in this community, but he shouldn’t have had to be. He should still be here. Lighting up the Richmond Theater Stages, The gym he was a personal trainer at, and the lives of the people who loved him most. The city of Richmond should have long ago implemented gun safety and prevention laws that could have kept Adam here with us today. While no amount of wanting or wishing can bring him back, we can let it not be in vain, by making lasting change that prevents anyone else in Richmond from having to feel the pain we feel with the absence of Adam. He brought light to Richmond, The Theater, The Fitness Industry, and each and every life he touched. Please vote yes on HB 19, HB 21, HB 93, HB 110, and HB 1359

HB1303, I support. The remaining bills are unnecessary and bureaucratic. You are creating bills meant to solve statistically insignificant events. HB1359 and HB217 are particularly objectionable. Requiring a "purchaser license" infringes on the right to bear arms and is a complete duplication of existing background checks. The assault firearm definition is unconstitutional and will not stand up to legal challenge. Our tax dollars and attorney general resources will be wasted on such an obviously flawed legislation. Gun buy back programs are have proven to be a waste of tax payer dollars with no impact on gun crime statistics. HB110 is very heavy handed. Just because someone could detect a weapon in a private motor vehicle should not make that vehicle subject to confiscation by the state nor a penalty applied to the firearm owner. This is totally a way to punish firearm owners without solving any real gun violence crimes that you, as legislators, could better focus your time and effort on. Focus on enforcing existing laws and not letting habitual criminals get away with warnings or light sentencing for their crimes. That is the common sense approach. We have more than enough laws, we do not need more ways to trap law abiding citizens and our merchants with this slew of bills.

The bills under consideration are only going to affect those who have no intention of breaking the law. Coupled with the other bills lessening the penalties for many violent crimes, these will do nothing to prevent crime. Criminals do not follow the law. That is a textbook definition. We have plenty of laws to deal with those who perpetrate crimes. What is needed is to deal with the existing criminals. Stop what leads these people to break the law to begin with. Punish those who commit violent crimes firmly. Stop the revolving door justice that keeps them on the streets committing more crimes. Making the law abiding public defenseless while turning more violent criminals loose makes no sense. Police forces are not bodyguards! All that can be expected after calling 911 is the victim being taken to a hospital, or possibly the morgue, and an investigation, hopefully followed by an arrest. The only person that can hope to defend themselves from these violent criminals is the victim. It would be better to provide a system for more self defense classes for the public. Better help for the victims of violent crime. And fitting punishment for those who have broken the law. None of the proposed bills will do that. I hope that the Constitutional rights of the public will be considered over feel good measures. I thank you for your time in reading my comments and hope you will consider these points in voting on the proposed bills.

I urge committee members to vote against these bills, many of which infringe on our God-given rights as Americans, and some of which are already unconstitutional under existing rulings by the Supreme Court of the United States. Respectfully, a lifelong Virginian.

Hi, My name is Catherine Shultz and I’m writing this as a woman that survived almost being strangled to death, then stalked for 2 years. I was in fear of my life and I bought my first firearm and trained. My personal defense weapon saved my life and I didn’t have to pull the trigger. A piece of paper does nothing to protect survivors but I stand with VCDL & am co director of Women for Gun Rights in Va. I’m also disabled and an amputee & I can’t run from danger but I can use my firearm to protect myself. People don’t seem to understand that educating oneself vs restricting mags etc… they affect people like me and it shows me that the “gun safety” laws are simply a psychological bandage & does nothing to protect women like myself. Thank you, Catherine Shultz Women for gun rights

To the legislators; Not one of the proposed HBs should be approved. The authors of the proposed bills lack experience or insight into gun ownership or general safety of the public. Not one of these bills can be proven to save lives or stop criminal acts. What I do see is the potential for a level of state bureaucrats to create new jobs for their buddies. Let’s monitor who has a gun or who has too many bullets in their magazine. Whose family member is related to someone involved with domestic violence. This sounds like the state boys and girls are out to get their hands into Virginians pocket's again. Vote no for everyone of these HBs.

Shall not be infringed was and still is very clear. The bill of rights was written to limit the government. Please stop infringing on my god given rights.

HB19 Misdemeanors should never take away a civil right. HB21 A firearm accessory seller could not know they were selling a accessory to a prohibited person. A car parts store cannot be sued if they sell a seat cover for a car used in a bank robbery. HB40 This bill is unconstitutional, there is no analog in history or traditions of firearms with any such limitations when the Bill of Rights was adopted. Homemade guns have been legal since before the US existed. HB93 If a husband and wife co-own a shotgun and the husband gets a protective order issued against him, the wife would no longer have access to that shotgun. That punishes and needlessly endangers her life. HB110 Car owner should not be at fault for a criminal stealing a firearm. It is the criminal who is solely to blame. This bill could put a handgun in the possession of a tow truck driver that is a convicted felon. HB217 U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in both DC v Heller, and The New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen, that any firearm “in common use” is protected by the Second Amendment. Guns and magazines targeted by this bill are among the most common in the US, making this bill unconstitutional. HB229 Disarming visitors and guests, including CHP holders, violates their right to protect themselves. A U.S. District Court in the 2nd Circuit has restrained enforcement of just such a law for being unconstitutional under New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen Supreme Court ruling. HB626 Students have a right to self-defense. HB702 Destroying a functional, and possibly valuable firearms is a waste of money. State could offset costs by selling firearms to gun dealers through an auction. This program is a “turn in” and not a “give-back” program. HB871 Biometric safes are more expensive and can be unreliable when being used under stress and require batteries to work. There are other locking mechanisms that are just as secure. HB969 Center would only target violence committed using firearms and ignoring root causes of crime, as well as all the other ways violence is inflicted on victims – knives, blunt objects, hands and feet, etc. Half of violent crimes are not committed with a firearm. Term “Gun Violence” gives away true agenda: “gun violence” is a term coined by gun-control lobby to blame guns, which are inanimate objects, and not criminals that misuse guns. If a police officer shoots someone, officer gets blame, not his gun. If a criminal shoots someone, gun gets blame, not criminal. No one says, “tire iron violence” or “hand and feet violence.” It is just called “violence.” But there is a disarmament agenda with firearms and “gun violence” is just an excuse to go after firearms with more gun control. HB1300 Oppose HB1303 Oppose HB1359 Bill will get innocent people killed, it will take at least two months before a person can purchase a first firearm.  If they are purchasing that firearm for urgent self-defense, that is simply too long.  Price to get a permit, likely in hundreds of dollars, will be prohibitive for poor people and is equivalent of a poll tax.  And even with all hoops to get a permit, even citizens with a CHP will be limited to one handgun a month.  Local law-enforcement will be handed a registry of gun owners. And gun rentals at shooting ranges will not be possible for people who have not yet got their permit or are visiting from out of state or from another country.

My entire life I have taken great pride and stewardship in being a law abiding citizen of a great country. A very large part of my patriotism is the freedom and trust the founders of the nation gave me in the Second Amendment of the US constitution and Section 13 of the Virginia Bill of Rights. The anti-gun bills that have been introduced in Virginia show me that the supporters of these bills have zero regard for the Constitution, my rights as a lawful citizen and my rights to be able to defend myself and others from violent crime. The supporters of these bills have lost all sense of who the good guys are and who the bad guys are. I see this when early release is granted to hundreds of violent felons, many of which then go on to reoffend and violently prey on the very people you are supposed to protect, all for nothing more than some misdirected attempt at virtue signaling. I see this when prosecutors do not pursue charges against violent offenders in a misdirected attempt at virtue signaling. I see this when legislative efforts focus on the law-abiding and do nothing to violent felons who will not bother to be hindered by any gun laws. I see this when legislators talk about “gun violence” and do nothing about the underlying problem of “violence” and how to reduce it. I see this when I see news stories of repeat violent offenders who have been arrested for dozens of violent crimes, including murder, who end up killing someone yet again due to some form of “catch and release”. The laws are in place to remove violent felons, whether or not they use firearms, from society and prevent them from preying on your law-abiding constituents. Please use them. I urge opposition to HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB626, HB702, HB871, HB969 and HB1359. I urge support for HB1300 and HB1303.

I oppose all legislation which seeks to undermine our Constitutionally protected 2nd Amendment. Therefore, I would encourage all members to vote against these bills with a resounding NO!

As a life long Virginia resident and lawful firearms owner, I speak for myself and millions of other Virginians in saying that all of us strongly oppose any bill being introduced that restricts and infringes upon our Second Amendment rights that are guaranteed by the constitution of Virginia and of the United States. These gun control bills have been drafted under the guise of safety and crime prevention, while simultaneously doing the opposite and only increasing further resistance in both crime and safety. For decades, Virginia has been a pro-2A state where generations of families have been born into and raised on safe and responsible gun ownership. Hunting, personal protection, or simply being an enthusiast does not make someone a criminal or implies criminal intent because of the technology behind modern firearms has far surpassed the firearms of our grandfathers’s generation. Manufacturing methods and technology is ever changing, but our natural rights as law abiding citizens should never be hung in the balance and toyed with as privileges. I implore the General Assembly to please review these bills with logic, with reason, and with the hope that our state government will not make a mockery of the Second Amendment to further a political agenda not based upon fact, but upon incessant fear mongering and disarmament of the people.

I SUPPORT this bill. HB 110 prohibits leaving a handgun visible in an unattended vehicle on public property. Simply put, it requires gun owners to store the firearm out of sight—such as in the glove compartment, center console —to prevent it from being readily observable from outside. This requirement is straightforward and not onerous for responsible gun owners. Many already take this basic precaution. Importantly, HB 110 will help deter gun thefts from vehicles—a major source of stolen firearms entering criminal hands. Research shows that vehicle thefts account for roughly half of all reported gun thefts nationally in recent years, and stolen guns contribute significantly to firearm-related crimes. In Richmond alone vehicle gun thefts have skyrocketed: from 225 reported in 2017 to over 600 in recent years (e.g., 644 in 2023 and similarly high numbers since). Leaving a handgun in plain view in an unattended vehicle is irresponsible and unnecessarily endangers our community. HB 110 is a reasonable, narrowly tailored measure that promotes public safety without infringing on lawful gun ownership. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill.

Name: Brad Toohill Location: Loudoun County, Virginia I strongly oppose the following bills. These proposals punish law-abiding Virginians, undermine due process, and infringe on constitutionally protected rights while failing to address violent crime. Criminals do not follow gun laws—these bills target citizens who already do. HB 19 (McClure) This bill allows permanent loss of firearm rights based on vague “dating relationship” misdemeanors. Fundamental rights should not be stripped without clear standards and robust due process. HB 21 (Helmer) Holding firearm manufacturers and sellers liable for crimes they did not commit is unjust and dangerous. This policy attacks lawful commerce instead of criminal behavior. HB 40 (Simon) Criminalizing unfinished frames and receivers turns peaceful hobbyists into felons without evidence of crime reduction. This is regulation without results. HB 93 (Bennett-Parker) Forced firearm surrender under protective orders risks disarming innocent family members. Rights should not be suspended by accusation alone. HB 110 (Laufer) Penalizing lawful gun owners for storing a handgun in a vehicle is excessive and punitive. This bill targets responsible citizens, not criminals. HB 217 (Helmer) This bill bans commonly owned firearms and standard-capacity magazines that are clearly protected as arms in common use. It is unconstitutional and ineffective. HB 229 (Hernandez) Blanket bans on firearms and knives in medical facilities leave lawful citizens defenseless and create confusion without improving safety. HB 626 (Callsen) Disarming adults on college campuses does not enhance safety. Law-abiding individuals should not lose their right to self-defense based on location. HB 702 (Cole) Taxpayer-funded firearm turn-in and destroy programs waste public funds and show no measurable impact on crime. HB 871 (Downey) Mandated storage methods and biometric safes intrude into private homes and impose unnecessary costs on families. HB 969 (Price) Creating a new state agency focused solely on firearms expands bureaucracy while ignoring repeat offenders and enforcement failures. HB 1359 (Hope) This permit-to-purchase scheme creates delays, costs, fingerprinting, and a de facto registry. It burdens lawful ownership and disproportionately harms low-income Virginians. Virginia should focus on enforcing existing laws and prosecuting violent offenders—not restricting the rights of responsible citizens.

I urge you to oppose all of the proposed bills. None of these bills will have meaningful impact on crime committed with fire arms. The only honest way to reduce crime committed with firearms is to enforce mandatory and harsh penalties on criminals who use guns to commit crimes. Once has to realize that guns can only commit a crime in the hands of a criminal. The criminal, not the tool is the problem that needs to be addressed. A case in point: England has super strong regulations on guns. Was that effective? Did the crime rates really drop ? No, crime rates didn't drop all that much. Eliminating firearms just shifted the criminals over to using knives as their weapon of choice. These proposed regulations seem to be more aimed at annoying firearm owners, as opposed to solving any real problems. While I want to vote Democratic, these essentially useless regulations are making me seriously reconsider which party I will support in the future. Please put regulations in place to SOLVE problems, not these silly things that only provide talking points. Never forget, RESULTS are what voters want.

Not one of these bills will make anyone safer, but rather strip the rights of law abiding citizens of which pose no threat. Maybe try enforcing or increasing the penalties for laws against murder or violent felonies that are already in place? The problem isn't guns. It's the mentally ill people who misuse them. Making good people criminals for simply owning common firearms or magazines will not make a difference to people who have no regard for law.

Thank you - see file attached

All these bills infringe on citizens AMENDMENT RIGHT we the people been lied to BY OUR Government OFFICIALS & mainly democratic officials ABIGAIL SPANBERGER is one of them

As a fellow Virginian, I urge you to please OPPOSE "gun control" bills in your committee. Concepts like an "assault weapons" ban, arbitrary magazine restrictions, "reasonable standards" for firearms businesses, and a "permit to purchase," just to name a few, do nothing to address crime in the Commonwealth. Criminals do not abide by the law, and bills like these only target law-abiding firearm owners and businesses. The General Assembly should instead pursue legislation that holds criminals accountable for their crimes, not legislation that creates new criminals overnight for lawful purchases. Again, I urge you to OPPOSE gun control in your committee.

My family and I OPPOSE all these insidious, un-Constitutional anti-2A Bills you're proposing.

Dear Legislators, You have been elected to a position for the purpose of representing citizens in VA. You have taken an oath to the state and U.S. Constitution. It is not your place to push radical agendas or ideologies that clearly oppose those Constitutions. The 2nd Amendment clearly states that it “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”. Whether you agree or disagree with it is not important. Whether you appreciate firearms or hate and fear them, is not important. What is important, is that you respect my Constitutional right to own them, carry them, use them, transport them, have immediate access to them, decide for myself how I will store them in my own home. It is NOT your place to infringe upon these rights in any way. The very reason for the 2nd Amendment is for citizens to be able to repel, remove, and defend against a tyrannical government. Don’t be a tyrannical government. Remember and honor your oaths. Put aside the partisanship. Sincerely, One of millions of gun owners

All these proposed are laws are just awful. The right of self-preservation is a fundamental human right and having the best tools for self-preservation furthers that fundamental human right. Without those tools, you degrade the most important human right in the world, the right to live and live free. Suing gun dealers and manufacturers will prevent the public from acquiring guns. Banning large swaths of arms and accessories prevent the public from defending themselves with the best tool possible. All these proposed laws are bad. Bad for Virginians and bad for human rights. HB 19 (McClure) requires forfeiture of firearm rights for a “dating relationship” misdemeanor. HB 21 (Helmer) allows civil lawsuits against firearm manufacturers and sellers for crimes committed with their products. HB 40 (Simon) outlaws unfinished frames and receivers unless serialized. HB 93 (Bennett-Parker) forces firearm surrender under protective orders in a way that could disarm innocent family members. HB 110 (Laufer) imposes a civil penalty and towing if a handgun is left in an unattended vehicle. HB 217 (Helmer) bans commonly owned firearms and standard-capacity magazines made after July 1, 2026. HB 229 (Hernandez) prohibits firearms and many knives in medical facilities. HB 626 (Callsen) restricts firearms on college campuses without lawful cause. HB 702 (Cole) establishes a firearm "turn-in and destroy" program funded by taxpayers. HB 871 (Downey) mandates specific storage requirements and biometric safes in homes with minors. HB 969 (Price) creates a state gun violence prevention agency focused solely on firearms. HB 1359 (Hope) creates a costly permit-to-purchase scheme with fingerprints, training requirements, and a de facto handgun registry.

My name is Cossie Scott a lifelong Virginia resident. This is my first time speaking here. I strongly oppose HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB626, HB702, HB871, HB969, HB1300, HB1359 I do support HB1303 45% of Virginia homes own guns lawfully. Nationally, 93% of the guns associated with crime are obtained illegally. So how are any of these regulations moving the needle in illegal gun trafficking? Or attacking the root cause of violent crime? Furthermore, the majority of the average gun related crime occurs in 9 districts in Virginia (Richmond and Hampton Roads). So you are proposing punishing the entire state and every law biding gun owner for an “illegal” gun problem in Hampton and Richmond. Not to mention 63% of the gun related deaths in Virginia are suicide related. That means that all of these bills listed are not scientifically proven with sound data, but emotionally charged by political gun grabbing rhetoric and is saturated with slippery slope informal fallacies with proposed changes being made without analytical data to suggest we have a need to change. Why do we not first address Richmond and Hampton locally before pushing your unfounded ideology on the rest of the commonwealth. Gun laws do not solve for the human condition problem in those 9 districts. We would be better served spending our time, and tax dollars, addressing the poverty problem that drives violent crime, rather than trying to make law biding citizens criminals.

I’ve been a lifelong Democrat because I believe deeply in protecting working people, expanding access to healthcare, safeguarding civil rights, and investing in strong public institutions, but I’ve never fully aligned with my party on gun control. To me, supporting the Second Amendment isn’t about ideology or partisanship — it’s about personal responsibility, self-reliance, and the belief that law-abiding citizens should have the right to protect themselves and their families. I value evidence-based policy, and I worry that many proposed gun laws primarily burden responsible owners while doing little to address the root causes of violence like poverty, mental health gaps, and systemic inequality. I want safer communities, but I believe that comes from smarter enforcement, education, and prevention rather than broad restrictions that limit constitutional rights. Holding these views sometimes puts me at odds with fellow Democrats, but I see it as proof that political identity doesn’t have to mean agreeing with every plank of the platform — it means thinking critically and standing by the principles you believe in. Please vote no to any gun restrictions that are being presented.

The attachment contains my comments on the proposed bills.

Nearly half of all households in the Commonwealth own a firearm and yet Virginia has one of the lowest gun related death rates in the nation (5.6 per 100,000). Not only are you trying to solve an issue that doesn't exist, you're sacrificing your constiunts to pander towards national politics.

As a law abiding gun owner and retired military Virginia Citizen I vehemently oppose any law that opposes our Constitutional Right via the Second Amendment. All of the bills you are considering meet this criteria. Please cease and desist any band all actions that would infringe on my rights…those that our Founding Fathers of whom many were from our Great Commonwealth, believed to be self-evident. Very respectfully, Shannon J. Cornelius, USA/USAF (Ret)

I strongly urge voting against the following bills as all of them will cause undue hardship on legal gun owners, go against the spirit of the US 2nd amendment, will place firearm manufacturers in legal jeopardy solely because their products may have been used in an unlawful fashion (same as suing Ford for getting a speeding ticket). HB 19 (McClure) requires forfeiture of firearm rights for a “dating relationship” misdemeanor. HB 21 (Helmer) allows civil lawsuits against firearm manufacturers and sellers for crimes committed with their products. HB 40 (Simon) outlaws unfinished frames and receivers unless serialized. HB 93 (Bennett-Parker) forces firearm surrender under protective orders in a way that could disarm innocent family members. HB 110 (Laufer) imposes a civil penalty and towing if a handgun is left in an unattended vehicle. HB 217 (Helmer) bans commonly owned firearms and standard-capacity magazines made after July 1, 2026. HB 229 (Hernandez) prohibits firearms and many knives in medical facilities. HB 626 (Callsen) restricts firearms on college campuses without lawful cause. HB 702 (Cole) establishes a firearm "turn-in and destroy" program funded by taxpayers. HB 871 (Downey) mandates specific storage requirements and biometric safes in homes with minors. HB 969 (Price) creates a state gun violence prevention agency focused solely on firearms. HB 1359 (Hope) creates a costly permit-to-purchase scheme with fingerprints, training requirements, and a de facto handgun registry. Thank you,

I oppose the passage of these bills. HB 19, 21, 40, 93, 110, 217, 229, 626, 702, 871, 969, 1359.

The Right to Keep and Bear Arms shall not be infringed. Stop writing and putting Unconstitutional Legislation in the Virginia Code. That covers just about everything I have seen the Democratic Majority propose as new legislation. Want to live in a communist paradise - Move to Cuba - They do not get Snow and sleet there, and you will have someone to give you instructions on how to live your life.

Just to let you know, I am an independent in every sense of the word. I tend to lean left on many issues but on the subject of the second amendment I am a firm believer. I don’t think we need these new restrictions being proposed. The topic is so complex and polar I don’t know how to convince you all of the folly of this legislation except to say many of us are single issue voters regardless of how we feel about certain social issues. I know many democrats in this state who regularly use these weapons that are the subject for future restrictions or outright banning. I will try to touch on a few issues. Assault weapons and high capacity magazine are the current boogie man of the anti gun lobby and have been since the 1990s. This was originally a deliberate attempt to confuse modern civilian semiautomatic weapons with their more dangerous fully automatic assault military versions as a prelude to ban handguns. The term assault weapon is a purely political term that has no universal meaning and it was chosen to instill fear and confusion in the public’s mind. I ask you to review these laws and ask yourself which one of these features makes these weapons more dangerous than other rifles. Is a pistol grip, bayonet lug, or similar feature what makes a rifle dangerous? Or is it caliber, muzzle energy, and rate of fire? If public safety is the true goal why doesn’t this legislation address these factors instead of cosmetics? I will tell you why. Because the average hunting rifle is more powerful than an ar-15 by a wide margin. These are not overpowered rifles as some would have you believe. It’s a semiautomatic version of an intermediate powered rifle - part way between the power of a pistol and a full power hunting rifle. Did you know even Great Britain has no restrictions on weapons with military style features? Their ban is on the caliber and rate of fire. You can even have a semiautomatic uzi there witt a 50 round magazine as long as it is chambered in 22lr. Silencers have very few restrictions there as well because they protect hearing and help minimize noise pollution. Let’s talk about the legality as well. Most of these restrictions are unconstitutional because the weapons and features are in common use. It’s unconstitutional to ban any weapon that is in common use as per DC vs Heller and Brien. If the state court doesn’t overturn these unconstitutional restrictions the Supreme Court will. I will end this conversation by saying our founding fathers faced the same issues we do. At that time most governments restricted civilian arms because they wanted to remain in power. They reasoned through their dealings with Great Britain that an armed population could never be slaves to any tyrannical government or foreign power. This may sound like a tired old saying that is often made fun of. I have heard people saying things like deer don’t need bullet proof vests and you can’t fight against a government without f-16s but is this really true? The ar-15 for instance is not powerful enough to take down a large elk humanly so the bullet proof vest comment is just plain silly. That cartridge is commonly used in other rifles as a varmint round. As far as f-16s are concerned, the Taliban sure kicked us out of their country with nothing more than small arms and guerrilla tactics. Civilian resistance movements rarely fight pitch battles with tanks and fighter jets. They use hit and run tactics combined with numbers to wear the enemy down.

Dear Committee Members, I urge you to reject the blatantly unconditional and egregious anti Second Amendment bills before you. This will do nothing to curb crime, and you know that, but will make criminals out of your political opponents, as well as many of your constituents. Scencerly, Sal DeGennaro

PLEASE PROTECT OUR GUN RIGHTS AND DO NOT DEGRADE VIRGINIANS' SECOND AMENDMENT GUARANTEED RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS!

IT IS VERY FRUSTRATING TO LIVE IN A SOCIETY IN WHICH THOSE WHO ARE ELECTED TO REPRESENT ME IMMEDIATELY STEP IN AND COME UP WITH LAWS IN AN ATTEMPT TO FRAME ME AS A CRIMINAL FOR EXERCISING MY RIGHTS. IN NO WAY HAVE I BROKEN ANY EXISTING LAWS, NOR DO I OWN ANY ITEM CURRENTLY CONSIDERED ILLEGAL. THAT THESE "REPRESENTATIVES" CAN, WITH THE STROKE OF A PEN, PENALIZE ME, MAKES ME WONDER JUST WHO THEY "REPRESENT". WE DO NOT NEED MORE LAWS TO "LESSEN CRIME", WE NEED TO ENFORCE THE ONES ALREADY ON THE BOOKS. PLEASE LEAVE YOUR LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS ALONE.

Our Second Amendment is clear and succinct: "... the right of the People to keep an bear arms shall not be infringed." What I see is an example of the government overstepping its bounds under the illusion of public safety. Many of the measures including assault weapons, magazine capacities, and "ghost guns" are based on buzz words that strike fear because people do not understand them. Let us embark on a few definitions: Infringe: "act so as to limit or undermine (something); encroach on" -Oxford Dictionary. Synonyms include Erode, Impair, and Weaken. ANY legislation that limits impairs, or weakens a citizen's right to own and carry weapons is, by definiton, infringement, and therefore a violation of our beautiful country's constitution. Ghost Gun: the ATF classifies the part of the weapon containing the trigger assembly as a "firearm," colloquially called a Lower Receiver. It is possible to manufacture this part and therefore build a weapon that has no serial number and is unregistered with the police department. This takes skill and specialized, expensive tooling; these firearms sound scary, but are by and large produced by hobbyists, not killers. Assault Weapons (HB217): The limiting, reduction, and impairment of the size of magazine that one can purchase, keep, and carry is simply a violation of the 2nd amendment. Storage (HB871): The State government has no business inside my home and how my weapons are stored. I learned to handle guns at 7 years of age, children can learn. If I lock my weapons as this bill requires, I can no longer access them in an emergency. Its safer to gun-proof my children than child-proof my guns. Permit to purchase (HB1359): We do not need a permit to exercise our first amendment rights. We do not have permits to secure our rights against inappropriate search and seizure, the 4th amendment. We also do not have permits to protect ourselves from cruel and unusual punishment. No other right enumerated in the Bill of Rights requires a permit, why do we treat the 2nd amendment differently? We already strip this right from convicted criminals, we have background checks, leave us law-abiding gunowners alone. I understand these bills have good intentions. We want to see our communities safe, healthy, and thriving, and have our neighbors and friends go about their days without fear. But let us not succumb to fear to such an extent that we throw away our freedom for the illusion of heightened safety. Let's look at California, llinois, and New York, who have the strictest policies in the nation, yet rising rates of violent crimes, and instantly the illusion is dispelled. These measures do not increase safety. What they do accomplish is an erosion of freedom, disarmament of law-abiding citizens, and violation of our country's constitution. I ask you please, as your neighbor and constituent, vote NO to these measures.

This bill unfairly punishes responsible gun owners for the criminal acts of others and represents yet another attempt to shift blame away from criminals and onto innocent citizens. HB 110 would impose a steep civil penalty and authorize vehicle towing simply because a firearm was visible in an unattended vehicle, regardless of whether any wrongdoing occurred. Under this proposal, a victim of theft could be fined and have their vehicle seized, even though they committed no crime. If a criminal breaks into a vehicle and steals a firearm, the only person who should be held accountable is the criminal. HB 110 instead treats the victim as the offender and rewards criminal behavior by imposing financial penalties on law-abiding citizens. HB 110 further raises constitutional concerns by interfering with the lawful possession and transport of firearms, activities that are clearly protected by the Second Amendment. Penalizing citizens for temporarily securing a firearm in a vehicle discourages lawful carry and self-defense, especially for individuals who must enter locations where firearms are prohibited. In addition, this proposal disproportionately impacts working-class Virginians who rely on their vehicles for transportation and cannot afford unexpected fines, towing fees, and storage costs. It imposes severe financial hardship without any demonstrated public safety benefit. There is no credible evidence that punishing theft victims reduces crime. Criminals are often indifferent of whether a firearm is visible before deciding to break into a vehicle, and they are not deterred by laws like this that target lawful gun owners. This bill in practice will not prevent theft. It will only increase burdens on responsible citizens.

HB19 It is improper to deprive citizen rights for a misdemeanor violation Deprivation of rights is part of the accepted sentence for felony crime (voting, firearms, etc) Proposed Fix – Make domestic violence and intimate partner violence a felony level crime. HB40 Causes a wide variety of hardware store supplies felony crime to own. Proposed Fix – Table bill and remove references to unfinished frames/receivers, remove references to serialization until a method of applying for serial number is available to the general public HB110 Tow truck drivers are NOT the ideal steward for firearms The tow yard is not a safe storage location Proposed fix – Police can call a locksmith and have the vehicle opened at owner expense, firearm can be removed and held at police station for recovery HB217 Large capacity varies by firearm, the most common standard capacity is 28-32 per magazine, 100 per belt Shotgun capacity is variable based on shell length If exemptions are made for police, CHP holders (who commit crimes at a rate LOWER than police) should also be exempt (DHS/ICE are making this argument stronger every day) Proposed fix – Change “High Capacity” from 10 to 60 for magazines, and 200 for belts. Define “High Capacity” for shotgun tubes based on a defined shot-shell size. Exempt CHP holders from all magazine restrictions. HB229 As with all prohibited places, if right to self defense is abridged, a duty to protect is created Secure storage should be provided, as due to Arlington Car-Free Diet, many trips are multi-modal, preventing use of anchored, steel, hidden, locking car safe storage. Proposed Fix - Security screening and armed protection must be provided in all prohibited places, failure to protect disarmed individuals to be held under strict liability. At one or more entrance, a staffed safe-storage location to be provided for weapons to be checked-in. HB871 Biometric safes are typically the WORST QUALITY OF ALL SAFES ON THE MARKET Proposed Fix – Allow for any kind of lock, or else indicate a cypher/combo/key lock. HB1300 The police commit crimes at a higher rate than CHP holders Police get paid and can buy guns normally Suggested Fix – Table and do not reintroduce, bill is not needed HB626 As with all prohibited places, if right to self defense is abridged, a duty to protect is created Secure storage should be provided, as due to Arlington Car-Free Diet, many trips are multi-modal, preventing use of anchored, steel, hidden, locking car safe storage. As with the open-carry on streets prohibition currently in place, CHP holders need to be exempted. Proposed Fix - Security screening and armed protection must be provided in all prohibited places, failure to protect disarmed individuals to be held under strict liability. At one or more entrance, a staffed safe-storage location to be provided for weapons to be checked-in. CHP holders to be exempted. HB1359 A criminal record history check is already performed for all firearm transactions DCJS training is for armed security guards and police, if all firearms owners are DCJS certified, then exemptions for armed security and police should apply to purchase permit holders Proposed Fix – Table bill and do not reintroduce, it is redundant to already existing protections, alternatively exempt all purchase permit holders from any firearms regulations that have specific exemptions for police

I disagree with any and all laws pertaining to our gun rights and any law that infringes our right to own,sell, trade or gift. These amendments are a total outreach of our constitutional rights and we the people will not stand for it.

These bill do nothing to address criminals and only affects law abiding gun owners. As a black man I feel they are racist as well. Vote NO to all of these bills.

I stand with Gun Owners of America and the Virginia Citizens Defense League in opposing any attempt to restrict law abiding Virginians 2nd amendment rights. These bills will do nothing to stop crime and only serve to limit the rights of the people to exercise their 2nd amendment rights. As a constituent, I urge you to OPPOSE these gun bills: HB 19, Misdemeanors should never take away a civil right. HB 21, This bill is designed to have a chilling effect on all aspects of the firearms industry. HB 40, This bill is unconstitutional, as there was no analog in the history or traditions of firearms with any such limitations at the time the Bill of Rights was adopted. Homemade guns have been legal since before the United States existed. HB 93, This disctriminates against people in the same household and also discriminates against young people who are legally allowed to own fire arms. HB 110, Punish criminals who do this, not the law abiding citizens. HB 217, The U.S. Supreme Court has said in both DC v Heller, and recently The New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen, that any firearm “in common use” is protected by the Second Amendment. The guns and magazines targeted by this bill are among the most common guns and magazines in the United States, making this bill unconstitutional. There are conservatively estimated to be over 20 million AR-15s and 700 million magazines that hold more than 10 rounds in civilian hands. HB 229, Disarming visitors and guests, including concealed handgun permit holders, at such facilities violates their right to protect themselves in an emergency. A U.S. District Court in the 2nd Circuit has restrained enforcement of just such a law for being unconstitutional under New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen Supreme Court ruling. HB 626, A solution in search of a problem. Higher education students are adults and have a right to self-defense. HB 702, The name of the program implies that the Commonwealth gives firearms to citizens and now wants citizens to give them back. That is not the case. The State does not give us our rights and does not own our property. HB 871, Biometric safes are more expensive than non-biometric safes and often times more unreliable when being used under stress, This discriminates against those people who are poor and still have a right to self protection. HB 969, we do not need to grow the state bureaucracy to study violent crime when most violent crime does not involve firearms. HB 1359, please find me a constitutional right that you have to get a permit for. There is not one and we should not be limiting the rights of the people by require a permit to exercise their 2nd amendment rights. I SUPPORT the following bill: HB 1303, 90 days is more than sufficient for the State Police to issue a non-resident permit. There is no reason that this should take longer than this.

I’m against all these worthless anti-gun / anti-freedom bills that will do nothing to reduce crime, but will only serve to reduce the freedoms of law abiding citizens. Please retract them and do something good for Virginians. Thank you.

Virginia opposes all these illegal unconstitutional bills. The second amendment is a right not a privilege.! I oppose these bills as an individual taxpayer.

I do not support these bills.

I oppose any and all restrictions on our God given and Constitutionally protected Right to keep and bear arms. None of this nonsense passes constitutional muster. And will have the effect of making the lives Of law abiding citizens less safe while you are Lowering penalties for real crime and turning Law abiding citizens into criminals... These bills are nothing more than a government power grab. What part of "Shall NOT be infringed " do you not Understand??

All bills with the exception of HB 1303 are unconstitutional and I do NOT support them.

I oppose these bills

When did our state government decide that they do not have to follow our Constitution of the United States of America? The 2nd Amendment is an individual right under the Constitution that states clearly that it shall not be infringed on which in simple terms means that no government official or group has the ability to take a person's right to keep and bear arms in the United States of America. This Amendment was so important to our forefathers that it is the second thing they wrote to establish that the government does not have the ability to take your right to defend yourself against all enemies and this includes a tyrannical state government that doesn't understand plain text that our country was founded on. It doesn't matter what others opinions or feelings on the subject of the right to bear arms is because it is my right and not their's that we are talking about at this time. As a society of individuals in our country that have never agreed on things of this nature since the invention of the modern firearm we have to look no farther than our own Constitution to see that this is not a collective right of certain people that agree or disagree with the principle of firearms but infact a Constitutional right of an individual to determine there views of their personal right to bear arms. With the world in the state it is in at our present time this Constitutional right is needed more then ever because we are facing people that think that the can completely ignore the Constitution and its not even on a national level but a state level. This is also a truly sad moment of our state that is the founding place for our country as it exists from the time that we settled in this new land of an unknown world at the time but to disrespect our founding Document that started it all on top of it is the worst thing that could happen in our state for these elected officials to look at the Bill of Rights and say to themselves that those Amendment are not worth following because I have a different opinion, belief or feeling on that Amendment that I am personally going to take the individual right of every person in Virginia just because I don't want to follow these Amendments as they are written. Do you understand how this is being a tyrannical government just like the British were when they were trying to control the entire population at the time that we had the Revolution in this great land to start this great country. When people say that the 2nd Amendment is dated and need to be revised but can see the actual beauty in how our forefathers predicted that this Amendment would be necessary throughout time to even to the year 2026 were we have a government that is looking at this exact Amendment and saying no we don't have to follow that anymore because we have all these people that don't like the fact that a free person of the United States of America can purchase anything that has to do with their ability to not only protect themselves in self defense but also to protect themselves from the tyrannical government that is before us today. I'm sorry but as a person that has no affiliation to a political party or any other organization on this subject in our country I believe in our Constitution and the Amendments that were written in the Bill of Rights to protect myself, my family and my friends from people that think that they know what is best for everyone in our country on the basis that they either think they are smarter, richer or elected.

I oppose every gun-control bill pending before this committee because they are prohibited by both the United States and Virginia Constitutions. The Second Amendment provides that “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Supreme Court held that this language protects an individual right to possess firearms for lawful purposes such as self-defense, independent of militia service. The Court emphasized that the Amendment protects arms “in common use” by law-abiding citizens and forbids bans on entire classes of such arms. In McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010), the Court reaffirmed that this right is fully incorporated against the states, binding Virginia to the same constitutional limits as Congress. Virginia’s Constitution independently protects this right, stating in Article I, Section 13 that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” In New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen (2022), the Supreme Court rejected interest-balancing tests and adopted a text-history-tradition standard: if the Second Amendment’s text covers the conduct, it is presumptively protected, and the government must show the regulation is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Modern policy goals, crime statistics, or legislative preferences are insufficient. Many pending bills restrict semi-automatic rifles, including AR-style firearms that are owned by millions of Americans and commonly used for lawful purposes such as self-defense, sport shooting, and hunting. Under Heller, arms in common use cannot be banned, and the “dangerous and unusual” exception does not apply. There is no historical tradition of banning commonly owned firearms based on rate of fire, operating mechanism, or cosmetic features, and under Bruen the absence of such historical analogues is dispositive. Other bills ban magazines over ten rounds, which are standard components of many commonly owned handguns and rifles. Because magazines are integral to firearm function, such bans operate as functional prohibitions on protected firearms. There is no Founding-era or Reconstruction-era tradition of limiting ammunition capacity, making these bans unconstitutional under Bruen. Permit-to-purchase schemes likewise unconstitutionally burden a fundamental right by converting it into a government-granted privilege. The right to keep arms necessarily includes the right to acquire them, and fees, training mandates, biometric requirements, and processing delays disproportionately burden citizens and lack historical justification. These schemes invite arbitrary enforcement and indirect suppression of a constitutional right. While public safety is a legitimate concern, the Supreme Court has made clear that constitutional rights cannot be traded away through legislative cost-benefit analysis. Regulations unsupported by historical tradition fail regardless of asserted benefits. For these reasons, the pending gun-control bills before this committee are inconsistent with both the United States and Virginia Constitutions and should be rejected.

Please no more gun bans

These proposed actions would increase the amount of money that is already taken from us in taxes. They make no sense, as we have a 2.3 billion surplus. These actions only hurt Virginians. The democrat party ran on affordability, and these bills do just the opposite. The taxes on firearms, and the banning of them and accessories have already proven to do nothing but punish law abiding citizens. CRIMINALS DONT FOLLOW LAWS! Reducing manditory sentecing for rape and other horrible crimes only make us less safe. Combined with TRYING to disarm us and helping criminals you out us at risk, and rob us of our rights and money. You all should be ashamed of yourselves for being bought off. You all remind me of our flag. You are acting like tyrants. You talk of affordability, yet you are trying to take more of our money. The people will not stand for tour unconstitutional actions. You may have control for the next two years, but your political careers will be destroyed. Tou have become radical tyrants. You hate the other side so much, that you are willing to destroy us. Shame on all of you. The pendulum always swings back, and you are just guaranteeing it will swing so far back that you will wish you never did this. The destruction of our constitution, and your petty attacks are not worth the backlash that will come when the people rise up against what you believe in.

Leave my second amendment rights alone and worry about all the criminals both legal and illegal. Don't screw with law-abiding citizens who work and pay your salary

Hello, I agree and stand with the opinions of the Virginia Citizens Defense League and Gun Owners of America on these troubling bills. The right to keep and bear ares enshrined as a God given right in both the US (2nd amendment) and Virginia (article 1, section 13) Constitutions. Please do not legislate millions of peaceful, law abiding Virginians into criminals with the stroke of a pen.

Please Protect Our 2nd Amendment Rights. Thank You.

Please don’t support any Bills that restrict or infringe on my 2nd Amendment rights.

To whom it may concern, It is important to recognize that criminals, by definition, disregard existing laws and are unlikely to be deterred by the introduction of new legislation. Consequently, the implementation of additional laws often impacts only law-abiding citizens, placing new restrictions or obligations upon those who already comply with legal standards. The focus, therefore, should not be on drafting further statutes but rather on ensuring the consistent and effective enforcement of the laws currently in place. By allocating resources toward upholding existing regulations, society can enhance public safety, maintain fairness, and uphold the integrity of the justice system without unnecessarily burdening responsible citizens. Respectfully, Mr. Jones

You were elected as a protest against the President. You definitely weren't elected to cancel Virginians constitutional rights. I'm sure your big donors outside of Virginia will be happy. But last time you tried this 90 of 95 counties, Cities and Town revolted against you. Plus once your donor lists are published by the influential VCDL and the lawsuits start. The people will find out who you actually serve. Unless you represent Arlington or Fairfax all democratic seats will be in jeopardy for the next election. Finally: You take an oath to honor the constitution when you get the privilege to serve the people. Someone who immediately violates their oath has no honor and can never be trusted with authority. People will remember that when it's time to vote again. I know I will. I used to be a Democrat and donor. But I will never vote for a Democrat again.

Please consider this by destroying the constitutional rights of the people of Virginia. You also will eventually come to the repercussions of your decisions, ie court action and loss of tax payer money etc.Now the 2nd amendment to the constitution in short says “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED ,basically no laws are to go against the constitution and also as per article 6 clause two of the constitution. Thank you and think wisely because your constituents as whole do not want this. Second Amendment Right to Bear Arms 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. Amdt2.1Overview of Second Amendment, Right to Bear Arms Amdt2.2Historical Background on Second Amendment Amdt2.3Early Second Amendment Jurisprudence Amdt2.4Heller and Individual Right to Firearms Amdt2.5Post-Heller Issues and Application of Second Amendment to States Amdt2.6Bruen and Concealed-Carry Licenses Amdt2.7Rahimi and Applying the Second Amendment Bruen Standard

Not one of you liberals submitted a bill to address the real evil that is using a gun. So all of these bills are designed to punish legal law abiding gun owners and protect the real criminals. Im78 years old and have owned and bought guns from the age of 15 when I purchased my first gun with money earned from a paper route. NOT ONE OF THE GUNS I'VE OWNED EVER HARMED ANYONE. IT'S AN INANIMATE OBJECT

As a veteran, I am against any so called gun control legislation that has not demonstrably proven to improve public safety while only minimally impacting individuals’ God given rights and liberties. It is unconscionable to think that elected leaders would even think about passing legislation that infringed upon individual rights merely for purposes of “doing something” without having weighed the impact on law abiding citizens and the innumerable sacrifices made to sustain and protect those rights and liberties through the years. Having served myself and also been the victim of illegal firearm use I staunchly support the 2A rights and individuals’ right to self-defense. Each person’s situation and experiences are different and they deserve to exercise their rights and liberties in a way that accommodates those circumstances, experiences, limitations, etc. So called “assault weapons” (a misnomer in itself) may have features and appearances that some persons find scary or intimidating but, to someone possessing that firearm for their own, individual law purposes, most all of those features actually improve the performance or safety related to the use of that same firearm. All semi-automatic firearms, regardless of how they might LOOK to a casual or uninformed observer basically function the same. Stocks, forearm, bipods, scopes, rails, magazines, etc. do not alter the fundamental intended purpose of this “tool.” I certainly understand those who do not appreciate firearms, in general, or who might actually be scared by their existence or appearance. But our 2A and self defense rights should never be indescribably infringed upon merely for these type reasons. There are very good reasons our fore fathers were adamant about including these inalienable rights as foundational principles in our founding documents. These foundational principles are as relevant today as they were at our founding. Anyone who is arrogant enough to think that they have studied and researched and experienced as much as the founding father scholars and thinkers should reconsider their actions carefully before indiscriminately treading upon one of our sacred rights and liberties without certifiable proof of the amount of public safety that would be realized by their actions. Anything less goes against the solemn oath you have sworn to uphold.

I oppose this bill, honor your oath

i OPPOSE any legislation that restricts 2nd amendment rights

I agree with the VCDL on these bills.

Opposite any gun laws. They will not stop any crime. Try enforcing the laws we already.

I support this bill

These sorts of draconian proposals severely restrict the ability of law-abiding citizens to effectively defend themselves against threats of violence. None of the proposed measures which have been inflicted on the citizenry of other states have made one iota of difference in crime levels. They HAVE however restricted law-abiding citizens from exercising their Constitutional rights via the 2nd Amendment. Vote now to cease this onslaught on the rights of law-abiding Virginians. Gun violence is perpetrated by CRIMINALS, so focus on the criminal prosecutions. Limiting the rights of law-abiding Virginians is tantamount to fascism. And as always, "When seconds count, the police are just minutes away!". That's what you are saying to Virginians. If I cannot be trusted to defend myself legally, then you cannot be trusted to run the Commonwealth.

These legislations violate many sections of the Virginia Constitution not just the U.S. Constitution. Legislations like these does nothing to prevent, curtail, deter or otherwise stop crimes or acts of violence. These legislations do not hold criminals that cannot legally possess, purchase or own firearms accountable for their possession, use or handling of a firearm. These legislations do not keep firearms out of the hands of criminals. Cliché but true rhetoric (Criminals will get guns and magazines and commit crimes regardless of the laws. These legislations are immoral, unethical and down right oppressive and serve no purpose other than to infringe upon rights and deny rights. Reminder: - 18, 19 and 20 year old men and women are entrusted in the operation, use, carry and implementation of the following in the service of our country as Servicemembers, Coast Guardsmen, National Guardsmen and Air National Guardsmen and Reservists as well as law enforcement: Semi-automatic Pistols with high capacity magazines, Semi- Automatic Rifles with 30 round magazines, machine guns, rockets, tanks, missiles, rocket Launchers etc and yet Virginia Legislators want to strip away the rights of civilians of that age group of their right to own and bear arms. That is hypocritical and it undermines the Constitution. Our nation foundation and freedom was earned through the blood and sweat of young 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20 year old men from the Revolutionary War for our independence and that of our 17 year old to 20 year old war fighters today standing tall and maintaining our soon to be 250 years of being a Constitutional Republic and our Freedom. Do not allow the stripping of the rights of these military aged men and women that serve and defend our nation, our freedom and our Constitutions. Do not insult them or slap them in the face or turn your backs on them. Fight for them because at some point we have fought and we have sacrificed for you and these young men and women will too. Any legislation that denies and deprives this age group the use, ownership while expecting them to serve in our country and have them carry, operate and use them in the defense of our nation and potentially die, be seriously injured or maimed is diabolical and is disgraceful. Magazine capacity restrictions: (Do not limit or stop the intent of criminals or those intent on committing any act of violence. We have seen the demonstrated and factual extreme actions/tactics that have been used for example: Using a vehicle to run into crowds, Vehicle Born Improvised Explosive Devises (VBIED), Improvised Explosive Devices (IED), mass stabbings, gas attacks and chemical warfare, fire, and more Constitution of Virginia - Article I. Bill of Rights Sections 1,2, 9,10,11. These legislations below, restrict the right to self- defense. Legal gun owners are not committing crimes and do not intend to committ crimes. These legislations are not about accountability for criminals. They are written to suppress and take away the rights of law abiding citizens and ro take away a means of self-defense. These legislations do not create a safer Virginia. HB110, HB1359, HB969, HB871, HB702, HB24, HB21, HB700, HB229, HB217, HB110, HB93, HB19, Example: - HB700: Denies and delays the access to firearms in an emergency situation where a victim of stalking or domestic abuse are in imminent danger. V/R Raymond Carter SFC(Retired)

I strongly oppose this bill

All of these bills are intolerable infringements of the right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment and the Constitution of Virginia. Supporting these bills is a violation of your oaths of office. In addition, as should be evident, these bills will only affect law-abiding gun owners, the very people least likely to offend. Criminals, by definition, do not obey the law. They are unlikely to obey these.

Please do not consider any anti-gun bills. Any potential law that goes against our Constitution is wrong and should not be acknowledged. We shouldn't have to pay for our rights. No innocent person should be penalized for a criminal's actions. A gun's capacity is irrelevant. If a person comments a REAL crime, they should be convected and sentenced accordingly. A right should be lost only through certain major criminal actions, not some fool's option of potential. No manufacturer should be responsible for how their product is used. The one responsible is the one in possession of said product, even if it was stolen. Our last Governor understood this. Our new Governor and her political party desperately needs to. We have seen the failures of worthless states like California, Maryland, New York and others. We don't need to be another one. No law will ever stop a crime. The law should provide proper penalties or real crimes. No law should be made for the sole purpose of controlling and wielding power over the citizens of this State or our country.

I am opposed to HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB626, HB702, HB871, HB969, and HB1359, I support HB 1300 and HB1303.

My father was born in Romania in 1933 and as a child lived under the fascism of socialism. The first thing the fascist socialists did was to confiscate guns. Nearly 400,000 Jews were slaughtered by the socialists after having been disarmed in Romania. Now socialists have taken power in Virginia by running as "moderates" and immediately showing their true selves once safely elected. Democrats, like their brethren Nazis, seek to disarm and enslave the general population. I oppose any legislation which punishes law-abiding citizens from protecting themself, their family, and their property. I oppose any legislation which punishes a citizen for potentially being robbed, as if the thief is not the problem-- the victim is treated as the criminal. I oppose any legislation which allows accusations to remove the rights of others. If I accuse every member of government of being a child abuser, are you forced to remain away from your child(ren)? I oppose Nazis and Democrats for the same reasons.

As a fellow Virginian, I urge you to please OPPOSE "gun control" bills in your committee. Concepts like an "assault weapons" ban, arbitrary magazine restrictions, "reasonable standards" for firearms businesses, and a "permit to purchase," just to name a few, do nothing to address crime in the Commonwealth. Criminals do not abide by the law, and bills like these only target law-abiding firearm owners and businesses. The General Assembly should instead pursue legislation that holds criminals accountable for their crimes, not legislation that creates new criminals overnight for lawful purchases. Again, I urge you to OPPOSE gun control in your committee. I support HB 1303 by Delegate Ware. Thank you for all that you do for Virginia.

Disarming the population is not a viable means to promote public safety. It is the duty of the individual to protect themselves from physical harm that may occur by criminal activity. It is not the responsibility of politicians or police. That is why bills like HB 19, HB 21, HB 40, HB 93, HB 229, HB 1359 are unconstitutional and put the general public in more danger as violent criminals will take advantage of unarmed civilians. HB 110 and HB 702 will promote criminal use of firearms as the firearms will be taken away from the registered owners' possession which greatly increases the likelihood the firearm will end up on the black market for resale where violent criminals obtain their weapons. HB 871 will also be ineffective as gun violence prevention means while again adding a monetary burden and serious disadvantage to law a biding citizens in the immediate face of danger. The people of Virginia do not support these policies that waste the time of politicians and money of the tax payer.

I oppose all of these unconstitutional bills.

I as a resident of The State of Virginia agree and stand with the positions of the VCDL, GOA, and every other gun rights organization in opposition to all of the firearm restriction bills that you have proposed ,as each are unconstitutional and violate our God given rights.

HB 19 (McClure) requires forfeiture of firearm rights for a “dating relationship” misdemeanor. HB 21 (Helmer) allows civil lawsuits against firearm manufacturers and sellers for crimes committed with their products. HB 40 (Simon) outlaws unfinished frames and receivers unless serialized. HB 93 (Bennett-Parker) forces firearm surrender under protective orders in a way that could disarm innocent family members. HB 110 (Laufer) imposes a civil penalty and towing if a handgun is left in an unattended vehicle. HB 217 (Helmer) bans commonly owned firearms and standard-capacity magazines made after July 1, 2026. HB 229 (Hernandez) prohibits firearms and many knives in medical facilities. HB 626 (Callsen) restricts firearms on college campuses without lawful cause. HB 702 (Cole) establishes a firearm "turn-in and destroy" program funded by taxpayers. HB 871 (Downey) mandates specific storage requirements and biometric safes in homes with minors. HB 969 (Price) creates a state gun violence prevention agency focused solely on firearms. HB 1359 (Hope) creates a costly permit-to-purchase scheme with fingerprints, training requirements, and a de facto handgun registry. ALL of these bills are Unconstitutional and will cause Lawsuits and MASS NON COMPLIANCE

I oppose all these bills!

As a fellow virginian I am very disappointed in these outrageous bills proposed. They do nothing to stop criminals cause they don't follow rules or laws anyways it just hurts people trying to protect themselves from being hurt or God forbid something worse. I have lived in virginia my whole life and love this state but i also love the 2nd amendment and freedom to bear arms so please take in consideration myself and thousands of other virginian's that love the 2nd amendment and the state of Virginia and strike down these outrageous bills. Thank you for your time god bless the 2nd amendment and the state of Virginia!

All these bills are an infringement on our constitutional second amendment rights!

You ran as a middle of the road moderate ticket, and wanted to bring everyone together. all these bills go against that and alienate half of the state. You want bi partisan support? Well to get that you can not be going after law abiding citizens and take away a constitutionally protected right.

Hello, as a true Virginian whose family goes back to the founding of this state, country and fought in the revolutionary war. The anti gun bills being pushed on us are completely unconstitutional. My ancestors would be rolling in their graves right now knowing what you all are trying to do to our personal liberties, freedom and property. All of the anti gun legislation being pushed is not only unconstitutional but against previous Supreme Court rulings. You plan to turn over half of your state into criminals overnight for legally purchased items. So not only are you infringing on the 2nd Amendment but now on our 5th Amendment. 12 months in jail! Sounds like an 8th Amendment violation. True Virginians do not want these unconstitutional laws placed on us. Virginia is where freedom was won and not taken! I urge you all to vote against these unconstitutional bills. We are not California or New York. Our friends in Northern Virginia do not speak for all of Virginia anymore. My kindness regards. True Virginian.

These bills are ill-advised “solutions” in desperate search of largely non-existent problems. The 2nd amendment was quite clear. “Shall not be infringed” means exactly those words. These bills will only make law-abiding citizens less safe. Please actually consider your constituents safety instead of your partisan talking points.

I urge a vote against this, and any gun related bill, that would arguably restrict gun rights, or increase the cost of having,/buying firearms or ammunition, or create any kind of registry of such, of law abiding citizens of Virginia. Most of these bills would do nothing for saving lives, and criminals will not abide by them.

These anti-Second Amendment legislations violate the Second Amendment freedoms guaranteed by the United States Constitution and Virginia Constitution. These bills will not make Virginians safer. but will put us at risk for predatory criminals. Also, the Second Amendment wpuld protect us from a tyranical government. Who protects us from you? Do you so crave power that you must disatm us? Why do you hate fireams?

I oppose these bills. Limiting our right to defend ourselves will not reduce crime or make anyone safer, except violent criminals.

Dear Committee Chair, I am writing to respectfully urge you to OPPOSE these bills. These proposals place unconstitutional burdens on law-abiding citizens while failing to address the root causes of criminal misuse of firearms. Measures such as taxpayer-funded gun turn-in and destruction programs, knife and firearm bans at medical facilities, and magazine capacity restrictions unfairly target responsible gun owners in my community without demonstrable public safety benefits. I ask that you vote “NO” on this legislation and instead support policies that enforce existing laws and address criminal behavior, rather than restricting the rights of lawful citizens. Thank you for your time and consideration. Respectfully, Jan

My family and I hope you will reconsider all of these unconstitutional and tyrannical bills that seek to limit the God given right of citizens to defend themselves. Supporting these unconstitutional. bills as the Governor simultaneously supports the actions of Mr. Petti as a legal firearms owner, is indeed hypocrisy.

Good Morning. I respectfully oppose the following House Bills, which collectively place excessive burdens on law-abiding Virginians while offering little evidence of meaningful reductions in violent crime. These proposals raise serious concerns related to constitutional rights, due process, public safety, and cost. HB 19 (McClure) requires forfeiture of firearm rights for certain misdemeanors involving a broadly defined “dating relationship.” This imposes severe constitutional consequences without felony-level due process protections and relies on vague definitions prone to misuse. HB 21 (Helmer) allows civil lawsuits against firearm manufacturers and sellers for crimes committed with their products. This abandons long-standing liability principles by holding lawful businesses responsible for third-party criminal acts, increasing costs and reducing lawful access without improving public safety. HB 40 (Simon) criminalizes unfinished frames and receivers unless serialized, burdening lawful hobbyists and small manufacturers despite a lack of evidence that such items meaningfully drive crime. HB 93 (Bennett-Parker) mandates firearm surrender under protective orders in ways that may disarm innocent family members who are not accused of wrongdoing, undermining due process and property rights in shared households. HB 110 (Laufer) penalizes and allows towing of vehicles when a handgun is left unattended, even if secured. This may discourage lawful compliance with firearm-restricted locations by eliminating practical storage options. HB 217 (Helmer) bans commonly owned firearms and standard-capacity magazines manufactured after July 1, 2026. Such bans target arms in common lawful use and raise serious constitutional concerns while failing to address criminal misuse of existing firearms. HB 229 (Hernandez) prohibits firearms and many knives in medical facilities, removing lawful self-defense options from patients, visitors, and staff, including permit holders who have already undergone background checks. HB 626 (Callsen) restricts lawful firearm possession on college campuses, treating adult students and faculty as if they forfeit constitutional rights despite documented safety concerns and delayed emergency response times. HB 702 (Cole) establishes a taxpayer-funded firearm turn-in and destroy program with no demonstrated impact on violent crime, diverting resources from proven enforcement and prevention strategies. HB 871 (Downey) mandates specific storage methods and biometric safes in homes with minors, imposing costly, one-size-fits-all requirements that intrude into private homes and may delay access in emergencies. HB 969 (Price) creates a new state agency focused solely on firearms while ignoring broader contributors to violence such as repeat offenders, mental health access, and community-based interventions. HB 1359 (Hope) establishes a costly permit-to-purchase system with fingerprints, training mandates, and a de facto registry, creating delays and barriers to exercising a constitutional right without clear public safety benefits. Conclusion: Taken together, these bills represent a sweeping expansion of government control over lawful firearm ownership. They burden responsible citizens, weaken due process, and prioritize symbolic regulation over effective crime reduction. I urge the General Assembly to reject these measures and focus on enforcing existing laws and addressing violent criminal behavior.

Forum: These Bills are an attack on the lawful Citizen and will not stop the criminal element from doing harm. This has been proven time and time again. The intent of these Bills is to discourage the Citizenry from exercising their rights as protected by the US Constitution and the VA Constitution. These documents are explicit that our rights are being protected and not being given to us by the Govt. It is the Govt responsibility to protect our Bill of Rights and not to subvert them at the Federal and Local level. These bills seek to create a list and registry as forbidden by law. The declaration that all guns that are semi-automatic are "assault weapons" is absurd. The look of a gun does not define it as an assault weapon. These Bills have been stricken down by the highest court(s) in the land time and time again. The only reason for these bills is too attack the lawful citizen and will not do anything to stop the aggressor in his/her intent to do harm. There is significant history that illustrates that an armed populace in society is a peaceful and secure society. I respectfully oppose these Bills that attack the fundamental Bill of Rights that the Federal and State Constitutions protect. V/R, Mr. Charters

I stand with the VCDL and GOA. The proposed bills are tyrannical, these bills make it only harder on law abiding citizens. All gun laws are infringements on the Second Amendment. Just Remembering History” On April 21, 1775, Virginia’s Royal Governor, Lord Dunmore, ordered British marines to seize gunpowder from the Williamsburg powder magazine to prevent a colonial uprising. This "Gunpowder Incident" enraged colonists, leading to militia mobilization under Patrick Henry, forcing a payment for the powder and accelerating Virginia's march toward revolution. “

I oppose these bills because they are unconstitutional!!

I urge you not oppose all of these bills.

All of these bills pushing further gun control only hurt law abiding citizens and punish them for the actions of criminals. Further they aim to disarm potential victims in a lame attempt to establish “common sense” gun control that is anything but. California, Chicago, New York are the model for many of these bills and the evidence is clear that they are not effective and even harmful. If a criminal stole a car and drove it into a crowd of people, you wouldn’t hold the car’s owner responsible. You wouldn’t hold the vehicle’s manufacturer responsible. You wouldn’t pass a law that requires safe storage of vehicles. If someone exhibited a “red flag” you wouldn’t take aware their location driver’s license with no due process or investigation. We don’t do any of that because “common sense” says that it’s ridiculous. The difference between cars and firearms however is there is no Second Amendment for cars, which means that these laws make even less sense and are directly unconstitutional.

All of the aforementioned bills are a substantial attack the God given rights & the 2nd Amendment. These in fact are the opposite of good governance. How does the aforementioned reduce the size & scope of government? How does the aforementioned lead to affordability? There are no statistics that show a benefit to society! Furthermore the aforementioned will only lead to a higher government cost to the citizens while squashing the rights of the citizens!

I do not believe these bills are in alignment with the constitution of Virginia: Article I. Bill of Rights Section 13. Militia; standing armies; military subordinate to civil power That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power. Each of these will infringe on the right of the people of this state to bear arms. I expect the legislature to pass laws in accordance with the state and federal constitution, not in opposition to it. For these reasons, i am opposed to these bills.

As a single woman and trained gun owner, I object to any kind of restrictions against my rights as protected by the 2nd amendment. My safety and those of women like me depends on having unrestricted access to the purchase and ownership of a "great equalizer". The next training facility is over an hour from my house, and another I use is more than two hours away. If I cannot leave my gun unattended in the car, I cannot even take a break on my way to or from the range? And since when have taxpayers given you permission and a mandate to use our hard-earned tax money to "buy back" something you haven't bought in the first place? These programs have shown to be a proven failure in other communities. Please vote no.

As a resident of York County I am opposed to the bills listed above and wish for them to be rejected by this committee.

As a Virginian, I am completely opposed to HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB626, HB702, HB871, HB969, and HB1359. Similar ideas have been tried in the past in other states, and have been proven not to reduce any crime, but only serve to unnecessarily burden law-abiding citizens in the lawful exercise of their Second-Amendment rights. If "common sense" were used to try to reduce violent crime, it would be completely obvious that inanimate objects, can, by themselves, do nothing. The sole responsibility lies in the hands of the person who commits the crime, not in what object they chose to use in the perpetration of the crime. The focus of "public safety" initiatives should be keeping violent criminals off the streets, not limiting citizens of their Constitutionally -protected rights. I do not appreciate my tax dollars being used to advance this agenda, and then being further used to try to defend it in the inevitable litigation of these infringements on Virginian's rights. Thank you for your time.

All Anti-Gun bills are Unconstitutional and Impede Citizens' right to Self Defense. We, the residents of the Commonwealth of Virginia OPPOSE any and all of these and will fight each and every one of themthem

As a fellow Virginian, I urge you to please OPPOSE "gun control" bills in your committee. Concepts like an "assault weapons" ban, arbitrary magazine restrictions, "reasonable standards" for firearms businesses, and a "permit to purchase," just to name a few, do nothing to address crime in the Commonwealth. Criminals do not abide by the law, and bills like these only target law-abiding firearm owners and businesses. The General Assembly should instead pursue legislation that holds criminals accountable for their crimes, not legislation that creates new criminals overnight for lawful purchases. Many of the bills proposed have already been declared unconstitutional by multiple Supreme Court decisions. Most others are likely to be struct down in future court proceedings. Again, I urge you to OPPOSE gun control in your committee. Thank you for all that you do for Virginia. Respectfully, Mark Salamone

Unconstitutional. What part of shall not be infringed is misunderstood?

I firmly oppose any laws or policies that infringe upon my Second Amendment rights. I believe the right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental constitutional protection, and I do not support legislation that restricts law‑abiding citizens from exercising that right. Tucker Ophof Bristow, VA 20136

Stop all bills restricting our Second Amendment rights.

I strongly oppose this bill. HB 110

HB21 Status: In SubcommitteeFirearm industry members; creates standards of responsible conduct, civil liability. This law will make it impossible to sell firearms in Virginia. How do you expect a firearm manufacturer to make their guns thief prooof. The owner of the gun is responsible for safeguarding their weapon but criminals can still steal weapons. The manufacturer shouldn’t have any responsibility at that point. If someone broke into my car and found a way to steal it, it’s not Toyota’s fault, it’s the thief’s. The onus is on the citizens to not be criminal and steal guns or misuse them. Not on the manufacturer. This will make it hard for law abiding citizens, not criminals. HB40 Status: In SubcommitteePlastic firearms or receivers, unserialized firearms, etc.; transfer, etc., prohibited, penalties. We’re legislating against criminality that doesn’t exist. It should not be a criminal offense to have these. This turns normal citizens exercising their 2A rights into criminals. The actual criminals are those that plan to use their firearms against innocents. Not amateur gunsmiths with blank pieces of metal. HB 626, Delegate Callsen, restricts firearms at public institutions of higher education by requiring such firearms be part of an authorized program or activity inside a building. A solution in search of a problem. Higher education students are adults and have a right to self-defense. HB 1303, Delegate Ware, sets 90 days as the maximum number of days that the Virginia State Police can take when processing a non-resident concealed handgun permit. If the permit has not yet been approved after 90 days, then the permit is issued at that point. If the applicant is later found to be disqualified, the permit is revoked, and the applicant has to return it. This makes a lot of sense. No reason to delay law abiding citizens from being able to have access to self-defense. We cannot rely on police for 100% of the violence that happens in the community as they are not omnipresent or omnipotent. HB 217, Delegate Helmer, prohibits the sale, possession, transfer, and transport of an “assault firearm” made on or after July 1, 2026. It also prohibits sale, possession, transfer, and transport of an “assault firearm” to anyone under the age of 21. Magazines that hold more than 10 rounds and were made on or after July 1, 2026, are prohibited. The U.S. Supreme Court has said in both DC v Heller, and recently The New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen, that any firearm “in common use” is protected by the Second Amendment. The guns and magazines targeted by this bill are among the most common guns and magazines in the United States, making this bill unconstitutional. There are conservatively estimated to be over 20 million AR-15s and 700 million magazines that hold more than 10 rounds in civilian hands. HB 110, Delegate Laufer, creates a $500 civil penalty and subjects a vehicle to towing if a person leaves a visible handgun in an unattended vehicle. The car owner should not be at fault even if a criminal opens an unlocked car door to steal a firearm. It is the criminal who is solely to blame. This bill would put a handgun in the possession of, and under the control of, a tow truck company! Punish criminals and stop harassing good people.

I appose this bill.

My name is Cole Zerrenner, and I am a registered voter residing in Ashburn, Loudoun County, Virginia. I respectfully submit this written testimony in opposition to the following bills scheduled before the House Public Safety – Firearms Subcommittee: HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB626, HB702, HB871, HB969, HB1300, HB1303, and HB1359. I oppose these bills because, taken individually and collectively, they impose additional restrictions and penalties on law-abiding citizens while failing to meaningfully address criminal misuse of firearms or the underlying causes of violence. Many of these proposals expand prohibitions, create new compliance burdens, or rely on vague standards that raise concerns regarding due process, inconsistent enforcement, and unintended consequences. Several of the bills before the subcommittee emphasize preemptive restrictions or broad prohibitions rather than focusing on enforcement of existing laws, accountability for criminal conduct, or effective mental health interventions. Policies that reduce procedural safeguards or delay the exercise of constitutional rights risk undermining public confidence without clear evidence of improved public safety outcomes. I respectfully urge the subcommittee to consider whether these measures meaningfully target criminal behavior or instead primarily impact responsible Virginians who already comply with the law. Public safety is best served through targeted enforcement, due process protections, and policies that address root causes rather than symbolic or duplicative restrictions. Thank you for the opportunity to submit written testimony for the public record and for your consideration of my views. Respectfully submitted, Cole Zerrenner Ashburn, Loudoun County, Virginia

First and foremost, I fully support any comments made by Virginia Citizens Defense League, The NRA, and Gun Owners of America in regard to support for the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. As a fellow Virginian, I urge you to please OPPOSE "gun control" bills in your committee. Concepts like an "assault weapons" ban, arbitrary magazine restrictions, "reasonable standards" for firearms businesses, and a "permit to purchase," just to name a few, do nothing to address crime in the Commonwealth. Criminals do not abide by the law, and bills like these only target law-abiding firearm owners and businesses. The General Assembly should instead pursue legislation that holds criminals accountable for their crimes, not legislation that creates new criminals overnight for lawful purchases. A lot of these proposed bills are unconstitutional and may even be a civil rights violation due to the fact that they most certainly will disproportionally have a negative effect on minorities, women, and people of lower income and certainly violating an 18–20 year-old persons 2nd Amendment right to own and bear arms. If they have to work and pay taxes and be held accountable as an adult you can't legally deny them any rights under the constitution. Many of these proposed bills have already successfully been challenged at the U.S. Supreme court in rulings supporting the 2nd amendment. Examples cases- v Heller and v Bruen, so you are intentionally trying to pass bills that will not hold up in court and wasting valuable taxpayer money to pursue these bills. Again, I urge you to OPPOSE gun control in your committee. Thank you for all that you do for Virginia. Sincerely, Chris McDorman

Why I Oppose Each Bill below: HB 19 – Opposition: Punishes a non‑violent misdemeanor unrelated to firearms. Violates: Heller (2008); Hayes (4th Cir. 2009) – proportionality; Bruen (2022) – no historical basis for such a blanket ban. HB 21 – Opposition: Imposes strict liability for third‑party crimes, chilling lawful commerce. Violates: Heller (2008); Printz (1997) – cannot commandeer private actors; Bruen (2022) – no historic analogue. HB 40 – Opposition: Criminalizes already‑lawful homemade components and deprives property without compensation. Violates: Heller (2008); Miller (1939) – regulation must have a reasonable safety link; Bruen (2022); Lucas (1992) – takings. HB 93 – Opposition: Overbroad removal punishes lawful spouses and 18‑20‑year‑olds who may already possess firearms. Violates: Heller (2008); McDonald (2010); Bruen (2022) – age‑restriction lacks history; Carpenter (2018) – vague “if officer believes” standard violates due process. HB 110 – Opposition: Penalizes mere visibility and treats the gun as property that can be seized without due process. Violates: Heller (2008); Jones (2012) – towing = unlawful seizure; Bruen (2022) – no historic precedent. HB 217 – Opposition: Bars weapons in common lawful use and imposes capacity limits without historical support. Violates: Heller (2008); Bruen (2022); Miller v. Bonta (9th Cir. 2021). HB 229 – Opposition: Prevents lawful armed visitors in public medical settings without a narrow justification. Violates: Heller (2008); Bruen (2022); Katz (1967) – potential Fourth‑Amendment search issues. HB 626 – Opposition: Denies adult students the right to self‑defense on public campuses. Violates: Heller (2008); Bruen (2022); Washington v. Davis (1976) – lacks rational basis. HB 702 – Opposition: Authorizes confiscation/destruction of lawfully owned property without compensation or due process. Violates: Heller (2008); Kelo (2005) – takings require just compensation; Bruen (2022) - no historic precedent. HB 871 – Opposition: Expensive, tech‑exclusive requirement makes lawful loaded storage impracticable. Violates: Heller (2008); Bruen (2022); Willowbrook v. Olech (2000) – overinclusive impact on owners with minors. HB 969 – Opposition: Single‑issue agency risks viewpoint discrimination and may enable firearm‑specific regulations lacking constitutional footing. Violates: Heller (2008); Bruen (2022); Mathews v. Eldridge (1976) – inadequate procedural due process. HB 1359 – Opposition: Creates costly, time‑consuming barriers that effectively deny the right to acquire firearms for lawful purposes. Violates: Heller (2008); Bruen (2022); McDonald (2010); Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections (1966) – fee structure resembles a poll tax. The Virginia Constitution’s Article I § 16 protects an individual’s right to keep and bear arms, and the state Supreme Court requires any limitation to be narrowly tailored, historically grounded, and consistent with due‑process (§ 13) and takings (§ 14) protections. The bills listed: HB 19, 93, 110, 871 (mandatory surrenders/penalties); HB 21, 40, 1359 (civil‑liability or costly licensing); HB 217, 229, 626, 702 (bans on common‑use firearms or accessories); and HB 969 (a gun‑only state agency)—all impose restrictions without a clear historical analogue, over‑reach permissible regulation, and create undue financial or procedural burdens. Consequently, they conflict with Virginia’s constitutional guarantees.

I SUPPORT HB1303. A right delayed is a right denied. I OPPOSE HB19: Misdemeanors should not remove rights. I OPPOSE HB21: How could a firearm accessory seller reasonably know if they were selling a gun sling to a prohibited person? Should a car parts store be sued if they sold a seat cover for a car used in a bank robbery? I OPPOSE HB40: Even a chunk of aluminum, if sold to the public to become a frame or receiver once completed, must be serialized under this bill. The bill doesn’t grandfather existing homemade firearms. This bill is unconstitutional under Bruen. Homemade guns have been legal since before the United States existed. I OPPOSE HB93: There are multiple problems with the bill as written. If a husband and wife co-own a shotgun for home defense, for example, and the husband gets a protective order issued against him, the wife would no longer have access to that co-owned shotgun. That punishes the wife and needlessly endangers her life. Also, a person 18-20yo can legally possess rifles, shotguns, and handguns. Others right can not be removed because of the actions of another. I OPPOSE HB110: The car owner should not be at fault even if a criminal opens an unlocked car door to steal a firearm. It is the criminal who is solely to blame. I OPPOSE HB217: The U.S. Supreme Court has said in both DC v Heller, and recently in Bruen, that any firearm “in common use” is protected by the 2A. The guns and magazines targeted by this bill are among the most common guns and magazines in the US & VA, making this bill unconstitutional. I OPPOSE HB229: Disarming visitors and guests, including concealed handgun permit holders, at such facilities violates their right to protect themselves in an emergency. A U.S. District Court in the 2nd Circuit has restrained enforcement of just such a law for being unconstitutional under Bruen. I OPPOSE HB626: A solution in search of a problem. Higher education students and staff are adults and have a right to self-defense. I OPPOSE HB702: Destroying what might be perfectly functional, and possibly quite valuable, firearms is a waste of money. The State could offset any costs by selling the firearms to licensed gun dealers through an auction. This program is a “turn in” and not a “give-back” program, the government never owned them. I OPPOSE HB871: Biometric safes are more expensive than non-biometric safes. Biometric safes can be unreliable when being used under stress and they also require batteries to work. There are plenty of other locking mechanisms for safes that are more secure. I OPPOSE HB969: The Center would only be targeting violence committed using firearms and ignoring the root causes of crime, as well as all the other ways violence is inflicted on victims – knives, blunt objects, hands and feet, etc. Half of violent crimes are not committed with a firearm! I OPPOSE HB1359: This bill WILL get innocent people killed, as it will take at least two months before a person can purchase their first firearm. If they are purchasing that firearm for urgent self-defense, that is simply too long. The price to get a permit, is not equitable. Even citizens with CHPs will be limited to one handgun a month. Local law-enforcement will be handed a registry of gun owners. And gun rentals at shooting ranges will not be possible for people who have not yet got their permit or are visiting from out of state or from another country. It is sickening to see this bill even proposed.

This document breaks down my reasoning for supporting these bills.

I SUPPORT THIS BILL

Disarming the law-abiding, tax-paying citizenry of the Commonwealth is going to drive me away from this state. Stop creating unconstitutional efforts that curtail my Rights as an American Citizen. If you want to change the Right, then change the Constitution through the amendment process. Otherwise, focus on what you can really change and fund. Schools and roads. Quit wasting my hard earned money that I spend on local businesses that keep Virginians employed. I am not the only one who will vote with my feet. I left California for a reason...not you're trying to re-create it on the East coast.

Too many people with guns that shouldn’t be with guns. I know lazy gun owners who have had their items stolen. Lazy gun owners might as well be donating their legal firearms to criminals- putting them in dangerous hands should have more severe consequences. Adam T. lost his life protecting someone in a situation that could’ve been avoided if weapons weren’t involved. More strict gun laws will result in fewer cases of gun violence like this.

I support these bills to prevent gun violence in Virginia. Attached is the story of my friend Adam Turck’s tragic death due to gun violence in August 2025, and why the Friends of Adam Turck are choosing to support these five bills. Virginians like Adam have a right to be kind and brave without being killed, and it is the job of the state to guarantee that right.

Its is vital to the safety of the community that these bills be passed. on August 2, 2025 not to far from the capital building, one of my best friends, Adam Turck, was shot and killed on a beautiful Saturday morning trying to help a woman in the middle of a domestic violence altercation. The individual who shot him was a 19 year old boy who illegally had a gun. There were several eye witnesses and 2 recordings of the event that showed that Adam did everything right in remaining calm and attempting to defuse the situation, but that was not enough. Adam was a brave, kind and caring person. He would never be able to leave someone in need, but if these laws had been in place, he may never have had to step in in this situation. His lose has devastated our community and that is why we have come together to make sure these bills get passed. I know that the situations are not unique, as tragic as that is... and something needs to be done. Please vote yes.

I am IN SUPPORT of HB110. This law is not limiting anyones 2nd amendment right. Instead it promotes safe and responsible gun ownership, and would significantly reduce to number of stolen handguns in our state. Research shows that vehicle thefts account for roughly half of all reported gun thefts nationally in recent years, and stolen guns contribute significantly to firearm-related crimes. Leaving a handgun in plain view in an unattended vehicle is irresponsible and unnecessarily endangers our community.

HB 110 I SUPPORT this bill. HB 110 prohibits leaving a handgun visible in an unattended vehicle on public property. Simply put, it requires gun owners to store the firearm out of sight—such as in the glove compartment, center console —to prevent it from being readily observable from outside. This requirement is straightforward and not onerous for responsible gun owners. Many already take this basic precaution. HB 110 will help deter gun thefts from vehicles—a major source of stolen firearms entering criminal hands. HB 110 is a reasonable, narrowly tailored measure that promotes public safety without infringing on lawful gun ownership. HB19 I SUPPORT this bill. Under current Virginia law, a person convicted of misdemeanor assault against a family or household member is prohibited from possessing a firearm. This protection currently only applies primarily to spouses, ex-spouses or those with a child in common. It does not fully cover other intimate partners. There is no reasonable basis to treat violence against a dating partner differently from violence against a spouse when it comes to preventing harm from firearms. Those convicted of domestic assault should be prohibited from possessing firearms, full stop. HB 19 is a targeted, limited expansion of existing law. It closes the dangerous “boyfriend loophole” by extending the firearm prohibition to misdemeanor convictions for assault and battery against an intimate partner. This common-sense measure will help protect victims and the Commonwealth’s citizens. HB 93 I SUPPORT this bill. Under current Virginia law, individuals subject to a protective order or convicted of misdemeanor domestic assault are prohibited from possessing firearms. However, there is no clear mechanism to ensure these prohibited individuals actually relinquish their guns, leaving survivors at continued risk. HB 93 creates a straightforward enforcement mechanism for laws already on the books. It is targeted, limited in scope, and focused on protecting survivors of domestic violence by reducing the risk of armed abusers. This common-sense measure will help safeguard the Commonwealth’s citizens without creating new prohibitions. HB 21 SUPPORT this bill. HB 21 would require firearm industry members—manufacturers, distributors, importers, and sellers—to implement “reasonable procedures, safeguards, and business practices” to prevent the sale or distribution of firearms to prohibited persons, straw purchasers (those buying for someone barred from ownership), firearm traffickers, or anyone the seller has reasonable cause to believe poses a substantial risk of gun violence or self-harm. Firearm manufacturers and distributors handle a uniquely dangerous product. Like sellers of any potentially hazardous good, they should maintain reasonable safeguards to protect the public from negligent or reckless business practices that endanger Virginians. HB 1359 I SUPPORT this bill. HB 1359 would require any person who purchases a firearm to present a valid firearms purchaser license issued by the Department of State Police. as we require vehicle owners to obtain and maintain a license before driving a car, we should require gun owners to obtain and maintain a license before possessing a firearm. Attached is information about my friend Adam, who was a victim of gun violence last year.

My friend Adam was killed late last year helping save someone from violence committed by their partner. The perpetrator pulled a gun out of his backpack and shot Adam, then turned the gun on himself. Any one of these bills could have played a role in ensuring this did not happen, and saved so many people from devastating loss. I urge you to pass these bills.

As a concerned resident, parent, and active voter, I support this bill to keep Virginians safe from gun violence.

In summary, I support House Bills 19, 93, 110, 201, 691, 696, 702, 871, 901, 909, 969, 1303, and 1359. I oppose House Bills 21, 40, 207, 217, 229, 626, 700, 907, 919. Please refer to my attached document for further explanation.

As a father, I want to raise my child in a world where doing the right thing doesn't put them in danger. My friend Adam did the right thing. He stepped in to help someone who was in a bad situation, and that decision—one he made with clear eyes and a full heart for humanity—cost him his life. While I appreciate that many constituents in this state are opposed to any restrictions on their 2nd amendment rights, there are many more who support reasonable efforts to restrict access to firearms and penalize those who are careless with the weapons they own. We cannot say with any certainty that the passing of bills like HB 19 or HB 110 would have prevented Adam's death, but we can they will save others' in the future. And that's worth fighting for.

I SUPPORT this bill. Leaving a handgun in plain view in an unattended vehicle is irresponsible and unnecessarily endangers our community. In Richmond alone vehicle gun thefts have skyrocketed: from 225 reported in 2017 to over 600 in recent years. HB 110 is a reasonable, narrowly tailored measure that promotes public safety without infringing on lawful gun ownership. Attached is leave-behind from the Friends of Adam Turck that lay out the gun laws that can make our community safer and help prevent premature death in our community.

I am writing in memory of my friend Adam Turck, who was murdered with a .22 caliber handgun in Shockoe Bottom in August 2025. I support the following bills because I believe they will go a long way toward ensuring that what happened to Adam doesn't happen again. HB110: I SUPPORT this bill. HB 110 prohibits leaving a handgun visible in an unattended vehicle on public property. Simply put, it requires gun owners to store the firearm out of sight—such as in the glove compartment, center console —to prevent it from being readily observable from outside. This requirement is straightforward and not onerous for responsible gun owners. Many already take this basic precaution. Importantly, HB 110 will help deter gun thefts from vehicles—a major source of stolen firearms entering criminal hands. I want to stress that I support this bill, but not the similar bill being considered by the Senate, because it imposes a civil fine instead of a criminal penalty. HB 110 is a reasonable, narrowly tailored measure that promotes public safety without infringing on lawful gun ownership. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. HB19 I SUPPORT this bill. Under current Virginia law, a person convicted of misdemeanor assault against a family or household member is prohibited from possessing a firearm. However, this protection currently only applies primarily to spouses, ex-spouses or those with a child in common. It does not fully cover other intimate partners. There is no reasonable basis to treat violence against a dating partner differently from violence against a spouse when it comes to preventing harm from firearms. HB 19 is a targeted, limited expansion of existing law. It closes the dangerous “boyfriend loophole” by extending the firearm prohibition to misdemeanor convictions for assault and battery against an intimate partner. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. HB38 Under current Virginia law, individuals subject to a protective order or convicted of misdemeanor domestic assault are prohibited from possessing firearms. However, there is no clear mechanism to ensure these prohibited individuals actually relinquish their guns, leaving survivors at continued risk. HB 93 addresses this gap. The bill also notifies the individual that law enforcement may seek a search warrant if there's reason to believe firearms have not been relinquished. HB 93 creates a straightforward enforcement mechanism for laws already on the books. It is targeted, limited in scope, and focused on protecting survivors of domestic violence by reducing the risk of armed abusers. This common-sense measure will help safeguard the Commonwealth’s citizens without creating new prohibitions. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. HB21 I SUPPORT this bill. HB 21 would require firearm industry members to implement “reasonable procedures, safeguards, and business practices” to prevent the sale or distribution of firearms to prohibited persons, straw purchasers, firearm traffickers, or anyone the seller has reasonable cause to believe poses a substantial risk of gun violence or self-harm. In short, this bill establishes basic standards of responsible conduct and makes it easier to hold the industry accountable for reckless practices that fuel illegal gun trafficking, straw purchases, or other harms in our communities. This is a targeted, common-sense step toward greater accountability and safer communities. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill.

I SUPPORT this bill. HB 110 prohibits leaving a handgun visible in an unattended vehicle on public property. Simply put, it requires gun owners to store the firearm out of sight—such as in the glove compartment, center console —to prevent it from being readily observable from outside. This requirement is straightforward and not onerous for responsible gun owners. Many already take this basic precaution. Importantly, HB 110 will help deter gun thefts from vehicles—a major source of stolen firearms entering criminal hands. Research shows that vehicle thefts account for roughly half of all reported gun thefts nationally in recent years, and stolen guns contribute significantly to firearm-related crimes. In Richmond alone vehicle gun thefts have skyrocketed: from 225 reported in 2017 to over 600 in recent years (e.g., 644 in 2023 and similarly high numbers since). Leaving a handgun in plain view in an unattended vehicle is irresponsible and unnecessarily endangers our community. HB 110 is a reasonable, narrowly tailored measure that promotes public safety without infringing on lawful gun ownership. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill.

Comments Document

I SUPPORT THIS BILL.

I SUPPORT this bill. HB 110 prohibits leaving a handgun visible in an unattended vehicle on public property. Simply put, it requires gun owners to store the firearm out of sight—such as in the glove compartment, center console —to prevent it from being readily observable from outside. This requirement is straightforward and not onerous for responsible gun owners. Many already take this basic precaution. Importantly, HB 110 will help deter gun thefts from vehicles—a major source of stolen firearms entering criminal hands. Research shows that vehicle thefts account for roughly half of all reported gun thefts nationally in recent years, and stolen guns contribute significantly to firearm-related crimes. In Richmond alone vehicle gun thefts have skyrocketed: from 225 reported in 2017 to over 600 in recent years (e.g., 644 in 2023 and similarly high numbers since). Leaving a handgun in plain view in an unattended vehicle is irresponsible and unnecessarily endangers our community. HB 110 is a reasonable, narrowly tailored measure that promotes public safety without infringing on lawful gun ownership. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill.

I SUPPORT HB21, HB93, and HB110. These bills are common sense gun legislature and would help keep countless Virginians safe.

Comments Document

I support these Bills

HB 110 – Firearm in unattended vehicle; civil penalties I SUPPORT this bill. HB 110 is a reasonable, narrowly tailored measure that promotes public safety without infringing on lawful gun ownership. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. HB19 – Purchase, possession, or transportation of firearm; assault and battery of a family or household member or intimate partner; penalties I SUPPORT this bill. HB 19 is a targeted, limited expansion of existing law. It closes the dangerous “boyfriend loophole” by extending the firearm prohibition to misdemeanor convictions for assault and battery against an intimate partner. This common-sense measure will help protect victims and the Commonwealth’s citizens. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. HB 93 – Firearms; transfers to another person from a prohibited person I SUPPORT this bill. HB 93 creates a straightforward enforcement mechanism for laws already on the books. It is targeted, limited in scope, and focused on protecting survivors of domestic violence by reducing the risk of armed abusers. This common-sense measure will help safeguard the Commonwealth’s citizens without creating new prohibitions. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. HB21 – Firearm industry members; creates standards of responsible conduct, civil liability (available here) I SUPPORT this bill. This is a targeted, common-sense step toward greater accountability and safer communities. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill. HB 1359 – Firearm purchase requirements; penalties (available here) I SUPPORT this bill. HB 1359 would require any person who purchases a firearm to present a valid firearms purchaser license issued by the Department of State Police. This bill would have three large practical impacts: (i) Prohibit possession of firearms by anyone under age 21; (ii) require regular firearms safety training for all licensed owners to promote responsible handling and storage (iii) create a de facto waiting period: Individuals could not purchase a firearm without first obtaining a license, a process that can take up to 45 days. This would help reduce impulsive purchases that can lead to irreversible harm in our communities. Just as we require vehicle owners to obtain and maintain a license before driving a car, we should require gun owners to obtain and maintain a license before possessing a firearm. This is a targeted, common-sense step toward greater accountability and safer communities. Accordingly, I SUPPORT this bill.

Comments Document

I support these bills.

I stand strongly with the VCDL on these proposed laws. VA has always been a bipartisan state on gun issues, and although the second amendment has may purposes- it must be preserved to protect the citizens of this state. Overreaching federal law enforcement, and all threats domestic and foreign are kept in line by responsible firearm ownership. Gun control also impacts lower income groups, impoverished populations, and people of color disproportionately. We must preserve the 2nd amendment.

I support HB110 as it would save lives by preventing gun thefts from cars. Gun rights come with equal levels of responsibility, and gun violence is not an acceptable or constitutionally protected side effect of civilian gun ownership. Gun owners should be more proactive to prevent their guns from being stolen. Half of all stolen guns are stolen from a car, and half of all crimes committed with a gun have a stolen gun used. Richmond has one of the highest rates of gun thefts from cars in the entire United States, so this bill can make a huge impact on public safety in Virginia.

As a concerned parent and Virginian, I support these bills.

I strongly oppose this bill.

I am writing to express my strong opposition to the recently proposed bills on gun control. While I understand the intent behind these bills—to enhance public safety—I firmly believe that they will have unintended consequences that infringe on the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens. The Second Amendment guarantees "the right of individuals to keep and bear arms", and it is a fundamental part of what makes this country free. These bills being proposed would place unnecessary and burdensome restrictions on responsible gun owners, making it harder for Virginians to exercise their rights in a lawful and safe manner. Rather than focusing on restricting access to firearms, I urge the General Assembly to consider measures that target criminals and illegal activities, such as enforcing stricter penalties for those who use firearms in the commission of crimes, or improving background checks for gun purchases. It is essential to address the root causes of violence, such as mental health issues and gang-related activity, rather than punishing responsible gun owners who follow the law. Furthermore, these proposed bills could create significant logistical challenges for gun owners, particularly those who rely on their firearms for self-defense, hunting, or recreational activities. The financial burden and potential legal ramifications of complying with these new regulations would be overwhelming for many Virginians. I strongly urge you to reconsider these proposals and to focus on policies that protect both our rights and our communities. I trust that you will make the best decision for all Virginians, and I sincerely hope that you will oppose these bills.

I support HB110 because half of all stolen guns are stolen from a car. This bill would help reduce crimes committed from stolen guns.

HB110, Del. Laufer (D): This bill will save lives by eliminating provisions allowing any person to store their firearms in their car and preventing firearms from being stolen from cars. I SUPPORT this bill as half of all stolen guns are ones that are stolen from a car, and half of all crimes committed with a gun have a stolen gun used. This is a straightforward way to reduce these crimes and gun violence. HB19, Del. McClure (D): I SUPPORT this bill as it expands critical protections to additional relationship categories. This is a critical step to ensuring that more individuals are protected from domestic violence and gun violence. HB21, Del. Helmer (D): I SUPPORT this bill as industry accountability is a great way to force manufacturers to raise standards of safety. Firearm manufacturers and distributors must be held accountable for reckless behavior and practices that make our communities less safe. HB229, Del. Hernandez (D): I SUPPORT this bill and commonsense restrictions on gun access and believe in protecting the safety of our medical care providers. HB24, Del. Helmer (D): I SUPPORT this bill as visitors wishing to carry concealed handguns in Virginia should meet the same level of safety requirements that we require of our state’s residents. HB40, Del. Simon (D): I SUPPORT this bill as it would make it easier to prosecute and prevent crimes committed by ghost guns. HB626, Del. Callsen (D): I SUPPORT extending the protection of k-12 schools to our institutions of higher education. HB702, Del. Cole (D): I SUPPORT this bill as currently it can be incredibly difficult to find a way to get a gun destroyed that you no longer want or has come into your possession through something like inheritance. The public benefits from the creation of more drop-off point for individuals, of their own free will, to relinquish firearms to be destroyed. HB700, Hayes (D): I SUPPORT this bill as waiting periods provide law enforcement additional time to perform an accurate background check and create a “cooling off” period to prevent acts of violence or suicide attempts. HB93, Bennett-Parker: I SUPPORT this bill, as it strengthens protections for domestic violence survivors. We must establish a clear process to separate a person from their firearms who has been convicted of a domestic violence offense, or who is subject to a protective order.

Adam Turck was shot and killed in August of 2025 when he saw someone in trouble and intervened to help. He was in his early 30's and beloved in both the theater and weightlifting community here in RVA. Lets not make his loss of life be in vain. Gun ownership is already at an all time high, so it makes sense to enact laws that reflect that. These four bills are not trying to take away anyone's guns. They are trying to create deterrents to tragic events like the one that happened to Adam. Please dont be swayed by the ugly rhetoric that I have read in some of the comments. We can enact a few common sense gun safety laws without people fearing that their guns will be taken away. That is an old argument and one that is never going to be realized. So lets move on from that and do what we can to ensure the public safety as much as possible. Thanks for your consideration of: HB 93, HB 702, HB 110, and HB 19

I support H110 as it reflects a commitment to common-sense solutions that keep our communities safer and help prevent tragedies before they happen.

Too many guns are stolen in Va. Guns should not be in plain view unattended to cut down on the number of stolen guns which are used in crimes.

I support the presented gun laws that will improve the Commonwealth’s safety

In 2021, my elderly stepmother shot through a closed door during an argument with my elderly father, striking him in the back and paralyzing him. My father has spent the past five years in extreme physical agony, unable to walk, paying caretakers out of pocket to hoist him in and out of bed, unable to care for himself. The lack of movement in his life has led to horrific bed sores, which become bone infections, which lead to extended hospital stays and a horrible quality of life. All this because my stepmother was allowed to have a gun. There are countless stories like this of the bullet's aftermath: of the lifelong physical and mental damage that comes from guns. It has been a horrific five years, full of physical pain and mental anguish for our entire family. I wouldn't wish this on anyone. The bills before you now will not only save lives, they will spare whole swaths of our neighborhoods from needing to deal with these horrors. One bullet, lodged in my father's spine, didn't kill him. Instead, it has shattered the life he had, his ability to work and care for himself, and his family. Each bullet we allow in our communities has the ability to do the same. His care has bankrupted him personally, and now he relies on state care and Medicaid, an avoidable burden on taxpayers. There are numerous reasons guns have no place in our society, and I hope my father's story is just one that helps make change. Please support all bills that make guns harder to access, harder to keep. Please do everything you can to keep guns out of the hands of our society. Thank you for the great work you are doing to keep Virginians safe.

This bill will help to prevent firearms from being stolen from vehicles by eliminating provisions allowing any person to store their firearms in their car. Under this bill, any person wishing to store their firearms in their car must have a valid concealed handgun permit. I SUPPORT this bill as half of all stolen guns are ones that are stolen from a car, and half of all crimes committed with a gun have a stolen gun used.

I respectfully submit this comment in opposition to HB110, HB21, HB217, HB229, HB24, HB623, HB626, HB700, HB871, and HB916. These proposals represent a sweeping expansion of firearm regulation that raises serious constitutional concerns under both the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 13 of the Virginia Constitution. Recent Supreme Court precedent makes clear that firearm regulations must be consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Broad restrictions on commonly owned firearms, magazines, permitting, carry, storage, commerce, and industry liability extend well beyond that tradition and place undue burdens on law abiding Virginians. Several proposals also seek to impose increased taxation of firearms, ammunition, and accessories such as the proposed $500 tax on suppressors. These proposals are nothing more than a means of discouraging lawful ownership. Using taxation to create financial barriers to the exercise of a constitutional right is deeply concerning and disproportionately impacts lower income Virginians. Constitutional rights should not be accessible only to those who can afford significant additional fees or penalties. Many of these bills do not meaningfully target criminal misuse, but instead regulate the conduct of responsible citizens who already comply with existing laws. Measures such as expanded prohibitions, waiting periods, altered permitting standards, reciprocal permit limitations, storage penalties, civil liability expansion, forfeiture hurdles, location based carry bans, and punitive taxation risk criminalizing otherwise lawful behavior while doing nothing to address violent crime or its underlying causes. I respectfully urge the General Assembly to reject these proposals in their entirety. Virginians should not be asked to surrender constitutional rights through cumulative restrictions, financial barriers, or regulatory complexity that would never be tolerated if applied to any other enumerated right. Public safety and constitutional liberty are not mutually exclusive, and legislation that undermines one in the name of the other ultimately serves neither. The Commonwealth can and must pursue solutions that respect both the Constitution and the Virginians it exists to serve.

I am writing to oppose the current slate of firearm restriction bills before the General Assembly. While these proposals are framed as public safety measures, in practice they disproportionately harm marginalized Virginians — including racial minorities, LGBTQ+ individuals (especially trans people), immigrants, and low-income residents — who often face higher risks of targeted violence and slower or unequal police response. These bills add costs, delays, and bureaucratic hurdles to exercising a fundamental right. Increased fees, mandatory waiting periods, feature bans, and expanded disqualifications fall hardest on people with limited financial resources, unstable work schedules, or justified concerns about their personal safety. For many vulnerable individuals, the ability to lawfully and promptly acquire a firearm is not about ideology, but about self-defense. History shows that restrictive gun laws are most aggressively enforced in minority communities, amplifying disparities in arrests, prosecution, and legal exposure — even when no harm has occurred. Expanding civil liability, criminal penalties, and subjective risk standards increases that risk. Public safety should not come at the expense of civil rights or equal access to self-protection. Policies that price people out of their rights or delay lawful self-defense do not address the root causes of violence and instead leave the most vulnerable less safe. I respectfully urge you to oppose these bills and support approaches that protect both public safety and the rights of all Virginians, regardless of income, identity, or background. Thank you for your time and consideration.

I respectfully submit this comment as a Virginia citizen and member of the r/VAGuns subreddit, in principled opposition to HB110. I oppose HB110 as written. Article I, §13 of the Virginia Constitution protects “the right of the people to keep and bear arms in defense of themselves and the state.” The Second Amendment, as interpreted in District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago, secures an individual right to possess firearms for lawful purposes, including self-defense in the home. New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen requires that firearms regulations align with the historical tradition of firearm regulation. HB110 burdens a fundamental right without a historical analogue. There is no tradition in American law of penalizing lawful storage of firearms in private vehicles when unattended; nor is there a clear historical counterpart limiting where a law-abiding person may store a firearm they own when not observing their vehicle. The bill prohibits leaving a visible handgun in an unattended vehicle and imposes a civil penalty up to $500, with potential removal of the vehicle. Proponents may assert public safety benefits, but credible reviews by RAND indicate that evidence for specific firearm storage mandates producing measurable reductions in violent crime is limited and mixed. The most relevant data (FBI UCR/NIBRS, CDC WISQARS) identify that firearms taken in thefts can be diverted to criminal use, but HB110 lacks tailoring to theft risk factors and does not demonstrate a statistically significant public safety impact relative to existing burglary and theft statutes. This type of civil penalty regime has no robust, peer-reviewed evidence showing reduction in violent crime rates in jurisdictions that have adopted similar laws. HB110 is overbroad and redundant. Current Virginia law already prohibits theft, unlawful possession, and misuse of firearms. Penalizing a lawful owner for a visible firearm in an unattended vehicle conflates lawful behavior with criminal exposure to theft, irrespective of negligence or illegal intent. Importantly, the bill creates enforcement ambiguity: visibility standards are subjective, and ordinary, lawful behavior (e.g., lawful transport between destinations) could trigger penalties. It potentially criminalizes routine conduct more appropriately addressed through public education rather than civil penalties, and risks selective enforcement against certain demographics or neighborhoods. The civil penalty up to $500 and potential vehicle removal disproportionately burdens individuals of limited means. Ordinary citizens who momentarily leave a vehicle parked while attending to errands could face fines that constitute a significant economic hardship. Enforcement discretion may also exacerbate racial and socioeconomic disparities in vehicle stops and citations, compounding distrust in law enforcement and undermining equitable application of law. HB110 does not survive the post-Bruen historical-tradition framework, lacks compelling empirical support, duplicates existing criminal protections, and risks inequitable enforcement and undue burden on law-abiding Virginians. I respectfully urge the Committee to oppose HB110.

I support this bill as the data and evidence show that it will reduce harm and deaths from guns. Taking this measure will ensure that guns are used responsibly and only for the intended consequences. Owning a gun is a serious responsibility and measures like this must be put into action as currently they are being misused and causing an epidemic in this country. Guns are the #1 killer of children and teens in the United States. When the impact of an item causes so much harm, measures must be put into place to protect people, especially children.

I support the following bills because guns are the number one cause of death for children in our commonwealth and our nation. HB 110 will help reduce the number of gun thefts from cars, and these thefts are on the rise. Additionally, we need to close the boyfriend loophole from domestic violence offenders (HB19).

These proposed bills are clear and direct violations of our 2nd Amendment Constitutional right. Virginia has been an upstanding example of bi-partisan gun ownership since its birth as a Commonwealth. At a time when many other constitutional rights are being directly challenged by the Federal Government, with little resistance from the Supreme Court & Congress, it is extremely ignorant and out of touch for Virginia representatives to even consider passing these unconstitutional bills. Whether it is Republicans or Democrats it seems our rights are being pinched away, piece by piece. I ask our representatives and Governor to use "common sense" and not pass these blatant violations to our guaranteed constitutional right. You representatives cannot simply pick and choose which constitutional amendments apply to citizens or we may as well not have a constitution at all.

As a new resident of Virginia, a state full of history, I strongly urge to vote AGAINST this bill. Criminals do not care about laws, so why should law abiding citizens get punished?

As a representative of r/VAGuns, a popular online community of Virginia gun owners on the social media platform Reddit, we fully and unanimously DO NOT support this bill and others like it that blatantly violate Second Amendment rights with disregard for tradition or case law. These bills DO NOT represent practical, balanced measures that help safeguard our community, and r/VAGuns does NOT back these efforts to infringe on the rights of Virginians.

I strongly oppose this bill. As the government continues to restrict the places where law-abiding citizens may legally carry firearms, many people are left with no practical option other than securing their firearm in their vehicle. Penalizing gun owners for complying with existing carry restrictions creates an unreasonable and unfair burden on those who are following the law. Common sense tells us that a person should not be held responsible for the criminal actions of another. This principle applies to all forms of property. If this bill were to pass, would it then be reasonable to sue a vehicle owner because a criminal stole their car and committed a crime? Of course not. The same logic applies here. This legislation misplaces responsibility. Rather than deterring criminals, it punishes responsible citizens who take lawful steps to protect themselves and their property. Criminals who steal firearms are already committing serious crimes, yet this bill shifts the focus away from those offenders. If the General Assembly truly wishes to reduce firearm-related crime, it should focus on the individuals committing those crimes. Increase penalties for stealing firearms, strengthen consequences for breaking and entering, and ensure that prosecutors and Attorneys General fully enforce existing laws. Criminals will continue to harm Virginians until meaningful accountability is placed where it belongs—on those who commit the crimes. This bill does not pass the common-sense test. I urge the committee to reject it and instead pursue policies that target criminal behavior rather than law-abiding citizens who are doing the right thing.

To the Members of the House Public Safety Committee: I respectfully submit this comment in opposition to HB110 as a private citizen concerned with both constitutional fidelity and effective public safety policy. While the bill aims to reduce firearm theft from vehicles, it does so through a mechanism that is neither supported by historical tradition under Heller and Bruen nor justified by empirical evidence. HB110 prohibits leaving a handgun visible within an unattended motor vehicle and imposes a civil penalty up to $500, with potential vehicle removal. The bill does not regulate criminal misuse of firearms. Instead, it penalizes otherwise lawful conduct by peaceable individuals, including lower income Virginians who rely on their vehicles as secure temporary storage when prohibited from carrying inside workplaces or government buildings. Because vehicle based storage is often the only option available, the bill’s financial penalty risks disparate impact on working class and minority citizens. From a constitutional perspective, HB110 reflects a form of situational storage mandate. Modern storage regulations must comport with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. No meaningful historical analogue exists for civil penalties tied to the temporary placement of lawfully owned arms inside private chattel property, visible or not. Under Bruen, such a regulation must be justified by relevant historical tradition, and modern public safety concerns cannot substitute for that requirement. HB110 also suffers from internal inconsistency. If visibility is the alleged harm driver, Virginia law already criminalizes theft, tampering, and unlawful entry into motor vehicles. Enforcing these existing statutes is the most direct method of addressing firearm theft. This bill instead shifts liability onto the victim of theft rather than deterring the underlying criminal act. The Committee should avoid policies that invert culpability in this way. Empirically, the relationship between visibility of firearms in vehicles and subsequent violent misuse is not supported by conclusive evidence. While firearm theft from vehicles has risen in some jurisdictions, data show that these incidents correlate more strongly with high crime areas and patterns of opportunistic auto break ins than with whether a firearm was partially visible. States with similar restrictions have not demonstrated clear reductions in firearm related crime attributable to visibility prohibitions. The bill therefore lacks the evidentiary foundation required to justify burdening lawful owners. Finally, the bill invites selective enforcement. The definition of an “unattended motor vehicle” hinges on the owner’s ability to “observe” the vehicle, introducing a standard that differs across neighborhoods and policing contexts, again risking unequal impact. For these reasons, I urge the Committee to oppose HB110. Respectfully submitted. References: District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008). New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022). HB110 bill text, “Firearm in unattended motor vehicle; civil penalty,” §§ 46.2 1215.1(A)–(D), via LIS and LegiScan. [legiscan.com], [lis.virginia.gov] Bureau of Justice Statistics, data on theft related firearm acquisition patterns FBI UCR/NIBRS reporting on motor vehicle break ins and associated theft trends

I am writing to oppose this legislation as a proud Virginia resident. This legislation will have no effect on public safety and will only provide an undue burden on the law abiding residents of Virginia. Other states have tried these methods and have shown no drastic reduction in gun violence. Instead, this merely prevents law abiding Virginians from fully exercising their constitutional rights. And it is clearly a constitutional right of both our nation and the state. It is the only amendment where “shall not be infringed” is expressly stated. Under the recent New York vs Bruen decision, there must be historical precedent for it to be constitutional of which there is none especially none that are not based in racist ideologies. I urge my delegates to vote no on this legislation and will be allocating my vote accordingly.

As a representative of r/VAGuns, a popular online community of Virginia gun owners on the social media platform Reddit, we fully and unanimously endorse this bill and others like it that promote common-sense gun laws. Our community stands united in support of the recent legislation being passed in the General Assembly, which aims to protect and strengthen our neighborhoods while respecting the rights of responsible gun owners. These bills represent practical, balanced measures that help safeguard our community, and r/VAGuns proudly backs these efforts to promote safety and responsibility across Virginia.

Simply unconstitutional. Only a tyrant would agree with this. A waste of time and money for no benefit.

This bill does more harm to law abiding citizens. This bill does nothing to curb crime or be harsher on criminals. This bill will not help secure the safety of law abiding citizens.

I oppose HB110 | Laufer | Firearm in unattended motor vehicle as it will create nuisance tickets. Between very realistic air soft guns and cosplay - people leave realistic toys that look and in some cases feel like the real thing. The intent is good but we have good laws requiring fire arms to be kept locked up. Hence real fire arms will rarely be subject to this. Airsoft and toys will create false reports. Cities like Richmond, Hampton, Virginia Beach, et al have conventions drawing in CosPlayers with just this type of toy guns. Please strike this down and continue the fight on a different law.

HB110 | Laufer CRIMINALISES the victim and incentivizes these types of crime to go UNREPORTED. It allows guns to fall into the hands of CRIMINALS and then you penalize person who the crime was committed against. HB21 | Helmer HB217 | Helmer HB24 | Helmer These LIMIT the gun RIGHTS of Virginians. The 2nd amendment does not grant rights to it's people, it prevents governments from taking the INALIENABLE RIGHTS away from it's people. This goes against the 2nd amendment, the Virginia Bill of rights Art I Section 13 and your oath of office. Sic Semper Tyrannis. Remember that Helmer

I support this bill because on average, at least one gun is stolen from a car every nine minutes in the United States, and the rate of gun thefts from cars is triple what it was a decade ago.

I oppose the following bills. HB110 | Laufer | Firearm in unattended motor vehicle; civil penalty. This is an attempt to criminalize the victim. Where else can I person store a firearm to go into a non permissible location. This is especially important on an unexpected visit to such a location HB21 | Helmer | Firearm industry members; creates standards of responsible conduct, civil liability. This is an obvious attempt to sue businesses out of business. HB217 | Helmer | Assault firearms and certain ammunition feeding devices; importation, sale, etc., prohibited. Millions of these are already in VA and the rest of the country. According to the Bruin decision, these are already in common use. HB24 | Helmer | Concealed handgun permits; reciprocity with other states. VA enjoys one of the broadest reciprocity agreements in the country. Is this based on any evidence or just feel good measure. HB40 | Simon | Plastic firearms or receivers, unserialized firearms, etc.; transfer, etc., prohibited, penalties. Since before the creation of this country the people have had the right to produce their own firearms.

I oppose this bill. It places civil liability on the victim of a crime, not the criminal. What if someone stole a bottle of alcohol out of a vehicle, got drunk, drove their car and killed someone. Are you going to also hold the original owner of the alcohol civilly liable? People who have property (no matter what the property is) stolen out of their car by a criminal should not be held civilly liable.

I AM AGAINST HB110, IT criminalizes lawful behavior by focusing on how a law-abiding citizen stores a firearm in their own private property. While framed as a safety measure, this bill does not address criminal misuse of firearms. Instead, it imposes after-the-fact penalties on lawful owners, based on subjective standards such as visibility and enforcement discretion. Firearms are already commonly stolen from vehicles by criminals who ignore laws entirely. HB110 does nothing to deter those criminals. What it does do is shift liability onto responsible gun owners who have committed no violent act, no reckless behavior, and no criminal intent.

These proposed laws are onerous and unconstitutional. No person who swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution should be able to support this in good conscience. This is a disgrace to the legislature, the people, and this State.

I think this is a logical and creative proposal. While there is a level of controlling individual property rights with this bill, the intention is to dissuade further crime from improper management of personal property. I support this bill and think it's a good idea. This is non-infringing "common sense gun control"

I am writing to express my strong opposition to the anti-gun bills scheduled for consideration in your subcommittee meeting on January 29, 2026. As a law-abiding citizen who values the rights enshrined in the United States Constitution, particularly the Second Amendment, I urge you to vote against these measures that infringe upon the fundamental right to keep and bear arms. The Second Amendment guarantees the right of the people to keep and bear arms, a right that shall not be infringed. These bills, including but not limited to HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB702, HB871, HB969, and HB1359, represent direct assaults on this constitutional protection. They impose unnecessary restrictions on firearm ownership, possession, and transfer that disproportionately burden responsible gun owners while doing nothing to address the root causes of crime. It is a well-established fact that criminals, by definition, do not obey laws. Measures like bans on certain firearms (HB217), mandatory storage requirements (HB871), prohibitions on unserialized firearms (HB40), and penalties for leaving firearms in vehicles (HB110) will only disarm law-abiding citizens who follow the rules. These individuals are not the source of violent crime; rather, they are often the ones who rely on their Second Amendment rights for self-defense, hunting, and sport. Criminals will continue to acquire and use firearms illegally, unaffected by these new regulations, leaving ordinary Virginians more vulnerable. History and data show that gun control laws do not reduce crime rates but instead empower those who operate outside the law. For example, cities with strict gun laws often experience higher rates of violent crime compared to areas where law-abiding citizens can more freely exercise their rights. These bills will create more "gun-free" zones and bureaucratic hurdles that criminals ignore, effectively turning law-abiding citizens into easier targets. I respectfully request that you reject these infringement on our constitutional rights and focus instead on policies that target actual criminal behavior, such as enforcing existing laws against violent offenders and supporting mental health initiatives. Protecting the Second Amendment is essential to preserving our freedoms and ensuring public safety for all Virginians. Thank you for your time and consideration. I hope you will vote NO on these anti-Second Amendment bills. Sincerely, Bailey Pratt

In reviewing these various bills it seems that many of them disregard the Constitution that was sworn to be upheld. Additionally several have already been ruled on in various courts across the country. They serve to divide constituents especially those who vote rather than provide civil discourse and leadership. They further fail to address larger issues that plague our society. Punishing those who abide by the law and creating penalties for innocent civilians is conceptually flawed. I urge you all to reexamine the methods behind these bills and abandon them at this point. Work toward the greater good and try something that hasn’t already failed repeatedly. Truly focus on serving this great Commonwealth. It will serve all of us better in the future.

HB1303, I support. The remaining bills are unnecessary and bureaucratic. You are creating bills meant to solve statistically insignificant events. HB1359 and HB217 are particularly objectionable. Requiring a "purchaser license" infringes on the right to bear arms and is a complete duplication of existing background checks. The assault firearm definition is unconstitutional and will not stand up to legal challenge. Our tax dollars and attorney general resources will be wasted on such an obviously flawed legislation. Gun buy back programs are have proven to be a waste of tax payer dollars with no impact on gun crime statistics. HB110 is very heavy handed. Just because someone could detect a weapon in a private motor vehicle should not make that vehicle subject to confiscation by the state nor a penalty applied to the firearm owner. This is totally a way to punish firearm owners without solving any real gun violence crimes that you, as legislators, could better focus your time and effort on. Focus on enforcing existing laws and not letting habitual criminals get away with warnings or light sentencing for their crimes. That is the common sense approach. We have more than enough laws, we do not need more ways to trap law abiding citizens and our merchants with this slew of bills.

As a responsible gun owner, these Bills to limit our ability to use rifles and firearms for sporting activities is against our second amendment rights. Even further to take away or make it against the law to have magazines greater than 10 rounds makes no logical sense. It only helps out the criminals who will still have them. It is proven in Chicago with strict gun laws they don’t work as they have the highest murder rates. Please stop these bills and focus on keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill.

While I support common sense laws, I feel this bill is unfair because it removes the grandfather clause for people that own magazines for their firearms already. Most firearms sold and owned in Virginia have magazines larger than this and it is not fair to to ask law abiding and responsible citizens to foot the bill for disposal, conversion, and replacement of their existing magazines. The state should either allow people to keep the firearms and accessories they already own (my preference) or offer to buy back the magazines at market rate, or allow a tax deduction for the purchase of replacement magazines. I am especially worried about the case where women and other people who are at a disadvantage to harassment and attack and who own normal, common firearms for defense will now be found to be criminals under this bill. Gun rights are womens rights. Gun rights are trans rights.

To Whom it may concern. I write you today, to hopefully persuade you in NOT voting for HB217, HB 626, HB 1303 and HB1359. I am retired military and a conceal carry holder. I am a avid hunter and visit the range often to shoot at different types of firearms and also Sporting Clays. With these bills you are now criminalizing hundreds of thousands of Virginians who do this legally, without any issues. These bills will do nothing but hurt the law abiding citizen. For the permit to purchase, if I have a conceal permit, and I still go through a background check everytime I buy a gun, why do I need a card that says I am good. My 2nd Amendment right, and fact I have passed a background check is all I should need to purchase a firearm. For HB 217, Assault Weapons ban, once again is taking away majority of the guns that law abiding citizens have, this bill will not do anything for the people who already plan harm on someone. Assault Weapons by definition are not allowed to purchase unless you go though the NFA process. A Semi Auto weapon is not a "Assault Weapon". 10 round magazine, this bill is once again just hurting the law abiding citizen. What I would like to say to finish this off is PLEASE take the time to think about these bills. I ask you, Do criminals care what the laws are? Are they going to turn their stuff in? If we can hold criminals accountable then we start there. Lets take some time and come up with laws that require Firearm Safety in schools. Kids that have gun safety and know about them and have been around them will act differently then those who have not.

HB 217 proposes to unlawfully strip VA citizens of their right to bear arms.

If passed, HB 217 will criminalize my family overnight and many families throughout Virginia. This bill will do nothing to reduce crime or provide treatment to the mentally ill, but instead seeks to disarm law abiding Virginians.

This bill is unconstitutional and seeks to criminalize my family and other families like mine in Virginia. This type of weapons ban will only negatively affect law abiding citizens and will do nothing to prevent firearm related crimes.

Dear Members of the Virginia House Public Safety Firearms Subcommittee: I am writing to express my deep concerns regarding several of the bills currently on the docket at today’s meeting that I believe impose overly restrictive and chilling effects on the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Virginians. As someone with over six decades of active participation in shooting sports, I feel compelled to share my perspective based on extensive experience in the responsible exercise of these constitutional rights. For more than 60 years, I have been a devoted participant in shooting sports across various disciplines. Throughout this time, I have witnessed firsthand how responsible gun ownership and proper safety training create a culture of respect for firearms and the rights they represent. I am both an NRA Certified Range Safety Officer and a United States Marine Corps Certified Range Safety Officer, credentials that reflect my commitment to the highest standards of firearm safety and education. In these roles, I have dedicated countless hours to ensuring that shooters of all skill levels understand and practice safe firearm handling. Much of the proposed legislation before your committee, in my view, risks discouraging lawful participation in shooting sports and responsible firearm ownership without demonstrably addressing criminal misuse. Overly broad restrictions often burden those who already comply with the law, while doing little to deter individuals who disregard it entirely. I respectfully urge the Subcommittee to carefully consider whether these measures strike the appropriate balance between public safety and the constitutional rights of law-abiding Virginians. Shooting sports have been an integral part of American culture and Virginia's heritage. They teach discipline, responsibility, focus, and respect. These are values that strengthen our communities. Overly burdensome regulations such as those on the docket today do not distinguish between those who respect the law and those who do not; instead, they disproportionately affect those of us who have demonstrated decades of safe and responsible firearm use. I urge this committee to carefully consider the unintended consequences of legislation that may seem reasonable in theory but proves impractical or unjust in application. The rights protected by the Second Amendment are fundamental, and any restrictions placed upon them must be narrowly tailored, clearly justified, and respectful of Virginia's long tradition of responsible gun ownership. I thank you for allowing me to submit this written response and for providing the opportunity for citizens to voice their concerns on these important matters. More importantly, I thank each of you for your service to the Commonwealth of Virginia. The work you do on behalf of our citizens is vital to our democracy, and I appreciate your willingness to consider all perspectives as you deliberate on these critical issues. Respectfully submitted, George Mather, Jr. 6212 Sudley Church Court Fairfax Station, VA 22039 Email: mather.george.6212@gmail.com Mobile: 1.703.598.8848

The bills under consideration are only going to affect those who have no intention of breaking the law. Coupled with the other bills lessening the penalties for many violent crimes, these will do nothing to prevent crime. Criminals do not follow the law. That is a textbook definition. We have plenty of laws to deal with those who perpetrate crimes. What is needed is to deal with the existing criminals. Stop what leads these people to break the law to begin with. Punish those who commit violent crimes firmly. Stop the revolving door justice that keeps them on the streets committing more crimes. Making the law abiding public defenseless while turning more violent criminals loose makes no sense. Police forces are not bodyguards! All that can be expected after calling 911 is the victim being taken to a hospital, or possibly the morgue, and an investigation, hopefully followed by an arrest. The only person that can hope to defend themselves from these violent criminals is the victim. It would be better to provide a system for more self defense classes for the public. Better help for the victims of violent crime. And fitting punishment for those who have broken the law. None of the proposed bills will do that. I hope that the Constitutional rights of the public will be considered over feel good measures. I thank you for your time in reading my comments and hope you will consider these points in voting on the proposed bills.

I urge committee members to vote against these bills, many of which infringe on our God-given rights as Americans, and some of which are already unconstitutional under existing rulings by the Supreme Court of the United States. Respectfully, a lifelong Virginian.

Hi, My name is Catherine Shultz and I’m writing this as a woman that survived almost being strangled to death, then stalked for 2 years. I was in fear of my life and I bought my first firearm and trained. My personal defense weapon saved my life and I didn’t have to pull the trigger. A piece of paper does nothing to protect survivors but I stand with VCDL & am co director of Women for Gun Rights in Va. I’m also disabled and an amputee & I can’t run from danger but I can use my firearm to protect myself. People don’t seem to understand that educating oneself vs restricting mags etc… they affect people like me and it shows me that the “gun safety” laws are simply a psychological bandage & does nothing to protect women like myself. Thank you, Catherine Shultz Women for gun rights

To the legislators; Not one of the proposed HBs should be approved. The authors of the proposed bills lack experience or insight into gun ownership or general safety of the public. Not one of these bills can be proven to save lives or stop criminal acts. What I do see is the potential for a level of state bureaucrats to create new jobs for their buddies. Let’s monitor who has a gun or who has too many bullets in their magazine. Whose family member is related to someone involved with domestic violence. This sounds like the state boys and girls are out to get their hands into Virginians pocket's again. Vote no for everyone of these HBs.

Shall not be infringed was and still is very clear. The bill of rights was written to limit the government. Please stop infringing on my god given rights.

HB19 Misdemeanors should never take away a civil right. HB21 A firearm accessory seller could not know they were selling a accessory to a prohibited person. A car parts store cannot be sued if they sell a seat cover for a car used in a bank robbery. HB40 This bill is unconstitutional, there is no analog in history or traditions of firearms with any such limitations when the Bill of Rights was adopted. Homemade guns have been legal since before the US existed. HB93 If a husband and wife co-own a shotgun and the husband gets a protective order issued against him, the wife would no longer have access to that shotgun. That punishes and needlessly endangers her life. HB110 Car owner should not be at fault for a criminal stealing a firearm. It is the criminal who is solely to blame. This bill could put a handgun in the possession of a tow truck driver that is a convicted felon. HB217 U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in both DC v Heller, and The New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen, that any firearm “in common use” is protected by the Second Amendment. Guns and magazines targeted by this bill are among the most common in the US, making this bill unconstitutional. HB229 Disarming visitors and guests, including CHP holders, violates their right to protect themselves. A U.S. District Court in the 2nd Circuit has restrained enforcement of just such a law for being unconstitutional under New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen Supreme Court ruling. HB626 Students have a right to self-defense. HB702 Destroying a functional, and possibly valuable firearms is a waste of money. State could offset costs by selling firearms to gun dealers through an auction. This program is a “turn in” and not a “give-back” program. HB871 Biometric safes are more expensive and can be unreliable when being used under stress and require batteries to work. There are other locking mechanisms that are just as secure. HB969 Center would only target violence committed using firearms and ignoring root causes of crime, as well as all the other ways violence is inflicted on victims – knives, blunt objects, hands and feet, etc. Half of violent crimes are not committed with a firearm. Term “Gun Violence” gives away true agenda: “gun violence” is a term coined by gun-control lobby to blame guns, which are inanimate objects, and not criminals that misuse guns. If a police officer shoots someone, officer gets blame, not his gun. If a criminal shoots someone, gun gets blame, not criminal. No one says, “tire iron violence” or “hand and feet violence.” It is just called “violence.” But there is a disarmament agenda with firearms and “gun violence” is just an excuse to go after firearms with more gun control. HB1300 Oppose HB1303 Oppose HB1359 Bill will get innocent people killed, it will take at least two months before a person can purchase a first firearm.  If they are purchasing that firearm for urgent self-defense, that is simply too long.  Price to get a permit, likely in hundreds of dollars, will be prohibitive for poor people and is equivalent of a poll tax.  And even with all hoops to get a permit, even citizens with a CHP will be limited to one handgun a month.  Local law-enforcement will be handed a registry of gun owners. And gun rentals at shooting ranges will not be possible for people who have not yet got their permit or are visiting from out of state or from another country.

My entire life I have taken great pride and stewardship in being a law abiding citizen of a great country. A very large part of my patriotism is the freedom and trust the founders of the nation gave me in the Second Amendment of the US constitution and Section 13 of the Virginia Bill of Rights. The anti-gun bills that have been introduced in Virginia show me that the supporters of these bills have zero regard for the Constitution, my rights as a lawful citizen and my rights to be able to defend myself and others from violent crime. The supporters of these bills have lost all sense of who the good guys are and who the bad guys are. I see this when early release is granted to hundreds of violent felons, many of which then go on to reoffend and violently prey on the very people you are supposed to protect, all for nothing more than some misdirected attempt at virtue signaling. I see this when prosecutors do not pursue charges against violent offenders in a misdirected attempt at virtue signaling. I see this when legislative efforts focus on the law-abiding and do nothing to violent felons who will not bother to be hindered by any gun laws. I see this when legislators talk about “gun violence” and do nothing about the underlying problem of “violence” and how to reduce it. I see this when I see news stories of repeat violent offenders who have been arrested for dozens of violent crimes, including murder, who end up killing someone yet again due to some form of “catch and release”. The laws are in place to remove violent felons, whether or not they use firearms, from society and prevent them from preying on your law-abiding constituents. Please use them. I urge opposition to HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB626, HB702, HB871, HB969 and HB1359. I urge support for HB1300 and HB1303.

I oppose all legislation which seeks to undermine our Constitutionally protected 2nd Amendment. Therefore, I would encourage all members to vote against these bills with a resounding NO!

As a life long Virginia resident and lawful firearms owner, I speak for myself and millions of other Virginians in saying that all of us strongly oppose any bill being introduced that restricts and infringes upon our Second Amendment rights that are guaranteed by the constitution of Virginia and of the United States. These gun control bills have been drafted under the guise of safety and crime prevention, while simultaneously doing the opposite and only increasing further resistance in both crime and safety. For decades, Virginia has been a pro-2A state where generations of families have been born into and raised on safe and responsible gun ownership. Hunting, personal protection, or simply being an enthusiast does not make someone a criminal or implies criminal intent because of the technology behind modern firearms has far surpassed the firearms of our grandfathers’s generation. Manufacturing methods and technology is ever changing, but our natural rights as law abiding citizens should never be hung in the balance and toyed with as privileges. I implore the General Assembly to please review these bills with logic, with reason, and with the hope that our state government will not make a mockery of the Second Amendment to further a political agenda not based upon fact, but upon incessant fear mongering and disarmament of the people.

Team, All of these bills infringe my rights guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment. Especially egregious are 217 banning weapons and magazines that are in common use. Secondly, is 969 creating another state agency to use up taxpayer money when what should be done is simply enforce the laws that are currently on the books. Do not allow liberal DA's and judges to release violent criminals back onto our streets, they must be held accountable for their crimes. Finally, 1359 creating some type of permit simply to be able to buy a weapon which will create a weapon registry. The current procedures of checking the buyer's background through both federal and state databases is more than sufficient. Thank you. Roger R. Scott

Not only will these bills harm those who wish to acquire firearms legally, these bills especially HB217 go against the supreme court decision on DC v Heller and the most recent Bruen decision which protect firearms that in "common use" the firearms detailed in HB217 are protected as they are in common use.

Name: Brad Toohill Location: Loudoun County, Virginia I strongly oppose the following bills. These proposals punish law-abiding Virginians, undermine due process, and infringe on constitutionally protected rights while failing to address violent crime. Criminals do not follow gun laws—these bills target citizens who already do. HB 19 (McClure) This bill allows permanent loss of firearm rights based on vague “dating relationship” misdemeanors. Fundamental rights should not be stripped without clear standards and robust due process. HB 21 (Helmer) Holding firearm manufacturers and sellers liable for crimes they did not commit is unjust and dangerous. This policy attacks lawful commerce instead of criminal behavior. HB 40 (Simon) Criminalizing unfinished frames and receivers turns peaceful hobbyists into felons without evidence of crime reduction. This is regulation without results. HB 93 (Bennett-Parker) Forced firearm surrender under protective orders risks disarming innocent family members. Rights should not be suspended by accusation alone. HB 110 (Laufer) Penalizing lawful gun owners for storing a handgun in a vehicle is excessive and punitive. This bill targets responsible citizens, not criminals. HB 217 (Helmer) This bill bans commonly owned firearms and standard-capacity magazines that are clearly protected as arms in common use. It is unconstitutional and ineffective. HB 229 (Hernandez) Blanket bans on firearms and knives in medical facilities leave lawful citizens defenseless and create confusion without improving safety. HB 626 (Callsen) Disarming adults on college campuses does not enhance safety. Law-abiding individuals should not lose their right to self-defense based on location. HB 702 (Cole) Taxpayer-funded firearm turn-in and destroy programs waste public funds and show no measurable impact on crime. HB 871 (Downey) Mandated storage methods and biometric safes intrude into private homes and impose unnecessary costs on families. HB 969 (Price) Creating a new state agency focused solely on firearms expands bureaucracy while ignoring repeat offenders and enforcement failures. HB 1359 (Hope) This permit-to-purchase scheme creates delays, costs, fingerprinting, and a de facto registry. It burdens lawful ownership and disproportionately harms low-income Virginians. Virginia should focus on enforcing existing laws and prosecuting violent offenders—not restricting the rights of responsible citizens.

I urge you to oppose all of the proposed bills. None of these bills will have meaningful impact on crime committed with fire arms. The only honest way to reduce crime committed with firearms is to enforce mandatory and harsh penalties on criminals who use guns to commit crimes. Once has to realize that guns can only commit a crime in the hands of a criminal. The criminal, not the tool is the problem that needs to be addressed. A case in point: England has super strong regulations on guns. Was that effective? Did the crime rates really drop ? No, crime rates didn't drop all that much. Eliminating firearms just shifted the criminals over to using knives as their weapon of choice. These proposed regulations seem to be more aimed at annoying firearm owners, as opposed to solving any real problems. While I want to vote Democratic, these essentially useless regulations are making me seriously reconsider which party I will support in the future. Please put regulations in place to SOLVE problems, not these silly things that only provide talking points. Never forget, RESULTS are what voters want.

Not one of these bills will make anyone safer, but rather strip the rights of law abiding citizens of which pose no threat. Maybe try enforcing or increasing the penalties for laws against murder or violent felonies that are already in place? The problem isn't guns. It's the mentally ill people who misuse them. Making good people criminals for simply owning common firearms or magazines will not make a difference to people who have no regard for law.

Ladies and Gentlemen of this subcommittee, I am deeply concerned by several of the proposed bills. I am a resident of Patrick County, named after the esteemed Virginian Patrick Henry, who opposed ratifying the Constitution because it did not provide protections against the government overreach. Patrick Henry knew that without expressed rights of the citizens government would naturally strip those rights from them. And here we are in a situation that is natural, in proposing the current slate of firearm bills you are just doing what is in your nature: Size power and control from the citizens of this state and give it to yourselves. You are proposing to make yourselves the arbitrary authority on what is right for me to protect myself and my family. Why a 10-bullet magazine? What is so magical about that 11th bullet that you must prohibit me from having it in my guns? Why is commonwealth exempt from this law? Why is the state entitled to more than 10 rounds, but not me? Are the law enforcement officers in the state not trained? It would seem to me that well trained officers should need less, not more ammunition than an average citizen in order to defend themselves, if that is indeed why we are limiting capacity to 10 rounds. But that is all beside the point because who are you to dictate what I might need in any given violent encounter. Most home invasions do not involve just one perpetrator, how are we to be able to determine what is needed to stop a gang? And on that note wouldn’t a semiautomatic firearm be best to stop such threats. Of course it would. That is true common sense. But all these bills are blatant attempts to control the populace and destroy the second amendment. You may not live in a rural area and may lack understanding of how remote parts of Virginia are. The police are not going to come fast enough to save anyone. My safety is my responsibility. Limiting how people can defend themselves is putting blood on your hands. Telling people how to store the very lifesaving instruments they need is negligent. Under the proposed law you would make it so a teenager would not be able to access a firearm in the case of someone attempting to break into their home. I guess you would rather they be raped or murdered then be able to defend themselves. Where is personal responsibility? Where are parents teaching children right from wrong? Why is the knee jerk reaction when one person is negligent to punish everyone? Punish the actual offender, crazy concept I know. Please understand that this is not what the people of Virgina want. They do not want any more restrictions on their ability to purchase firearms. They do not want, nor approve of needing to obtain a permit to purchase a firearm. You may be confused because you passed similar bills in the last two sessions, but people knew we had the backing of Governor Youngkin to protect us. I for one chalked up these bills as nothing but virtue signaling and did not raise my voice. Now, I and many others see this for what it is: complete government overreach. Please stop these bills now in committee. Respectfully Shawn Cagle Patrick County VA

Thank you - see file attached

All these bills infringe on citizens AMENDMENT RIGHT we the people been lied to BY OUR Government OFFICIALS & mainly democratic officials ABIGAIL SPANBERGER is one of them

As a fellow Virginian, I urge you to please OPPOSE "gun control" bills in your committee. Concepts like an "assault weapons" ban, arbitrary magazine restrictions, "reasonable standards" for firearms businesses, and a "permit to purchase," just to name a few, do nothing to address crime in the Commonwealth. Criminals do not abide by the law, and bills like these only target law-abiding firearm owners and businesses. The General Assembly should instead pursue legislation that holds criminals accountable for their crimes, not legislation that creates new criminals overnight for lawful purchases. Again, I urge you to OPPOSE gun control in your committee.

My family and I OPPOSE all these insidious, un-Constitutional anti-2A Bills you're proposing.

Dear Legislators, You have been elected to a position for the purpose of representing citizens in VA. You have taken an oath to the state and U.S. Constitution. It is not your place to push radical agendas or ideologies that clearly oppose those Constitutions. The 2nd Amendment clearly states that it “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”. Whether you agree or disagree with it is not important. Whether you appreciate firearms or hate and fear them, is not important. What is important, is that you respect my Constitutional right to own them, carry them, use them, transport them, have immediate access to them, decide for myself how I will store them in my own home. It is NOT your place to infringe upon these rights in any way. The very reason for the 2nd Amendment is for citizens to be able to repel, remove, and defend against a tyrannical government. Don’t be a tyrannical government. Remember and honor your oaths. Put aside the partisanship. Sincerely, One of millions of gun owners

All these proposed are laws are just awful. The right of self-preservation is a fundamental human right and having the best tools for self-preservation furthers that fundamental human right. Without those tools, you degrade the most important human right in the world, the right to live and live free. Suing gun dealers and manufacturers will prevent the public from acquiring guns. Banning large swaths of arms and accessories prevent the public from defending themselves with the best tool possible. All these proposed laws are bad. Bad for Virginians and bad for human rights. HB 19 (McClure) requires forfeiture of firearm rights for a “dating relationship” misdemeanor. HB 21 (Helmer) allows civil lawsuits against firearm manufacturers and sellers for crimes committed with their products. HB 40 (Simon) outlaws unfinished frames and receivers unless serialized. HB 93 (Bennett-Parker) forces firearm surrender under protective orders in a way that could disarm innocent family members. HB 110 (Laufer) imposes a civil penalty and towing if a handgun is left in an unattended vehicle. HB 217 (Helmer) bans commonly owned firearms and standard-capacity magazines made after July 1, 2026. HB 229 (Hernandez) prohibits firearms and many knives in medical facilities. HB 626 (Callsen) restricts firearms on college campuses without lawful cause. HB 702 (Cole) establishes a firearm "turn-in and destroy" program funded by taxpayers. HB 871 (Downey) mandates specific storage requirements and biometric safes in homes with minors. HB 969 (Price) creates a state gun violence prevention agency focused solely on firearms. HB 1359 (Hope) creates a costly permit-to-purchase scheme with fingerprints, training requirements, and a de facto handgun registry.

My name is Cossie Scott a lifelong Virginia resident. This is my first time speaking here. I strongly oppose HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB626, HB702, HB871, HB969, HB1300, HB1359 I do support HB1303 45% of Virginia homes own guns lawfully. Nationally, 93% of the guns associated with crime are obtained illegally. So how are any of these regulations moving the needle in illegal gun trafficking? Or attacking the root cause of violent crime? Furthermore, the majority of the average gun related crime occurs in 9 districts in Virginia (Richmond and Hampton Roads). So you are proposing punishing the entire state and every law biding gun owner for an “illegal” gun problem in Hampton and Richmond. Not to mention 63% of the gun related deaths in Virginia are suicide related. That means that all of these bills listed are not scientifically proven with sound data, but emotionally charged by political gun grabbing rhetoric and is saturated with slippery slope informal fallacies with proposed changes being made without analytical data to suggest we have a need to change. Why do we not first address Richmond and Hampton locally before pushing your unfounded ideology on the rest of the commonwealth. Gun laws do not solve for the human condition problem in those 9 districts. We would be better served spending our time, and tax dollars, addressing the poverty problem that drives violent crime, rather than trying to make law biding citizens criminals.

I’ve been a lifelong Democrat because I believe deeply in protecting working people, expanding access to healthcare, safeguarding civil rights, and investing in strong public institutions, but I’ve never fully aligned with my party on gun control. To me, supporting the Second Amendment isn’t about ideology or partisanship — it’s about personal responsibility, self-reliance, and the belief that law-abiding citizens should have the right to protect themselves and their families. I value evidence-based policy, and I worry that many proposed gun laws primarily burden responsible owners while doing little to address the root causes of violence like poverty, mental health gaps, and systemic inequality. I want safer communities, but I believe that comes from smarter enforcement, education, and prevention rather than broad restrictions that limit constitutional rights. Holding these views sometimes puts me at odds with fellow Democrats, but I see it as proof that political identity doesn’t have to mean agreeing with every plank of the platform — it means thinking critically and standing by the principles you believe in. Please vote no to any gun restrictions that are being presented.

I write in opposition to the magazine-capacity provisions of House Bill 217. The most common pistols used for lawful self-defense today—including the Glock 19 and 17, SIG Sauer P365, Smith & Wesson M&P Shield Plus and Equalizer, Springfield Hellcat Pro, Walther PDP, Taurus GX4, and Ruger MAX-9—are all designed with standard capacities exceeding ten rounds. HB217 provides no grandfather exemption, meaning ordinary Virginians could become criminals overnight for possessing standard magazines they already own. Per the USCCA, approximately 8.3 percent of Virginians—over 700,000 people—hold concealed carry permits. This bill would expose many of those law-abiding citizens to serious criminal penalties without any violent conduct. That concern is heightened when penalties under HB217 are incongruent with those proposed in HB244 addressing robbery and HB863 addressing rape and child pornography. This imbalance undermines proportional justice. I respectfully urge the House to reject the magazine-capacity provisions of HB217.

Banning assault weapons at a time when ICE is killing American citizens and the president is "joking"about a 3rd term is short slighted.

The attachment contains my comments on the proposed bills.

Nearly half of all households in the Commonwealth own a firearm and yet Virginia has one of the lowest gun related death rates in the nation (5.6 per 100,000). Not only are you trying to solve an issue that doesn't exist, you're sacrificing your constiunts to pander towards national politics.

As a law abiding gun owner and retired military Virginia Citizen I vehemently oppose any law that opposes our Constitutional Right via the Second Amendment. All of the bills you are considering meet this criteria. Please cease and desist any band all actions that would infringe on my rights…those that our Founding Fathers of whom many were from our Great Commonwealth, believed to be self-evident. Very respectfully, Shannon J. Cornelius, USA/USAF (Ret)

I strongly urge voting against the following bills as all of them will cause undue hardship on legal gun owners, go against the spirit of the US 2nd amendment, will place firearm manufacturers in legal jeopardy solely because their products may have been used in an unlawful fashion (same as suing Ford for getting a speeding ticket). HB 19 (McClure) requires forfeiture of firearm rights for a “dating relationship” misdemeanor. HB 21 (Helmer) allows civil lawsuits against firearm manufacturers and sellers for crimes committed with their products. HB 40 (Simon) outlaws unfinished frames and receivers unless serialized. HB 93 (Bennett-Parker) forces firearm surrender under protective orders in a way that could disarm innocent family members. HB 110 (Laufer) imposes a civil penalty and towing if a handgun is left in an unattended vehicle. HB 217 (Helmer) bans commonly owned firearms and standard-capacity magazines made after July 1, 2026. HB 229 (Hernandez) prohibits firearms and many knives in medical facilities. HB 626 (Callsen) restricts firearms on college campuses without lawful cause. HB 702 (Cole) establishes a firearm "turn-in and destroy" program funded by taxpayers. HB 871 (Downey) mandates specific storage requirements and biometric safes in homes with minors. HB 969 (Price) creates a state gun violence prevention agency focused solely on firearms. HB 1359 (Hope) creates a costly permit-to-purchase scheme with fingerprints, training requirements, and a de facto handgun registry. Thank you,

I oppose the passage of these bills. HB 19, 21, 40, 93, 110, 217, 229, 626, 702, 871, 969, 1359.

The Right to Keep and Bear Arms shall not be infringed. Stop writing and putting Unconstitutional Legislation in the Virginia Code. That covers just about everything I have seen the Democratic Majority propose as new legislation. Want to live in a communist paradise - Move to Cuba - They do not get Snow and sleet there, and you will have someone to give you instructions on how to live your life.

Just to let you know, I am an independent in every sense of the word. I tend to lean left on many issues but on the subject of the second amendment I am a firm believer. I don’t think we need these new restrictions being proposed. The topic is so complex and polar I don’t know how to convince you all of the folly of this legislation except to say many of us are single issue voters regardless of how we feel about certain social issues. I know many democrats in this state who regularly use these weapons that are the subject for future restrictions or outright banning. I will try to touch on a few issues. Assault weapons and high capacity magazine are the current boogie man of the anti gun lobby and have been since the 1990s. This was originally a deliberate attempt to confuse modern civilian semiautomatic weapons with their more dangerous fully automatic assault military versions as a prelude to ban handguns. The term assault weapon is a purely political term that has no universal meaning and it was chosen to instill fear and confusion in the public’s mind. I ask you to review these laws and ask yourself which one of these features makes these weapons more dangerous than other rifles. Is a pistol grip, bayonet lug, or similar feature what makes a rifle dangerous? Or is it caliber, muzzle energy, and rate of fire? If public safety is the true goal why doesn’t this legislation address these factors instead of cosmetics? I will tell you why. Because the average hunting rifle is more powerful than an ar-15 by a wide margin. These are not overpowered rifles as some would have you believe. It’s a semiautomatic version of an intermediate powered rifle - part way between the power of a pistol and a full power hunting rifle. Did you know even Great Britain has no restrictions on weapons with military style features? Their ban is on the caliber and rate of fire. You can even have a semiautomatic uzi there witt a 50 round magazine as long as it is chambered in 22lr. Silencers have very few restrictions there as well because they protect hearing and help minimize noise pollution. Let’s talk about the legality as well. Most of these restrictions are unconstitutional because the weapons and features are in common use. It’s unconstitutional to ban any weapon that is in common use as per DC vs Heller and Brien. If the state court doesn’t overturn these unconstitutional restrictions the Supreme Court will. I will end this conversation by saying our founding fathers faced the same issues we do. At that time most governments restricted civilian arms because they wanted to remain in power. They reasoned through their dealings with Great Britain that an armed population could never be slaves to any tyrannical government or foreign power. This may sound like a tired old saying that is often made fun of. I have heard people saying things like deer don’t need bullet proof vests and you can’t fight against a government without f-16s but is this really true? The ar-15 for instance is not powerful enough to take down a large elk humanly so the bullet proof vest comment is just plain silly. That cartridge is commonly used in other rifles as a varmint round. As far as f-16s are concerned, the Taliban sure kicked us out of their country with nothing more than small arms and guerrilla tactics. Civilian resistance movements rarely fight pitch battles with tanks and fighter jets. They use hit and run tactics combined with numbers to wear the enemy down.

Dear Committee Members, I urge you to reject the blatantly unconditional and egregious anti Second Amendment bills before you. This will do nothing to curb crime, and you know that, but will make criminals out of your political opponents, as well as many of your constituents. Scencerly, Sal DeGennaro

PLEASE PROTECT OUR GUN RIGHTS AND DO NOT DEGRADE VIRGINIANS' SECOND AMENDMENT GUARANTEED RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS!

IT IS VERY FRUSTRATING TO LIVE IN A SOCIETY IN WHICH THOSE WHO ARE ELECTED TO REPRESENT ME IMMEDIATELY STEP IN AND COME UP WITH LAWS IN AN ATTEMPT TO FRAME ME AS A CRIMINAL FOR EXERCISING MY RIGHTS. IN NO WAY HAVE I BROKEN ANY EXISTING LAWS, NOR DO I OWN ANY ITEM CURRENTLY CONSIDERED ILLEGAL. THAT THESE "REPRESENTATIVES" CAN, WITH THE STROKE OF A PEN, PENALIZE ME, MAKES ME WONDER JUST WHO THEY "REPRESENT". WE DO NOT NEED MORE LAWS TO "LESSEN CRIME", WE NEED TO ENFORCE THE ONES ALREADY ON THE BOOKS. PLEASE LEAVE YOUR LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS ALONE.

Our Second Amendment is clear and succinct: "... the right of the People to keep an bear arms shall not be infringed." What I see is an example of the government overstepping its bounds under the illusion of public safety. Many of the measures including assault weapons, magazine capacities, and "ghost guns" are based on buzz words that strike fear because people do not understand them. Let us embark on a few definitions: Infringe: "act so as to limit or undermine (something); encroach on" -Oxford Dictionary. Synonyms include Erode, Impair, and Weaken. ANY legislation that limits impairs, or weakens a citizen's right to own and carry weapons is, by definiton, infringement, and therefore a violation of our beautiful country's constitution. Ghost Gun: the ATF classifies the part of the weapon containing the trigger assembly as a "firearm," colloquially called a Lower Receiver. It is possible to manufacture this part and therefore build a weapon that has no serial number and is unregistered with the police department. This takes skill and specialized, expensive tooling; these firearms sound scary, but are by and large produced by hobbyists, not killers. Assault Weapons (HB217): The limiting, reduction, and impairment of the size of magazine that one can purchase, keep, and carry is simply a violation of the 2nd amendment. Storage (HB871): The State government has no business inside my home and how my weapons are stored. I learned to handle guns at 7 years of age, children can learn. If I lock my weapons as this bill requires, I can no longer access them in an emergency. Its safer to gun-proof my children than child-proof my guns. Permit to purchase (HB1359): We do not need a permit to exercise our first amendment rights. We do not have permits to secure our rights against inappropriate search and seizure, the 4th amendment. We also do not have permits to protect ourselves from cruel and unusual punishment. No other right enumerated in the Bill of Rights requires a permit, why do we treat the 2nd amendment differently? We already strip this right from convicted criminals, we have background checks, leave us law-abiding gunowners alone. I understand these bills have good intentions. We want to see our communities safe, healthy, and thriving, and have our neighbors and friends go about their days without fear. But let us not succumb to fear to such an extent that we throw away our freedom for the illusion of heightened safety. Let's look at California, llinois, and New York, who have the strictest policies in the nation, yet rising rates of violent crimes, and instantly the illusion is dispelled. These measures do not increase safety. What they do accomplish is an erosion of freedom, disarmament of law-abiding citizens, and violation of our country's constitution. I ask you please, as your neighbor and constituent, vote NO to these measures.

This bill represents one of the most extreme and unconstitutional gun bans proposed in Virginia in recent years. HB 217 would prohibit the sale, possession, transfer, and transport of an entire class of commonly owned firearms and magazines that are lawfully used by millions of Americans for self-defense, hunting, sport shooting, and other legitimate purposes. The firearms and magazines targeted by this bill are unquestionably "in common use," a standard explicitly recognized and protected by the United States Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller and reaffirmed in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen. With more than 20 million AR-15 style rifles and hundreds of millions of standard-capacity magazines in civilian hands nationwide, there is no serious legal argument that these items fall outside the scope of Second Amendment protection. HB 217 attempts to evade constitutional limits by restricting firearms based on arbitrary cosmetic features and manufacturing dates rather than functionality or criminal misuse. A firearm that is legal today would become illegal tomorrow solely because of when it was made, not because of any increased danger. This kind of legislative manipulation undermines respect for the rule of law and invites years of costly litigation for Virginia taxpayers. The bill also unlawfully discriminates against adults between the ages of 18 and 20 by prohibiting them from purchasing or possessing firearms that they are otherwise legally entitled to own. These young adults can vote, serve in the military, and exercise other fundamental rights, yet HB 217 would deny them the ability to defend themselves and their families. There is no credible evidence that bans on commonly owned firearms reduce violent crime. Criminals do not follow weapon bans, and they routinely obtain firearms through illegal means. History has shown repeatedly that these prohibitions primarily affect peaceful citizens while leaving violent offenders undeterred. HB 217 would also impose severe economic and practical burdens on Virginians who have invested lawfully in firearms and magazines that would become prohibited under this scheme. Law-abiding owners would face confiscation, forced surrender, or criminal prosecution for possessing property that was legal when acquired. This proposal reflects a broader effort to redefine constitutionally protected arms as "dangerous" in order to justify prohibition. If the legislature can ban firearms that are owned by tens of millions of Americans today, there is no principled limit on what may be banned tomorrow. The public safety is best served by enforcing existing laws against violent criminals, not by banning constitutionally protected arms. HB 217 abandons that principle in favor of symbolic legislation that violates fundamental rights.

The New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen, that any firearm “in common use” is protected by the Second Amendment. The guns and magazines targeted by this bill are among the most common guns and magazines in the United States, making this bill unconstitutional. There are conservatively estimated to be over 20 million AR-15s and 700 million magazines that hold more than 10 rounds in civilian hands. This bill if passed would certainly face legal challenge wasting public money in its defense.

HB19 It is improper to deprive citizen rights for a misdemeanor violation Deprivation of rights is part of the accepted sentence for felony crime (voting, firearms, etc) Proposed Fix – Make domestic violence and intimate partner violence a felony level crime. HB40 Causes a wide variety of hardware store supplies felony crime to own. Proposed Fix – Table bill and remove references to unfinished frames/receivers, remove references to serialization until a method of applying for serial number is available to the general public HB110 Tow truck drivers are NOT the ideal steward for firearms The tow yard is not a safe storage location Proposed fix – Police can call a locksmith and have the vehicle opened at owner expense, firearm can be removed and held at police station for recovery HB217 Large capacity varies by firearm, the most common standard capacity is 28-32 per magazine, 100 per belt Shotgun capacity is variable based on shell length If exemptions are made for police, CHP holders (who commit crimes at a rate LOWER than police) should also be exempt (DHS/ICE are making this argument stronger every day) Proposed fix – Change “High Capacity” from 10 to 60 for magazines, and 200 for belts. Define “High Capacity” for shotgun tubes based on a defined shot-shell size. Exempt CHP holders from all magazine restrictions. HB229 As with all prohibited places, if right to self defense is abridged, a duty to protect is created Secure storage should be provided, as due to Arlington Car-Free Diet, many trips are multi-modal, preventing use of anchored, steel, hidden, locking car safe storage. Proposed Fix - Security screening and armed protection must be provided in all prohibited places, failure to protect disarmed individuals to be held under strict liability. At one or more entrance, a staffed safe-storage location to be provided for weapons to be checked-in. HB871 Biometric safes are typically the WORST QUALITY OF ALL SAFES ON THE MARKET Proposed Fix – Allow for any kind of lock, or else indicate a cypher/combo/key lock. HB1300 The police commit crimes at a higher rate than CHP holders Police get paid and can buy guns normally Suggested Fix – Table and do not reintroduce, bill is not needed HB626 As with all prohibited places, if right to self defense is abridged, a duty to protect is created Secure storage should be provided, as due to Arlington Car-Free Diet, many trips are multi-modal, preventing use of anchored, steel, hidden, locking car safe storage. As with the open-carry on streets prohibition currently in place, CHP holders need to be exempted. Proposed Fix - Security screening and armed protection must be provided in all prohibited places, failure to protect disarmed individuals to be held under strict liability. At one or more entrance, a staffed safe-storage location to be provided for weapons to be checked-in. CHP holders to be exempted. HB1359 A criminal record history check is already performed for all firearm transactions DCJS training is for armed security guards and police, if all firearms owners are DCJS certified, then exemptions for armed security and police should apply to purchase permit holders Proposed Fix – Table bill and do not reintroduce, it is redundant to already existing protections, alternatively exempt all purchase permit holders from any firearms regulations that have specific exemptions for police

I disagree with any and all laws pertaining to our gun rights and any law that infringes our right to own,sell, trade or gift. These amendments are a total outreach of our constitutional rights and we the people will not stand for it.

These bill do nothing to address criminals and only affects law abiding gun owners. As a black man I feel they are racist as well. Vote NO to all of these bills.

I stand with Gun Owners of America and the Virginia Citizens Defense League in opposing any attempt to restrict law abiding Virginians 2nd amendment rights. These bills will do nothing to stop crime and only serve to limit the rights of the people to exercise their 2nd amendment rights. As a constituent, I urge you to OPPOSE these gun bills: HB 19, Misdemeanors should never take away a civil right. HB 21, This bill is designed to have a chilling effect on all aspects of the firearms industry. HB 40, This bill is unconstitutional, as there was no analog in the history or traditions of firearms with any such limitations at the time the Bill of Rights was adopted. Homemade guns have been legal since before the United States existed. HB 93, This disctriminates against people in the same household and also discriminates against young people who are legally allowed to own fire arms. HB 110, Punish criminals who do this, not the law abiding citizens. HB 217, The U.S. Supreme Court has said in both DC v Heller, and recently The New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen, that any firearm “in common use” is protected by the Second Amendment. The guns and magazines targeted by this bill are among the most common guns and magazines in the United States, making this bill unconstitutional. There are conservatively estimated to be over 20 million AR-15s and 700 million magazines that hold more than 10 rounds in civilian hands. HB 229, Disarming visitors and guests, including concealed handgun permit holders, at such facilities violates their right to protect themselves in an emergency. A U.S. District Court in the 2nd Circuit has restrained enforcement of just such a law for being unconstitutional under New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen Supreme Court ruling. HB 626, A solution in search of a problem. Higher education students are adults and have a right to self-defense. HB 702, The name of the program implies that the Commonwealth gives firearms to citizens and now wants citizens to give them back. That is not the case. The State does not give us our rights and does not own our property. HB 871, Biometric safes are more expensive than non-biometric safes and often times more unreliable when being used under stress, This discriminates against those people who are poor and still have a right to self protection. HB 969, we do not need to grow the state bureaucracy to study violent crime when most violent crime does not involve firearms. HB 1359, please find me a constitutional right that you have to get a permit for. There is not one and we should not be limiting the rights of the people by require a permit to exercise their 2nd amendment rights. I SUPPORT the following bill: HB 1303, 90 days is more than sufficient for the State Police to issue a non-resident permit. There is no reason that this should take longer than this.

I’m against all these worthless anti-gun / anti-freedom bills that will do nothing to reduce crime, but will only serve to reduce the freedoms of law abiding citizens. Please retract them and do something good for Virginians. Thank you.

Virginia opposes all these illegal unconstitutional bills. The second amendment is a right not a privilege.! I oppose these bills as an individual taxpayer.

I do not support these bills.

My family and I enjoy recreational shooting and hunting. House Bill 217 bans the firearms and magazines that we use lawfully on a regular basis. This is very upsetting to most gun owners. HB 217 punishes lawful gun owners for the misuse of firearms by criminals. Should this bill pass, I will encourage my college age children to relocate to other freedom loving states and not settle in Virginia where their rights are being taken.

HB21 This bill seeks to punish law-abiding hardworking gun manufacturers and those they employ, either directly or indirectly, by making them conspirators in crimes committed using guns. Besides it being unconstitutional, this law is also discriminatory in that it does not impose the same laws against car manufacturers whose autos and trucks are used in the commission of crimes and a plethora of other legal products used in the commission crime. HB-217 is arbitrary and capricious in that there is no such objective definition or standard for what constitutes a “standard magazine capacity” and/ or firearm. HB-702. This is misuse of public funds. It represents an ideological or charitable function that should be funded like other charities - voluntary contribution. As such it should require the same federal approvals as any other authorized charity. HB-1359. This is textbook 2A infringement prohibited by the US Constitution. Infringe is defined by Meriam-Webster dictionary as “to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another”. Imposition of taxes, requisite training, purchase delays, etc constitute infringement. Time and public funds are better spent funding law enforcement and executive offices to enforce civil and criminal laws that directly affect or deter criminal activities.

I oppose any and all restrictions on our God given and Constitutionally protected Right to keep and bear arms. None of this nonsense passes constitutional muster. And will have the effect of making the lives Of law abiding citizens less safe while you are Lowering penalties for real crime and turning Law abiding citizens into criminals... These bills are nothing more than a government power grab. What part of "Shall NOT be infringed " do you not Understand??

All bills with the exception of HB 1303 are unconstitutional and I do NOT support them.

I oppose these bills

When did our state government decide that they do not have to follow our Constitution of the United States of America? The 2nd Amendment is an individual right under the Constitution that states clearly that it shall not be infringed on which in simple terms means that no government official or group has the ability to take a person's right to keep and bear arms in the United States of America. This Amendment was so important to our forefathers that it is the second thing they wrote to establish that the government does not have the ability to take your right to defend yourself against all enemies and this includes a tyrannical state government that doesn't understand plain text that our country was founded on. It doesn't matter what others opinions or feelings on the subject of the right to bear arms is because it is my right and not their's that we are talking about at this time. As a society of individuals in our country that have never agreed on things of this nature since the invention of the modern firearm we have to look no farther than our own Constitution to see that this is not a collective right of certain people that agree or disagree with the principle of firearms but infact a Constitutional right of an individual to determine there views of their personal right to bear arms. With the world in the state it is in at our present time this Constitutional right is needed more then ever because we are facing people that think that the can completely ignore the Constitution and its not even on a national level but a state level. This is also a truly sad moment of our state that is the founding place for our country as it exists from the time that we settled in this new land of an unknown world at the time but to disrespect our founding Document that started it all on top of it is the worst thing that could happen in our state for these elected officials to look at the Bill of Rights and say to themselves that those Amendment are not worth following because I have a different opinion, belief or feeling on that Amendment that I am personally going to take the individual right of every person in Virginia just because I don't want to follow these Amendments as they are written. Do you understand how this is being a tyrannical government just like the British were when they were trying to control the entire population at the time that we had the Revolution in this great land to start this great country. When people say that the 2nd Amendment is dated and need to be revised but can see the actual beauty in how our forefathers predicted that this Amendment would be necessary throughout time to even to the year 2026 were we have a government that is looking at this exact Amendment and saying no we don't have to follow that anymore because we have all these people that don't like the fact that a free person of the United States of America can purchase anything that has to do with their ability to not only protect themselves in self defense but also to protect themselves from the tyrannical government that is before us today. I'm sorry but as a person that has no affiliation to a political party or any other organization on this subject in our country I believe in our Constitution and the Amendments that were written in the Bill of Rights to protect myself, my family and my friends from people that think that they know what is best for everyone in our country on the basis that they either think they are smarter, richer or elected.

I oppose every gun-control bill pending before this committee because they are prohibited by both the United States and Virginia Constitutions. The Second Amendment provides that “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Supreme Court held that this language protects an individual right to possess firearms for lawful purposes such as self-defense, independent of militia service. The Court emphasized that the Amendment protects arms “in common use” by law-abiding citizens and forbids bans on entire classes of such arms. In McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010), the Court reaffirmed that this right is fully incorporated against the states, binding Virginia to the same constitutional limits as Congress. Virginia’s Constitution independently protects this right, stating in Article I, Section 13 that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” In New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen (2022), the Supreme Court rejected interest-balancing tests and adopted a text-history-tradition standard: if the Second Amendment’s text covers the conduct, it is presumptively protected, and the government must show the regulation is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Modern policy goals, crime statistics, or legislative preferences are insufficient. Many pending bills restrict semi-automatic rifles, including AR-style firearms that are owned by millions of Americans and commonly used for lawful purposes such as self-defense, sport shooting, and hunting. Under Heller, arms in common use cannot be banned, and the “dangerous and unusual” exception does not apply. There is no historical tradition of banning commonly owned firearms based on rate of fire, operating mechanism, or cosmetic features, and under Bruen the absence of such historical analogues is dispositive. Other bills ban magazines over ten rounds, which are standard components of many commonly owned handguns and rifles. Because magazines are integral to firearm function, such bans operate as functional prohibitions on protected firearms. There is no Founding-era or Reconstruction-era tradition of limiting ammunition capacity, making these bans unconstitutional under Bruen. Permit-to-purchase schemes likewise unconstitutionally burden a fundamental right by converting it into a government-granted privilege. The right to keep arms necessarily includes the right to acquire them, and fees, training mandates, biometric requirements, and processing delays disproportionately burden citizens and lack historical justification. These schemes invite arbitrary enforcement and indirect suppression of a constitutional right. While public safety is a legitimate concern, the Supreme Court has made clear that constitutional rights cannot be traded away through legislative cost-benefit analysis. Regulations unsupported by historical tradition fail regardless of asserted benefits. For these reasons, the pending gun-control bills before this committee are inconsistent with both the United States and Virginia Constitutions and should be rejected.

Please no more gun bans

These proposed actions would increase the amount of money that is already taken from us in taxes. They make no sense, as we have a 2.3 billion surplus. These actions only hurt Virginians. The democrat party ran on affordability, and these bills do just the opposite. The taxes on firearms, and the banning of them and accessories have already proven to do nothing but punish law abiding citizens. CRIMINALS DONT FOLLOW LAWS! Reducing manditory sentecing for rape and other horrible crimes only make us less safe. Combined with TRYING to disarm us and helping criminals you out us at risk, and rob us of our rights and money. You all should be ashamed of yourselves for being bought off. You all remind me of our flag. You are acting like tyrants. You talk of affordability, yet you are trying to take more of our money. The people will not stand for tour unconstitutional actions. You may have control for the next two years, but your political careers will be destroyed. Tou have become radical tyrants. You hate the other side so much, that you are willing to destroy us. Shame on all of you. The pendulum always swings back, and you are just guaranteeing it will swing so far back that you will wish you never did this. The destruction of our constitution, and your petty attacks are not worth the backlash that will come when the people rise up against what you believe in.

Leave my second amendment rights alone and worry about all the criminals both legal and illegal. Don't screw with law-abiding citizens who work and pay your salary

Hello, I agree and stand with the opinions of the Virginia Citizens Defense League and Gun Owners of America on these troubling bills. The right to keep and bear ares enshrined as a God given right in both the US (2nd amendment) and Virginia (article 1, section 13) Constitutions. Please do not legislate millions of peaceful, law abiding Virginians into criminals with the stroke of a pen.

Please Protect Our 2nd Amendment Rights. Thank You.

Please don’t support any Bills that restrict or infringe on my 2nd Amendment rights.

To whom it may concern, It is important to recognize that criminals, by definition, disregard existing laws and are unlikely to be deterred by the introduction of new legislation. Consequently, the implementation of additional laws often impacts only law-abiding citizens, placing new restrictions or obligations upon those who already comply with legal standards. The focus, therefore, should not be on drafting further statutes but rather on ensuring the consistent and effective enforcement of the laws currently in place. By allocating resources toward upholding existing regulations, society can enhance public safety, maintain fairness, and uphold the integrity of the justice system without unnecessarily burdening responsible citizens. Respectfully, Mr. Jones

You were elected as a protest against the President. You definitely weren't elected to cancel Virginians constitutional rights. I'm sure your big donors outside of Virginia will be happy. But last time you tried this 90 of 95 counties, Cities and Town revolted against you. Plus once your donor lists are published by the influential VCDL and the lawsuits start. The people will find out who you actually serve. Unless you represent Arlington or Fairfax all democratic seats will be in jeopardy for the next election. Finally: You take an oath to honor the constitution when you get the privilege to serve the people. Someone who immediately violates their oath has no honor and can never be trusted with authority. People will remember that when it's time to vote again. I know I will. I used to be a Democrat and donor. But I will never vote for a Democrat again.

Please consider this by destroying the constitutional rights of the people of Virginia. You also will eventually come to the repercussions of your decisions, ie court action and loss of tax payer money etc.Now the 2nd amendment to the constitution in short says “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED ,basically no laws are to go against the constitution and also as per article 6 clause two of the constitution. Thank you and think wisely because your constituents as whole do not want this. Second Amendment Right to Bear Arms 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. Amdt2.1Overview of Second Amendment, Right to Bear Arms Amdt2.2Historical Background on Second Amendment Amdt2.3Early Second Amendment Jurisprudence Amdt2.4Heller and Individual Right to Firearms Amdt2.5Post-Heller Issues and Application of Second Amendment to States Amdt2.6Bruen and Concealed-Carry Licenses Amdt2.7Rahimi and Applying the Second Amendment Bruen Standard

Not one of you liberals submitted a bill to address the real evil that is using a gun. So all of these bills are designed to punish legal law abiding gun owners and protect the real criminals. Im78 years old and have owned and bought guns from the age of 15 when I purchased my first gun with money earned from a paper route. NOT ONE OF THE GUNS I'VE OWNED EVER HARMED ANYONE. IT'S AN INANIMATE OBJECT

As a veteran, I am against any so called gun control legislation that has not demonstrably proven to improve public safety while only minimally impacting individuals’ God given rights and liberties. It is unconscionable to think that elected leaders would even think about passing legislation that infringed upon individual rights merely for purposes of “doing something” without having weighed the impact on law abiding citizens and the innumerable sacrifices made to sustain and protect those rights and liberties through the years. Having served myself and also been the victim of illegal firearm use I staunchly support the 2A rights and individuals’ right to self-defense. Each person’s situation and experiences are different and they deserve to exercise their rights and liberties in a way that accommodates those circumstances, experiences, limitations, etc. So called “assault weapons” (a misnomer in itself) may have features and appearances that some persons find scary or intimidating but, to someone possessing that firearm for their own, individual law purposes, most all of those features actually improve the performance or safety related to the use of that same firearm. All semi-automatic firearms, regardless of how they might LOOK to a casual or uninformed observer basically function the same. Stocks, forearm, bipods, scopes, rails, magazines, etc. do not alter the fundamental intended purpose of this “tool.” I certainly understand those who do not appreciate firearms, in general, or who might actually be scared by their existence or appearance. But our 2A and self defense rights should never be indescribably infringed upon merely for these type reasons. There are very good reasons our fore fathers were adamant about including these inalienable rights as foundational principles in our founding documents. These foundational principles are as relevant today as they were at our founding. Anyone who is arrogant enough to think that they have studied and researched and experienced as much as the founding father scholars and thinkers should reconsider their actions carefully before indiscriminately treading upon one of our sacred rights and liberties without certifiable proof of the amount of public safety that would be realized by their actions. Anything less goes against the solemn oath you have sworn to uphold.

I oppose this bill, honor your oath

i OPPOSE any legislation that restricts 2nd amendment rights

I agree with the VCDL on these bills.

Opposite any gun laws. They will not stop any crime. Try enforcing the laws we already.

These sorts of draconian proposals severely restrict the ability of law-abiding citizens to effectively defend themselves against threats of violence. None of the proposed measures which have been inflicted on the citizenry of other states have made one iota of difference in crime levels. They HAVE however restricted law-abiding citizens from exercising their Constitutional rights via the 2nd Amendment. Vote now to cease this onslaught on the rights of law-abiding Virginians. Gun violence is perpetrated by CRIMINALS, so focus on the criminal prosecutions. Limiting the rights of law-abiding Virginians is tantamount to fascism. And as always, "When seconds count, the police are just minutes away!". That's what you are saying to Virginians. If I cannot be trusted to defend myself legally, then you cannot be trusted to run the Commonwealth.

These legislations violate many sections of the Virginia Constitution not just the U.S. Constitution. Legislations like these does nothing to prevent, curtail, deter or otherwise stop crimes or acts of violence. These legislations do not hold criminals that cannot legally possess, purchase or own firearms accountable for their possession, use or handling of a firearm. These legislations do not keep firearms out of the hands of criminals. Cliché but true rhetoric (Criminals will get guns and magazines and commit crimes regardless of the laws. These legislations are immoral, unethical and down right oppressive and serve no purpose other than to infringe upon rights and deny rights. Reminder: - 18, 19 and 20 year old men and women are entrusted in the operation, use, carry and implementation of the following in the service of our country as Servicemembers, Coast Guardsmen, National Guardsmen and Air National Guardsmen and Reservists as well as law enforcement: Semi-automatic Pistols with high capacity magazines, Semi- Automatic Rifles with 30 round magazines, machine guns, rockets, tanks, missiles, rocket Launchers etc and yet Virginia Legislators want to strip away the rights of civilians of that age group of their right to own and bear arms. That is hypocritical and it undermines the Constitution. Our nation foundation and freedom was earned through the blood and sweat of young 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20 year old men from the Revolutionary War for our independence and that of our 17 year old to 20 year old war fighters today standing tall and maintaining our soon to be 250 years of being a Constitutional Republic and our Freedom. Do not allow the stripping of the rights of these military aged men and women that serve and defend our nation, our freedom and our Constitutions. Do not insult them or slap them in the face or turn your backs on them. Fight for them because at some point we have fought and we have sacrificed for you and these young men and women will too. Any legislation that denies and deprives this age group the use, ownership while expecting them to serve in our country and have them carry, operate and use them in the defense of our nation and potentially die, be seriously injured or maimed is diabolical and is disgraceful. Magazine capacity restrictions: (Do not limit or stop the intent of criminals or those intent on committing any act of violence. We have seen the demonstrated and factual extreme actions/tactics that have been used for example: Using a vehicle to run into crowds, Vehicle Born Improvised Explosive Devises (VBIED), Improvised Explosive Devices (IED), mass stabbings, gas attacks and chemical warfare, fire, and more Constitution of Virginia - Article I. Bill of Rights Sections 1,2, 9,10,11. These legislations below, restrict the right to self- defense. Legal gun owners are not committing crimes and do not intend to committ crimes. These legislations are not about accountability for criminals. They are written to suppress and take away the rights of law abiding citizens and ro take away a means of self-defense. These legislations do not create a safer Virginia. HB110, HB1359, HB969, HB871, HB702, HB24, HB21, HB700, HB229, HB217, HB110, HB93, HB19, Example: - HB700: Denies and delays the access to firearms in an emergency situation where a victim of stalking or domestic abuse are in imminent danger. V/R Raymond Carter SFC(Retired)

I strongly oppose this bill

All of these bills are intolerable infringements of the right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment and the Constitution of Virginia. Supporting these bills is a violation of your oaths of office. In addition, as should be evident, these bills will only affect law-abiding gun owners, the very people least likely to offend. Criminals, by definition, do not obey the law. They are unlikely to obey these.

Please do not consider any anti-gun bills. Any potential law that goes against our Constitution is wrong and should not be acknowledged. We shouldn't have to pay for our rights. No innocent person should be penalized for a criminal's actions. A gun's capacity is irrelevant. If a person comments a REAL crime, they should be convected and sentenced accordingly. A right should be lost only through certain major criminal actions, not some fool's option of potential. No manufacturer should be responsible for how their product is used. The one responsible is the one in possession of said product, even if it was stolen. Our last Governor understood this. Our new Governor and her political party desperately needs to. We have seen the failures of worthless states like California, Maryland, New York and others. We don't need to be another one. No law will ever stop a crime. The law should provide proper penalties or real crimes. No law should be made for the sole purpose of controlling and wielding power over the citizens of this State or our country.

I am opposed to HB19, HB21, HB40, HB93, HB110, HB217, HB229, HB626, HB702, HB871, HB969, and HB1359, I support HB 1300 and HB1303.

My father was born in Romania in 1933 and as a child lived under the fascism of socialism. The first thing the fascist socialists did was to confiscate guns. Nearly 400,000 Jews were slaughtered by the socialists after having been disarmed in Romania. Now socialists have taken power in Virginia by running as "moderates" and immediately showing their true selves once safely elected. Democrats, like their brethren Nazis, seek to disarm and enslave the general population. I oppose any legislation which punishes law-abiding citizens from protecting themself, their family, and their property. I oppose any legislation which punishes a citizen for potentially being robbed, as if the thief is not the problem-- the victim is treated as the criminal. I oppose any legislation which allows accusations to remove the rights of others. If I accuse every member of government of being a child abuser, are you forced to remain away from your child(ren)? I oppose Nazis and Democrats for the same reasons.

As a fellow Virginian, I urge you to please OPPOSE "gun control" bills in your committee. Concepts like an "assault weapons" ban, arbitrary magazine restrictions, "reasonable standards" for firearms businesses, and a "permit to purchase," just to name a few, do nothing to address crime in the Commonwealth. Criminals do not abide by the law, and bills like these only target law-abiding firearm owners and businesses. The General Assembly should instead pursue legislation that holds criminals accountable for their crimes, not legislation that creates new criminals overnight for lawful purchases. Again, I urge you to OPPOSE gun control in your committee. I support HB 1303 by Delegate Ware. Thank you for all that you do for Virginia.

Disarming the population is not a viable means to promote public safety. It is the duty of the individual to protect themselves from physical harm that may occur by criminal activity. It is not the responsibility of politicians or police. That is why bills like HB 19, HB 21, HB 40, HB 93, HB 229, HB 1359 are unconstitutional and put the general public in more danger as violent criminals will take advantage of unarmed civilians. HB 110 and HB 702 will promote criminal use of firearms as the firearms will be taken away from the registered owners' possession which greatly increases the likelihood the firearm will end up on the black market for resale where violent criminals obtain their weapons. HB 871 will also be ineffective as gun violence prevention means while again adding a monetary burden and serious disadvantage to law a biding citizens in the immediate face of danger. The people of Virginia do not support these policies that waste the time of politicians and money of the tax payer.

I oppose all of these unconstitutional bills.

HB 19 (McClure) requires forfeiture of firearm rights for a “dating relationship” misdemeanor. HB 21 (Helmer) allows civil lawsuits against firearm manufacturers and sellers for crimes committed with their products. HB 40 (Simon) outlaws unfinished frames and receivers unless serialized. HB 93 (Bennett-Parker) forces firearm surrender under protective orders in a way that could disarm innocent family members. HB 110 (Laufer) imposes a civil penalty and towing if a handgun is left in an unattended vehicle. HB 217 (Helmer) bans commonly owned firearms and standard-capacity magazines made after July 1, 2026. HB 229 (Hernandez) prohibits firearms and many knives in medical facilities. HB 626 (Callsen) restricts firearms on college campuses without lawful cause. HB 702 (Cole) establishes a firearm "turn-in and destroy" program funded by taxpayers. HB 871 (Downey) mandates specific storage requirements and biometric safes in homes with minors. HB 969 (Price) creates a state gun violence prevention agency focused solely on firearms. HB 1359 (Hope) creates a costly permit-to-purchase scheme with fingerprints, training requirements, and a de facto handgun registry. ALL of these bills are Unconstitutional and will cause Lawsuits and MASS NON COMPLIANCE

Greetings, These bills that are being proposed will do more than infringe on Va citizens rights , they will cause many to loose their jobs and cause hardship on an already financially strained population. I work for a firearms manufacturer, these bills will shut us down. Put numerous citizens like me out of work! I hope you reconsider what you are proposing and realize the harm that you are causing! Our state needs caring leaders not over burdening tyrants! These bills and those like them appear to be from a communist playbook , not from a State of Virginia elected delegate. Thank you for your consideration on this matter!

I oppose all these bills!

As a fellow virginian I am very disappointed in these outrageous bills proposed. They do nothing to stop criminals cause they don't follow rules or laws anyways it just hurts people trying to protect themselves from being hurt or God forbid something worse. I have lived in virginia my whole life and love this state but i also love the 2nd amendment and freedom to bear arms so please take in consideration myself and thousands of other virginian's that love the 2nd amendment and the state of Virginia and strike down these outrageous bills. Thank you for your time god bless the 2nd amendment and the state of Virginia!

All these bills are an infringement on our constitutional second amendment rights!

You ran as a middle of the road moderate ticket, and wanted to bring everyone together. all these bills go against that and alienate half of the state. You want bi partisan support? Well to get that you can not be going after law abiding citizens and take away a constitutionally protected right.

Hello, as a true Virginian whose family goes back to the founding of this state, country and fought in the revolutionary war. The anti gun bills being pushed on us are completely unconstitutional. My ancestors would be rolling in their graves right now knowing what you all are trying to do to our personal liberties, freedom and property. All of the anti gun legislation being pushed is not only unconstitutional but against previous Supreme Court rulings. You plan to turn over half of your state into criminals overnight for legally purchased items. So not only are you infringing on the 2nd Amendment but now on our 5th Amendment. 12 months in jail! Sounds like an 8th Amendment violation. True Virginians do not want these unconstitutional laws placed on us. Virginia is where freedom was won and not taken! I urge you all to vote against these unconstitutional bills. We are not California or New York. Our friends in Northern Virginia do not speak for all of Virginia anymore. My kindness regards. True Virginian.

These bills are ill-advised “solutions” in desperate search of largely non-existent problems. The 2nd amendment was quite clear. “Shall not be infringed” means exactly those words. These bills will only make law-abiding citizens less safe. Please actually consider your constituents safety instead of your partisan talking points.

I urge a vote against this, and any gun related bill, that would arguably restrict gun rights, or increase the cost of having,/buying firearms or ammunition, or create any kind of registry of such, of law abiding citizens of Virginia. Most of these bills would do nothing for saving lives, and criminals will not abide by them.

These anti-Second Amendment legislations violate the Second Amendment freedoms guaranteed by the United States Constitution and Virginia Constitution. These bills will not make Virginians safer. but will put us at risk for predatory criminals. Also, the Second Amendment wpuld protect us from a tyranical government. Who protects us from you? Do you so crave power that you must disatm us? Why do you hate fireams?

I oppose these bills. Limiting our right to defend ourselves will not reduce crime or make anyone safer, except violent criminals.

Dear Committee Chair, I am writing to respectfully urge you to OPPOSE these bills. These proposals place unconstitutional burdens on law-abiding citizens while failing to address the root causes of criminal misuse of firearms. Measures such as taxpayer-funded gun turn-in and destruction programs, knife and firearm bans at medical facilities, and magazine capacity restrictions unfairly target responsible gun owners in my community without demonstrable public safety benefits. I ask that you vote “NO” on this legislation and instead support policies that enforce existing laws and address criminal behavior, rather than restricting the rights of lawful citizens. Thank you for your time and consideration. Respectfully, Jan

My family and I hope you will reconsider all of these unconstitutional and tyrannical bills that seek to limit the God given right of citizens to defend themselves. Supporting these unconstitutional. bills as the Governor simultaneously supports the actions of Mr. Petti as a legal firearms owner, is indeed hypocrisy.

Good Morning. I respectfully oppose the following House Bills, which collectively place excessive burdens on law-abiding Virginians while offering little evidence of meaningful reductions in violent crime. These proposals raise serious concerns related to constitutional rights, due process, public safety, and cost. HB 19 (McClure) requires forfeiture of firearm rights for certain misdemeanors involving a broadly defined “dating relationship.” This imposes severe constitutional consequences without felony-level due process protections and relies on vague definitions prone to misuse. HB 21 (Helmer) allows civil lawsuits against firearm manufacturers and sellers for crimes committed with their products. This abandons long-standing liability principles by holding lawful businesses responsible for third-party criminal acts, increasing costs and reducing lawful access without improving public safety. HB 40 (Simon) criminalizes unfinished frames and receivers unless serialized, burdening lawful hobbyists and small manufacturers despite a lack of evidence that such items meaningfully drive crime. HB 93 (Bennett-Parker) mandates firearm surrender under protective orders in ways that may disarm innocent family members who are not accused of wrongdoing, undermining due process and property rights in shared households. HB 110 (Laufer) penalizes and allows towing of vehicles when a handgun is left unattended, even if secured. This may discourage lawful compliance with firearm-restricted locations by eliminating practical storage options. HB 217 (Helmer) bans commonly owned firearms and standard-capacity magazines manufactured after July 1, 2026. Such bans target arms in common lawful use and raise serious constitutional concerns while failing to address criminal misuse of existing firearms. HB 229 (Hernandez) prohibits firearms and many knives in medical facilities, removing lawful self-defense options from patients, visitors, and staff, including permit holders who have already undergone background checks. HB 626 (Callsen) restricts lawful firearm possession on college campuses, treating adult students and faculty as if they forfeit constitutional rights despite documented safety concerns and delayed emergency response times. HB 702 (Cole) establishes a taxpayer-funded firearm turn-in and destroy program with no demonstrated impact on violent crime, diverting resources from proven enforcement and prevention strategies. HB 871 (Downey) mandates specific storage methods and biometric safes in homes with minors, imposing costly, one-size-fits-all requirements that intrude into private homes and may delay access in emergencies. HB 969 (Price) creates a new state agency focused solely on firearms while ignoring broader contributors to violence such as repeat offenders, mental health access, and community-based interventions. HB 1359 (Hope) establishes a costly permit-to-purchase system with fingerprints, training mandates, and a de facto registry, creating delays and barriers to exercising a constitutional right without clear public safety benefits. Conclusion: Taken together, these bills represent a sweeping expansion of government control over lawful firearm ownership. They burden responsible citizens, weaken due process, and prioritize symbolic regulation over effective crime reduction. I urge the General Assembly to reject these measures and focus on enforcing existing laws and addressing violent criminal behavior.

Forum: These Bills are an attack on the lawful Citizen and will not stop the criminal element from doing harm. This has been proven time and time again. The intent of these Bills is to discourage the Citizenry from exercising their rights as protected by the US Constitution and the VA Constitution. These documents are explicit that our rights are being protected and not being given to us by the Govt. It is the Govt responsibility to protect our Bill of Rights and not to subvert them at the Federal and Local level. These bills seek to create a list and registry as forbidden by law. The declaration that all guns that are semi-automatic are "assault weapons" is absurd. The look of a gun does not define it as an assault weapon. These Bills have been stricken down by the highest court(s) in the land time and time again. The only reason for these bills is too attack the lawful citizen and will not do anything to stop the aggressor in his/her intent to do harm. There is significant history that illustrates that an armed populace in society is a peaceful and secure society. I respectfully oppose these Bills that attack the fundamental Bill of Rights that the Federal and State Constitutions protect. V/R, Mr. Charters