Page 1 of 1

Which bills go to SFC (Senate financial Committee)?

PostPosted: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 18:33:19
by wittmeba
I thought this should be shared -- it is informative.

VCDL Page - Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc.
23 hours ago

Trying to make sure VCDL members are as knowledgeable as possible, I want to talk about the Senate Finance Committee (SFC), where a few pro-gun and a few anti-gun bills are sitting right now.

Most of you are probably not very familiar with the SFC because very few of the pro-gun bills go through it.

WHAT BILLS GO TO SFC?

Things that go to SFC are in some way potentially costing the Commonwealth money. Whenever a new crime is created, or the penalty for a crime is changed, the State has to figure in the cost of incarcerating X number of people who are convicted of that crime for Y amount of time.

If simply doing something that costs money, say doing background checks, purchasing items, issuing permits, then such bills also go to SFC.

Most pro-gun bills don't cost the State a penny. We are not creating new crimes, nor are we asking for things that cost the State money in other ways.

For example, look at Church Carry. It passed out of the Senate Courts of Justice and went straight to the Senate Floor, not to the SFC. That's because it ELIMINATES a crime (which was a Class-4 misdemeanor), so the State actually saves money!

The antis are forever wanting to criminalize everything dealing with guns. While they don't want to elevate misdemeanor domestic violence into a felony because it would "destroy families by making a breadwinner a felon," they are happy to destroy a gun-owner's family for a paperwork mistake! But, by creating new crimes or elevating old ones to felonies, their bills get sent to the SFC.

THE SFC IS OFTEN THE KILLING GROUND FOR BILLS

It is well known at the General Assembly that a bill which is referred to the SFC after passing out of a committee has an excellent chance of never seeing the light of day. That's because it's competing with various other bills for the same funds. Of course some bills can, and do, get through and move on to the Senate Floor.

ARGUING FOR/AGAINST BILLS IN THE SFC

When speaking on a bill is in the SFC, one cannot argue purely the merits of the bill, that's what the referring committee was supposed to have dealt with. Instead one has to argue either that there is no real cost to the bill and it should not have gone to SFC, or the price is reasonable/unreasonable, thus worth it/not worth it. There are other arguments that could be made, but they must center around finances.

A LOOK AT THE GUN BILLS CURRENTLY IN THE SFC

SB 350, Peake, makes CHPs good for 15 years. I'm suspicious the reason that this pro-gun bill went to SFC is because Clerks and the State Police will only get money for a permit once in 15 years, instead of three times. This WAS NOT supposed to be a moneymaker for the State! If that's what this is about, we were lied to about the state only breaking even on permit fees.

SB 48, Black, Constitutional Carry. Again, I'm betting this is about Clerks and the State Police not getting as much money since less people might be getting permits. First, CHP fees were NOT SUPPOSED to be a moneymaker for the State! The fees were supposed to simply cover costs. Second, I'm betting that the number of permit holders will stay about the same. Permits would allow carry in some situations that Constitutional Carry will not and a CHP is also necessary for recognition when one travels.

SB 1, Ebbin, bump stock ban. This bill creates a new crime, which is a Class 1 misdemeanor and will create lots of criminal charges against regular people, as there is no grandfathering for existing devices. Prosecutors are going to be very challenged because a device "designed to increase the rate of fire" is not defined. I can fire a semi-automatic rifle with my bare hands as fast as a bump stock or a trigger crank. So, increase the rate of fire beyond what standard? This is why people, like Ebbin, who know nothing about guns, should not be writing gun laws.

SB 79, Lucas, makes preschool and daycare centers "gun-free zones" with a felony as the penalty. This is going to get everyday people into trouble at churches and anywhere preschool or daycare centers are housed. I've been hearing from concerned faith leaders on this, as it will destroy any kind of security churches might currently enjoy.

SB 797, Howell, will make more felons out of people who don't give up their guns quickly enough (a very short 24 hours) when put under a protective order.

Re: Which bills go to SFC (Senate financial Committee)?

PostPosted: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 19:35:09
by MarcSpaz
These are the things that make me very upset with the political Left.

Many private daycare businesses exist in a portion of people's homes (home business). SB 79 will violate federal and VA constitutional rights for these people to defend themselves. Either they won't be able to keep their business in their home or they can't keep a firearm in there home.

The negative impact could be...

1.) the cost of business increases to an unsustainable level, causing a business to close and 10's, possible hundreds of thousands of people will directly lose income, or...
2.) a home owner loses their right to own property and defend themselves at home, or...
3.) a citizen loses their right to own property and defend themselves while in their place of business.

These people are only worried about maintaining power and have zero concern for the law-abiding citizen. The sad part is, people keep voting for them.