Stun weapons; prohibits possession on school property, exemptions. (SB173)
Introduced By
Sen. Emmett Hanger (R-Mount Solon)
Progress
✓ |
Introduced |
✓ |
Passed Committee |
✓ |
Passed House |
✓ |
Passed Senate |
✓ |
Signed by Governor |
☐ |
Became Law |
Description
Prohibition on possession of stun weapon on school property; exemptions. Allows the holder of a valid concealed handgun permit to possess a stun weapon on school property while in a motor vehicle in a parking lot, traffic circle, or other means of vehicular ingress or egress to the school. The bill also allows a stun weapon to be stored in a closed container in a motor vehicle while such vehicle is on school property. Read the Bill »
Outcome
Bill Has Passed
History
Date | Action |
---|---|
12/20/2019 | Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice |
12/20/2019 | Prefiled and ordered printed; offered 01/08/20 20101379D |
12/20/2019 | Referred to Committee on the Judiciary |
01/08/2020 | Moved from Courts of Justice to Judiciary due to a change of the committee name |
01/22/2020 | Reported from Judiciary with amendments (13-Y 0-N) (see vote tally) |
01/24/2020 | Constitutional reading dispensed (39-Y 0-N) (see vote tally) |
01/27/2020 | Read second time |
01/27/2020 | Reading of amendments waived |
01/27/2020 | Committee amendments agreed to |
01/27/2020 | Engrossed by Senate as amended SB173E |
01/27/2020 | Printed as engrossed 20101379D-E |
01/28/2020 | Read third time and passed Senate (40-Y 0-N) (see vote tally) |
01/29/2020 | Impact statement from DPB (SB173E) |
02/03/2020 | Placed on Calendar |
02/03/2020 | Read first time |
02/03/2020 | Referred to Committee on Public Safety |
02/13/2020 | Assigned PS sub: Firearms |
02/18/2020 | Subcommittee recommends reporting (8-Y 0-N) |
02/21/2020 | Reported from Public Safety (22-Y 0-N) (see vote tally) |
02/25/2020 | Read second time |
02/26/2020 | Read third time |
02/26/2020 | Passed House BLOCK VOTE (100-Y 0-N) |
02/26/2020 | VOTE: Block Vote Passage (100-Y 0-N) (see vote tally) |
03/03/2020 | Enrolled |
03/03/2020 | Bill text as passed Senate and House (SB173ER) |
03/03/2020 | Impact statement from DPB (SB173ER) |
03/03/2020 | Signed by Speaker |
03/04/2020 | Signed by President |
03/12/2020 | Enrolled Bill Communicated to Governor on March 12, 2020 |
03/12/2020 | G Governor's Action Deadline 11:59 p.m., April 11, 2020 |
04/06/2020 | G Approved by Governor-Chapter 693 (effective 7/1/20) |
04/06/2020 | G Acts of Assembly Chapter text (CHAP0693) |
Comments
This legislation will help abused women being stalked by vengeful exes. They should be able to use non-lethal force against the abusive father of their children, rather than lethal force, when attacked. So they should be allowed to carry a stun-gun rather than a gun if they choose. It reminds me of the abused woman protected by the Supreme Court's decision in Caetano v. Massachusetts (2016). That decision strongly signaled that the 2nd Amendment can protect stun guns, not just guns. Because it makes no sense to permit only lethal force (guns) but not non-lethal force (stun guns). Most people would rather not kill the abusive parent of their children, when threatened, but would rather just immobilize them with a stun gun. Children often don't take kindly to the killing of even an abusive parent. It traumatizes them.