An Act to amend and reenact § 59.1-148.3 of the Code of Virginia, relating to purchase of handguns or other weapons of certain officers; Department of State Police.
HB1300 amends Virginia Code § 59.1-148.3, which governs when certain public safety personnel may buy their issued service handguns or other agency-issued weapons. The bill expands and clarifies the list of eligible agencies and officers, including state police, wildlife resources, ABC, lottery, marine resources, capitol police, conservation and recreation, forestry, sheriffs, regional jail authorities, local police departments, DMV law-enforcement officers, campus police officers, and certain Department of Corrections employees with internal investigations authority.
The measure preserves the existing $1 purchase option for some retirees and survivors, while also allowing other eligible officers to buy their issued handgun at fair market value depending on years of service, retirement status, disability retirement, or death in the line of duty. It also addresses special cases such as officers who transfer into Virginia Retirement System-covered positions, auxiliary or volunteer deputies in Hanover County, and auxiliary law-enforcement officers with more than 10 years of service. The bill further allows agencies to sell other personally issued duty weapons, with approval, if the weapon is a type that a private citizen could legally buy from a regular retailer after a background check.
HB1300 updates the statutory framework for disposition of service handguns and certain other weapons by state and local law-enforcement and public safety agencies. It affects § 59.1-148.3 of the Code of Virginia by broadening eligible personnel, specifying pricing rules, and confirming agency discretion to authorize sales. The bill primarily impacts retiring officers, surviving family members, and the agencies that issue firearms, while leaving the underlying background-check and lawful-purchase limitations intact for weapons sold at fair market value.
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so the available record does not show debate or opposition. Based on the enacted chapter text, the bill appears to have been treated as a routine administrative update affecting retirement benefits and agency firearm disposition policies rather than a controversial policy change. The final enactment suggests the measure had sufficient support to pass and be signed into law.
The main policy distinctions in the statute are between officers who qualify for the $1 purchase price and those who must pay fair market value, especially based on years of service, disability status, and whether the officer died in the line of duty. Another possible point of interest is the inclusion of specific agencies and special categories such as campus police, corrections employees with internal investigations authority, auxiliary deputies, and Hanover County auxiliary or volunteer deputies. Because no discussion transcript is available, there is no documented disagreement, but these eligibility and pricing distinctions are the most likely areas where questions could arise.