A BILL to amend and reenact §§ 15.2-915, 18.2-283.2, 18.2-287.01, 18.2-287.4, 18.2-308, 24.2-604, 24.2-671, and 24.2-802.1 of the Code of Virginia, relating to carrying firearms in restricted locations; exception.
HB540 would revise multiple Virginia statutes governing where firearms may be carried and who is exempt from those restrictions. The bill keeps the general prohibitions on firearms in certain sensitive places, including the Capitol and surrounding area, airport terminals, polling places, electoral board meetings, and recount locations, but it also updates and expands several exceptions. In particular, it adds or clarifies exemptions for certain retired law-enforcement officers, off-duty State Police officers in some settings, armed security officers in election-related locations, and women who are current victims of family abuse and have active protective orders. It also preserves existing carve-outs for law-enforcement, military, and other specified personnel, and it maintains notice requirements for restricted areas.
The bill also amends Virginia’s firearm preemption law for local governments. Localities would remain barred from broadly regulating firearms, ammunition, and components except as expressly authorized by statute, but they would retain authority to restrict firearms in specified local government buildings, parks, recreation or community centers, and certain public streets or event areas, subject to posting and security requirements. The bill further preserves the rule that employees may not be barred from storing lawfully possessed firearms and ammunition in locked private vehicles at the workplace, with limited exceptions.
In election-related provisions, HB540 continues to prohibit firearms within 40 feet of polling places, electoral board result-counting locations, and recount sites, while adding exceptions for law-enforcement, certain retired officers, armed security officers, private property owners within the zone, and the same protective-order exception for abused women. The bill also leaves in place the existing misdemeanor penalties and notice requirements tied to these restricted areas. Overall, the measure would make several targeted changes to the state’s firearms code without eliminating the underlying restricted-location framework.
The general sentiment reflected by the bill’s posture is limited support in committee, or at least no recorded floor-level debate or vote history in the materials provided. HB540 was referred to the House Committee on Public Safety and ultimately left in committee, indicating it did not advance. Because there are no transcripts or recorded votes included, there is no direct evidence of public arguments for or against the bill in the provided context.
The main points of contention likely center on the balance between gun-carry restrictions in sensitive places and expanded exemptions for certain individuals. Potentially controversial features include the broader access for retired law-enforcement officers, the treatment of firearms in local government-controlled spaces, and the election-related carry prohibitions near polling and recount sites. The protective-order exception for women who are current victims of family abuse is another notable policy choice, as it creates a specific exemption from otherwise broad firearm restrictions.
HB540 would amend eight sections of the Code of Virginia, affecting state firearm preemption, carry restrictions in government and election settings, and related penalty and notice provisions. It would preserve most existing restricted-location rules while modifying exemptions and local authority, thereby changing how state law applies to concealed carry, open carry in certain public places, and firearm possession near elections and government facilities. The bill would primarily affect firearm owners, law-enforcement personnel, local governments, election officials, security personnel, and individuals covered by the new protective-order exception.
The provided record shows no committee transcript, no recorded votes, and a final status of left in the House Committee on Public Safety. That suggests the bill did not generate enough consensus to move forward, but the materials do not show explicit debate or a clear partisan split. The overall sentiment is therefore best characterized as unresolved or limited-support, with the bill not advancing out of committee.
The likely areas of contention are the bill’s firearm restrictions in sensitive places versus its expanded exemptions. Supporters may view the measure as a targeted adjustment that preserves public-safety restrictions while accommodating law-enforcement, security, and certain vulnerable individuals. Opponents may object to the continued criminalization of firearm possession near polling places, airports, Capitol Square, and recount sites, or to the bill’s local-government authority provisions and the carve-outs for retired officers and armed security. The absence of transcripts means these are inferred policy tensions rather than documented arguments in the provided materials.