WV Bill SB 96 Would Extend Preemption to Non-Firearm Weapons

West Virginia State Flag
West Virginia State Flag

U.S.A.-(Ammoland.com)- West Virginia has a strong preemption statute to ensure the state has reasonably uniform laws about the carry and use of firearms by individuals, throughout the state. It is §8-12-5a:

Limitations upon municipalities' power to restrict the purchase, possession, transfer, ownership, carrying, transport, sale and storage of certain weapons and ammunition.

§8-12-5a does a pretty good job of limiting the power of local governments to infringe on the right to keep and bear firearms. But the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution is not limited to firearms.

As affirmed in the Heller decision, the Second Amendment covers all bearable arms. The Heller decision was re-enforced by the Caetano decision, where the justices on the Supreme Court unanimously held the Second Amendment protects all bearable arms. From Caetano v. Massachusetts:

The Court has held that “the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding,” District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U. S. 570, 582 (2008), and that this “Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States,” McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U. S. 742, 750 (2010).

Senate Bill 96 has been filed in West Virginia to expand the state preemption protection from firearms to most bearable arms. From Senate Bill 96:

(b) For the purposes of this section:

“Deadly weapon” means an instrument which is designed to be used to produce serious bodily injury or death or is readily adaptable to that use. The term “deadly weapon” includes, but is not limited to:

(A) A blackjack, gravity knife, knife, switchblade knife, nunchuka, metallic or false knuckles, pistol, revolver and firearm, as defined in §61-7-2 of this code, or other deadly weapons of like kind or character which may be easily concealed on or about the person; and

(B) A rifle and a shotgun.

“Deadly weapon” does not include explosive, chemical, biological and radiological materials, or any item or material owned by a school or county board of education intended for curricular use, and used by a student solely for curricular purposes.

Later in the bill, pepper spray is included in the preemption law:

“Pepper spray” means a temporarily disabling aerosol that is composed partly of capsicum oleoresin and causes irritation and blinding of the eyes and inflammation of the nose, throat, and skin, intended for self-defense use.

While SB 96 expands the protections of the preemption bill to most concealable weapons, there are a number of bearable weapons that may not be protected, depending on whether a judge or jury would believe them to be “concealable on or about the person”.

Would most swords be protected under the law? Would spears, quarterstaves, or other polearms? It seems unlikely they would be considered to be concealable. Most people do not carry a spear with them. But swords are popular, and a spear was used to stop a mountain lion attack in Canada when Canadian firearms law was found to be burdensome.

It is unclear why the protections of the bill were limited to concealable weapons. Perhaps it was because the prohibitions were originally applied to concealable weapons.

The bill may or may not be passed in the current legislative session. The extreme restrictions on the exercise of Second Amendment rights being proposed in the neighboring state of Virginia may aid in the bill's passage, simply to differentiate West Virginia's approach to the protection of the right to keep and bear arms.


About Dean Weingarten:Dean Weingarten

Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of Constitutional Carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

10
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
5 Comment threads
5 Thread replies
1 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
7 Comment authors
loveaduckHereticUncleTdaveScottMc Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
Notify of
Heretic
Member
Heretic

In reference to the talk of UN troops coming to the USA to help enforce gun laws and confiscate weapons, their bosses would do well to remember an old quote attributed to Admiral Yamamoto. Whether Yamamoto really said it or not is irrelevant; the main takeaway is the sentiment, which is, paraphrased: “One would be foolish to invade the USA. There would be a rifle hiding behind every blade of grass.” We have many more millions of rifles today than we had then. We have millions more of pistols and shotguns than we had then. Nobody in their right mind… Read more »

loveaduck
Member
loveaduck

They’re not coming.

UncleT
Member
UncleT

I don’t say this often about my state govt, but in this case, every state in the Country should take note on what our state govt has done to protect the 2nd Amendment and the individual rights of the people. Also a shout out to the @WVCDL for their leadership in that fight.

ScottMc
Member
ScottMc

Two points:

1) The split between Virginia and West Virginia was not a product of the civil war, but is a cultural divide that began before North America was settled.

2) The West Virginia legislature meets for two months a year with brief interim sessions as needed and generally takes a minimum of two years to get the wording on a bill like this one sorted out.

Deplorable Bill
Member
Deplorable Bill

The 2A is clear. “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”. The 2A IS NOT predigested as to what type of arms. It should be also noted that in the sentence prior to “the right of the people…” the 2A uses the word “militia” which infers the right to keep and bear MILITARY arms. This constitutes a right, but even more so, it constituted a mandate. It reflects the mandate the LORD gave to mankind in Luke 22:36. IF the government, either federal or any state think they have the right to deny,… Read more »

tetejaun
Member
tetejaun

Excellent dialogue. Thanks.
I have never rescinded my Oath when I joined the United States Army.
I am bound by that Oath and my love of this country.

loveaduck
Member
loveaduck

No individual religion gets a say in our Constitutional battles. I agree, however, that we have the absolute right to self-defense and any weapon it takes to achieve that. And a right to protect against government overreach.

tetejaun
Member
tetejaun

The democrats in Richmond are calling for U.N. troops to enforce these anti-Constitutional ‘gun laws’ and to seize guns from Americans.
I hope they have good life insurance, because the life expectancy of a blue hat U.N. soldier trying to seize guns from Americans will be about 2 seconds after he says “Turn in your guns”.
IF shooting starts in Virginia, WE must go there to assist.
My pack is loaded, my vest is loaded and I am ready.

dave
Member
dave

I would drive the hundreds of miles to Richmond to join the resistance. I used to live there and know the town and state quite well. Also, blue helmets are great targets – it’s the most visible color of all. However, Northam does not have authority to invite a foreign army into the US for his own illegal purposes. If he does, he deserves to be dragged out hanged as a traitor. And further – he has no clue how many LEOs he thinks will do his bidding are really Oath Keepers who will refuse or even take action against… Read more »

loveaduck
Member
loveaduck

Where have they called for UN troops? I haven’t seen that.