“You also ask whether a center console, glove compartment or any other “ container or compartment’’ must be locked to constitute a “ secured container or compartment.” The legislative history of the 2010 amendment shows that the container or compartment storing the handgun need not be locked for the exception to apply. When § 18.2-308 was amended to include § 18.2-308(B)(10), “ locked in a container or compattment’’ was considered as possible statutory language; 13 however, “ secured in a container or compartment” was the wording that was ultimately adopted. 14 By choosing “ secured” instead of “ locked,” the General Assembly evinced its intention that a handgun may be carried in a vehicle without requiring the container or compartment storing it to be locked.”
This was given as an opinion by the previous AG, Ken Cuccinelli. The problem is that we have a Rat AG now, and people are worried that his interpretation will be the opposite of Cuccinelli’s, so the legislature tried to clarify it, but their clarification was vetoed by McAwful.
Thanks. Quite frankly I wasn't sure just what the OP was advocating for.
It's pretty sad that they have to continuously try to erode our rights by semantic games (secured or locked). With good guys, neither way matters. They have no nefarious motive whether the gun is "secured" or "locked" (though locked is just idiotic). With bad guys, they don't care what the law is.