Office of Attorney General CRIMES AND OFFENSES GENERALLY: CRIMES INVOLVING HEALTH AND SAFETY - OTHER ILLEGAL WEAPONS. Collectors of antique firearms may purchase such firearms without restriction. Curios and relics are not included in exception to one handgun a month purchase restriction. Any person possessing federal firearm curio and relic license may not purchase more than one such handgun in any 30-day period. The Honorable H. Morgan Griffith Member, House of Delegates February 17, 1997 You ask whether any person who possesses a federal firearm curio and relic license [footnote 1] is subject to the one handgun a month purchase restriction in section 18.2308.2:2(Q) of the Code of Virginia. Section 18.2308.2:2(Q) states that it is "unlawful for any person who is not a licensed firearms dealer to purchase more than one handgun within any thirty-day period." An exception to this prohibition is "[t]he purchase of antique firearms" [footnote 2] as defined in section 18.2308.2:2(G): "Antique firearm" means any firearm, including those with a matchlock, flintlock, percussion cap, or similar type of ignition system, manufactured in or before 1898 and any replica of such a firearm if such replica (i) is not designed or redesigned for using rimfire or conventional center-fire fixed ammunition or (ii) uses rimfire or conventional center-fire fixed ammunition which is no longer manufactured in the United States and which is not readily available in the ordinary channels of commercial trade. Although the purchase of antique firearms is one of the exceptions to the restriction in section 18.2308.2:2(Q), there is no such exception in section 18.2308.2:2(Q)(2) for the purchase of curios or relics. Applicable federal regulations define and regulate "antique firearms" and "curios and relics" as separate categories. [footnote 3] It is also apparent that the General Assembly has not included curios or relics within the statutory exemption provided for antique firearms. A well-settled principle of statutory construction is that "[i]f the language of a statute is plain and unambiguous, and its meaning perfectly clear and definite, effect must be given to it." [footnote 4] It is unnecessary to resort to any rules of statutory construction when the language of a statute is unambiguous. [footnote 5] In such a situation, the statute's plain meaning and intent govern. An equally well-accepted principle of statutory construction is that the "mention of a specific item in a statute implies that omitted items were not intended to be included within the scope of the statute." [footnote 6] The collection of curios and relics has been omitted from both the definition of "antique firearm" and the exemption to the prohibition in section 18.2308.2:2(Q). The clear intent of the General Assembly, therefore, is to permit collectors of antique firearms to purchase such firearms without restriction. Collectors of curios or relics, however, are not exempted from the general prohibition restricting the purchase of more than one such weapon within a thirty-day period. Therefore, I am of the opinion that any person who possesses a federal firearm curio and relic license is subject to the restriction in section 18.2308.2:2(Q) and may not purchase more than one such handgun within any thirty-day period. FOOTNOTES 1. "Any person desiring to be licensed as a collector shall file an application for such license with the Secretary [of the Treasury]. The application shall be in such form and contain only that information necessary to determine eligibility as the Secretary shall by regulation prescribe. The fee for such license shall be $10 per year. Any license granted under this subsection shall only apply to transactions in curios and relics." 18 U.S.C.A. section 923(b) (West Supp. 1996) (emphasis added). The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms has developed regulations for the issuance of a license to collectors of curios or relics. See 27 C.F.R. ch. I, pt. 178 (1996). Section 178.11 of the regulations separately defines the terms "antique firearm" and "curios or relics." 2. Section 18.2308.2:2(Q)(2)(e). 3. 27 C.F.R. ch. I, pt. 178, supra. 4. Temple v. City of Petersburg, 182 Va. 418, 423, 29 S.E.2d 357, 358 (1944); 1993 Op. Va. Att'y Gen. 256, 257. 5. See Ambrogi v. Koontz, 224 Va. 381, 386, 297 S.E.2d 660, 662 (1982); 1993 Op. Va. Att'y Gen. 99, 100. 6. Turner v. Wexler, 244 Va. 124, 127, 418 S.E.2d 886, 887 (1992); see Christiansburg v. Montgomery County, 216 Va. 654, 658, 222 S.E.2d 513, 516 (1976); see also 1992 Op. Va. Att'y Gen. 145, 146.