By Sam Douglass
On Thursday, May 7 the Vermont Senate will take up legislation that will place into effect a statewide prohibition on machine guns and create a statewide ban for bringing firearms into establishments licensed for alcohol, sponsor and Senate Pro Tem Phil Baruth (D-Chittenden Central) told VDC today.
The bill is on today’s calendar but will be passed over for action tomorrow, Baruth said.
S.329 was introduced in mid-April by Sen. Phil Baruth (D/P-Chittenden Central) as an exact copy of H.606, which was reported on by Vermont Daily Chronicle in early April. When introduced, S.329 also included a proposed amendment to ban firearms in bars statewide.
The proposal is based on Baruth’s 2025 legislation to modify the Burlington City Charter to the same effect. That legislation was taken up in the Senate last year and passed along party lines to the Vermont House where it has since remained in legislative quagmire.
At this point in the legislative session, senators are no longer allowed to introduce new bills, and the March deadline for legislation to advance out of committee has passed. However, according to Baruth speaking in committee on April 17, following his discussions with House leadership regarding his 2025 proposal to amend the Burlington City Charter, and citing unknown procedural obstacles, he appealed to the Rules Committee for an exemption to allow the drafting and advance of S.329 in the Senate.
In 2025, Governor Phil Scott went on record to state his intention to veto changes to the Burlington City Charter, citing the inability of business owners to enforce the measure and uneven rules across municipalities for banning firearms in licensed establishments. With S.329 applying prohibitions evenly statewide, it’s unclear whether the Republican Governor intends to veto this bill as well.
Information for In Committee news reports are sourced from GoldenDomeVt.com and the General Assembly website. Generative AI has not been used in the writing of this story.
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Legislation
What a waste of time ! A restaurant or any other business can already ban firearms on private property. Of course the incident that brought this about occured on a sidewalk outside a restaurant, and therefore would not have had anything to do with this bill. As far as fully automatic firearms, they are already controlled by federal laws. They require a more thorough background check, and higher cost to obtain the license. This is all about disingenuous legislators trying to put their names on laws that they can then claim as some kind of revolutionary, paradigm shifting legislation . In light of the woman that just last week, entered the hospital with a handgun, how well did the law that Baruth convinced others was not only necessary, but would end these kinds of incidents work ? It didn’t ! All that did was ensure that the perp did not have to worry about being confronted by a “good guy” with a gun.
To the demoprogs, virtue signaling is never a waste of time. Even with a Governor’s veto, they still get to show “how much they care”…
Democrats in Vermont and nationally often seem to have trouble affixing the truth to their proposed legislation. Case in point the “affordable care act” and the “inflation reduction act” that was a crypto-climate bill. May I suggest a title for the proposed ban on guns in liquor-serving establishments: The “guaranteeing of ample guns available for theft from vehicles outside of bars and restaurants bill”. If Vermonters really needed a ban on something dangerous, it should be on college English professors from New York in the Vermont legislature.
Machine guns? Seriously. One big hurrah and screw you to the law abiding citizens of Vermont. No one I know has ever had a machine gun. They were banned in 1986by the McClure Volkmer Act. Talk about wasting time on this one.
I had several machine guns under my control as a Weapons Officer on a Guided Missile Cruiser. It’s so comforting to know a graduate of the five month ‘Police Academy’ is exempt, but I’m no longer trusted.
1932 in believe machine gun ban
What does this have to do with making life more affordable? Why don’t they make it easier to remove illegals from the state? Why don’t they lower property taxes? Why do they need to have all these “green” regulations? I can keep going. It is so frustrating and to watch Politicians just make unnecessary laws to control law abiding citizens. It is offensive and disgusting. I know I just spoke in general terms. But I only want to write a few lines. So there it is!
We’ve allowed …no, I’d say ENCOURAGED, a legislative climate determined to RULE us guided by agendas of their own making in place of consensus developed from us. Are we ready to vote differently next time?
Sure hope they’re paying attention to what happened in Colorado recently.
If a privately owned institution wishes to keep firearms off of their own property, this is totally within their rights to do so. However, and to my limited understanding, our constitution, because of the 2nd amendment, would prohibit a broad sweeping gun ban such as S329.
Here is a great old quote I learned from one of my firearms coaches:
An armed society, is a polite society “
Think about what this old saying is implying.
The quote came from Robert A. Heinlein, “An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life”.
He also said, “There are no dangerous weapons. There are only dangerous men”.
Give them an inch…they’ll take a mile.
It’s that simple!
Never give the left an inch.
They practice death by 1000 cuts so never let them cut you once.
Fight! Fight! fight!
Phil Baruth is afraid of the dark and things that go ‘bump’ in the night.
He’s not a Vermonter and the sooner he leaves office, the better.
10-4 ! Maybe Lockport N. Y. is looking to get their “village idiot” back ? 🙂
The people of Vermont need to vote out every democrat. The Democrats destroyed this state’s affordability, safety, and want to make everyone defenseless. Do not comply with this law if it ever happens! The democrats can eat their crap.
The constitution says to never comply with unconstitutional laws.
Unconstitutional Official Acts
16 Am Jur 2d, Sec 177 late 2d, Sec 256:
The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The US. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any statute, to be valid, must be In agreement. It is impossible for both the Constitution and a law violating it to be valid; one must prevail. This is succinctly stated as follows:
The General rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted. Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed under it..… A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the lend, it is superseded thereby. No one Is bound to obey an unconstitutional law, and no courts are bound to enforce it. The Supreme Court’s decision is as follows; “An unconstitutional act is not law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; affords no protection; it creates no office; it in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it has never been passed”. Norton vs Shelby County 1886 – 118 US 425 p.442.
Alexander Hamilton explains unconstitutional law in Federalist No.76; “No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. To deny this, would be to affirm, that the deputy is greater than his principal; the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers, may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid”.
LORD – I can start going to bars again…feeling so much safer. Just an aside though…because penises are used for so many more atrocities than guns will we be considering gelding clinics as part of the bar scene?
That’s funny Curt.
Just so I don’t miss out on what I’m supposed to be doing…what days is it again am I to change my underwear and what color sock do I wear on Tuesdays?
Underwear will be worn on the outside, so it can be checked.
I was trying to remember when the last time I heard about a shooting inside a Vermont bar. There have been several outside of bars and It probably has happened, but I don’t recall any. Senator Baruth is out of touch with the values of rural Vermonters who live outside of Chittenden county. We deserve better.
In a Rutland bar, October 2018, one shot fired in bar, no one injured.
Hide A Way Bar in Rutland in April, 2018, posted on MyChamplain.com in Oct. 2018.
Baruth is the only sponsor of this disaster
We must be aware of the monkey see monkey do Commiecrats. A Glock ban is going to the Connecticut Senate, because of the so-called Glock switches, Governor Ned Lamont said he would sign it. That being said help may be on the way.
https://www.breitbart.com/2nd-amendment/2026/05/06/trump-doj-sues-colorado-ban-standard-capacity-magazines/
https://www.breitbart.com/2nd-amendment/2026/05/06/harmeet-dhillon-scotus-will-rule-ar-15s-legal-allover-america/
Trump gave us Harmeet Dhillon a champion for the Second Amendment.
Addendum: A friend from CT contacted me, said he never had a Glock, so he went out to several gun stores to find one, they were all sold out and he was told they don’t know if they will get any before the ban goes into effect.
I nominate Gov. Lamont of CT for Glock Salesman of the Year. Perhaps he should be more concerned about all the criminal gang members being exported to his neighboring states from the hellhole of Hartford?
Baruth is quitting the Senate and retiring. He lives in a high crime area, Burlington, Winooski and wants to feel safer hence his bill. He’s accomplished so much damage to Vermont being a mental thinker from NY. One lib down, perhaps a Rep replacement, but in that area??????.