Gun storage, waiting period bill passes Senate

By Guy Page

The Vermont Senate today passed H.230, a gun control bill featuring a 72-hour waiting period for firearms transfers and required gun storage. 

The roll call vote was 19-9. Because the Senate softened the storage provisions – making non-storage a crime only if someone is harmed by an unstored gun – the bill must return to the House for reconciliation. A conference committee is deemed likely.

Gov. Scott appreciates the improved storage language, but still has difficulty with the waiting period, Press Secretary Jason Maulucci said today. Gov. Scott has vetoed waiting period bills in previous sessions.

Sen. Terry Williams (R-Rutland), who voted against the bill, said the waiting period and storage requirements violate the Second Amendment.  Supporters say the bill seeks to reduce gun violence and prevent deaths by suicide. It also expands eligible petitioners for Extreme Risk Protection Orders to family or household members and creating a 72-hour waiting period for firearm transfers. 

“Vermonters want sensible gun violence prevention laws,” said Senator Sears, chair of the Senate Committee on Judiciary. “H.230 will help reduce community violence, prevent suicides and save lives.”

Supporters say data show that unsecured guns pose safety risks – in particular to youth – and that waiting periods are associated with reduced rates of both homicide and suicide by firearm.

“Right now Vermont is the only state in New England without a law to prevent youth access to firearms — H.230 brings us in line with that regional consensus,” Senate Pro Tem Phil Baruth said.

“As a social worker who works primarily with teens and young adults, I know just how big and transitory their emotions can be,” said Senator Vyhovsky, member of the Senate Committee on Judiciary. “And due to brain development, this population is particularly compulsive when under duress. And as a gun owner myself, nothing in this bill strikes me as overly cumbersome but rather simple common-sense safety measures.”

Categories: Gunrights

18 replies »

  1. A bill that you say they reduced the storage part and now says if a gun used in a crime that you didn’t have stored your accountable? Lol lol sounds like the same thing. I mean we wouldn’t want to punish the law breaker that Broke in, stole the gun and used it in a crime. I mean that’s only 3 laws they broke. What a joke. Democrats are

  2. ……Of COURSE it passed – despite the cautionary warnings that the storage mandate is likely unconstitutional and unenforceable.

    And just HOW will the State plan to enforce this gun lunacy? Can you say “illegal search and seizure”?? MARXIST TYRANTS. You’ll never succeed. Never. Ever.

  3. Sounds to me like Legislature wants the pharmaceutical companies to be able to corner the market on suicide. But then, this bill was never about suicide.

    • Oh, and Senator Vyhovsky calling this “simple common-sense safety measures” just proves to me that she would not recognize “common sense” or truth, if it slapped her beside her duplicitous face

  4. “And due to brain development, this population is particularly compulsive when under duress.”

    You mean like the peer & societal pressure to sterilize themselves & mutilate their genitals? Also now a constitutional right? Got it.

    The doublethink these clowns try to foist onto the rest of us is amazing.

  5. Patrick Finnie makes a good observation about pharma. For example, has this crowd seen the warning on the SSRI fluoxetine? Of course not. Blaming guns is another societal contagion like “racism”. Conner Sturgeon, the 25 year old Louisville Bank Shooter, legally purchased a gun after being prescribed meds and in the care of two mental health providers.

    “Fluoxetine WARNING:
    A small number of children, teenagers, and young adults (up to 24 years of age) who took antidepressants (‘mood elevators’) such as fluoxetine during clinical studies became suicidal (thinking about harming or killing oneself or planning or trying to do so). Children, teenagers, and young adults who take antidepressants to treat depression or other mental illnesses may be more likely to become suicidal than children, teenagers, and young adults who do not take antidepressants to treat these conditions. However, experts are not sure about how great this risk is and how much it should be considered in deciding whether a child or teenager should take an antidepressant.

    You should know that your mental health may change in unexpected ways when you take fluoxetine or other antidepressants even if you are an adult over 24 years of age. You may become suicidal, especially at the beginning of your treatment and any time that your dose is increased or decreased. You, your family, or your caregiver should call your doctor right away if you experience any of the following symptoms: new or worsening depression; thinking about harming or killing yourself, or planning or trying to do so; extreme worry; agitation; panic attacks; difficulty falling asleep or staying asleep; aggressive behavior; irritability; acting without thinking; severe restlessness; and frenzied abnormal excitement. Be sure that your family or caregiver knows which symptoms may be serious so they can call the doctor if you are unable to seek treatment on your own.”

  6. Senator Vyhovsky, member of the Senate Committee on Judiciary. “And due to brain development, this population is particularly compulsive when under duress. And as a gun owner myself, nothing in this bill strikes me as overly cumbersome but rather simple common-sense safety measures.”

    Tell me “Senator”, how overly cumbersome is trying to access your weapon from the safe in the middle of the night, load it and defend yourself when someone is trying to break into your house or already has and the police are “minutes away”??? Idiot! This law only serves to criminalize law abiding citizens’ rights under Article 16 of the VT constitution, as such it is null and void and will not be regarded in the least!

      Supreme Court Decision – Norton v Shelby County 1886

      6 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 it’s 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.

      “All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void”.
      Marbury vs Madison, 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 176, (1803)

      Thomas Jefferson: “Whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers, it’s acts are authoritative, void and of no force”.

      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”.

  7. Yes let’s pass more gun control to curb suicides and then tomorow we will pass a law for everyone around the country to come to Vermont for assisted suicides. What’s in the air up there. Idiotic.

  8. It sounds like and appears that Senator Sears must be on some medication himself or he has been drinking the stupid Koolade readily available at the Golden Doom Cafe. What happened to the reasoned person he used to be? “Vermonters want sensible gun violence prevention laws,” said Senator Sears, chair of the Senate Committee on Judiciary. “H.230 will help reduce community violence, prevent suicides and save lives.” Did he hear about the young man who just walked into a local shooting range, rented a gun and killed himself? They think laws will stop this?

    I wonder how this will prevent community violence. The most recent gun violence has been committed by felons and previously convicted drug dealers from other states. These two laws are unconstitutional, if not, why did they tweak it or soften it as the governor said. They know both are unconstitutional. Where did this legislature get it’s authority to violate the rights of law abiding people? They didn’t, they just run with the progressive agenda. Sen Sears is a major disppointment and should retire.

  9. Vermont, Michigan, Washington State, etc. are all doing the same carve up job on the 2nd Amendment. They cannot complete their mission when a majority of Americans are armed and a danger to their “democracy.” Consider how Democrats commit suicide: Mark Middleton, former aide to Bill Clinton. Ensured his suicide attempt was successful by standing on a bench and tying an electrical cord around his neck before shooting himself in the chest.

  10. Now in Vermont you can legally commit suicide and the law allows out of staters to come to Vermont to do so. Unfortunately, that industry won’t have many repeat customers coming back to Vermont. These legislators are so concerned about people committing suicide but allow fentanyl to pour into the state. Fentanyl deaths have tripled in the United States in five years.

    Don’t these people read the news? These anti 2A laws are being challenged all over the country and the Bruen decision is going to make their efforts null and void.

    Not only that all the states that are pushing gun control are seeing guns sales go thru the roof.

    Not only that there are 27 states that now have Constitutional Carry with North Carolina soon to follow. So, what do we call the minority of anti 2A states, “unconstitutional carry”?

    Phil Scott ran as a conservative but was really a wishy-washy middle of the roader that sold us out signing the magazine ban and the universal background check which was really background checks for private sales.

    I am urging Governor Scott to show some spine and veto this bill. At least put up some resistance. If not, if all of this stuff goes back to this Supreme Court, the states ignoring the Bruen decision are in for a rude awakening when their magazine bans, gun bans, storage laws, age requirements and waiting periods all go out the window. As far as the Constitution and 2A is concerned, states can’t have a different set of standards for citizens that are supposed to be equals and the majority of states are trending towards the rulings of Heller, McDonald and now Bruen.

    “If society is honest and historically accurate, the only question that has any relevance to the gun control debate is, do you trust those in government, now and in the future, to not take your life, liberty or property thru force of government? If the answer to that question is “no”, the gun control debate is over”. – KrisAnn Hall, JD

  11. Certainly this bill has provisions for carrying because you couldn’t carry it and also have it locked in a safe at the same time.

    I think if they pass that bill every gun owners should wear their gun openly everywhere until they overturn it. They’re making it a liability not to.

    If they want to be scared of it, let them.

  12. B.s. my house my legally obtained firearm I’ll do what I please. You crooks already tax us through the roof, stay the hell out of my house. 3 day waiting period is idiotic especially if I Already own a firearm. Not my fault the parents who pushed for this had a mentally weak minded child.

    • You know that’s a good point, If I already own a firearm, why do I need to wait, I could just as easily have used that one especially if they’re mentality, is that It’s the gun.

      Not that I support it in any way shape or form, but it certainly would be a lot more palatable and make a lot more sense if it was a 30-day waiting period for your first gun.

  13. H.230 needs to be laid to rest with a Tombstone lead over it period!!
    You leftist liberal Swamp Rats can’t you find everything good to do!!??
    Degusting human being period!!
    Wake up Americans wake up and stop voting in these mushrooms heads!!

  14. In crafting Bill H2 30, I wonder if anybody looked for specific data supporting the idea of the waiting period. Specifically how many Vermonters commit suicide within 72 hours of buying the gun used in the suicide? Absent empirical data supporting such a conclusion, passing this measure may simply be another “feel good” gesture without having an impact of on suicide in the real world.

    Sadly, that would not be the first time our Dem-Prog Groupthink has made that type of error.

Leave a Reply