(Editor’s note: H133 was approved with a veto-proof majority March 12 in the Vermont House of Representatives. It’s now in the Senate. Here’s how your local representative voted. To see a media/legislator contact list for your town and county, click here.)
By Rob Roper
H.133 – AN ACT RELATING TO EMERGENCY RELIEF FROM ABUSE ORDERS AND RELINQUISHMENT OF FIREARMS
PASSED
in the State House of Representatives
on March 12, 2021, by a vote of
102-44
Purpose: To outline measures that can be legally taken to protect an alleged victim of abuse, “Upon a finding that there is an immediate danger of further abuse.” The most controversial part of the bill is section (E), which would require the accused “to immediately relinquish, until the expiration of the order, all firearms that are in the defendant’s possession, ownership, or control, and to refrain from acquiring or possessing any firearms while the order is in effect.”
Analysis: Those voting YES believe this is a reasonable protection for victims of domestic abuse.
Those voting NO believe this is a violation of the Second Amendment the US and Article 16 of the Vermont Constitutions, by taking away rights to bear arms without due process of law, noting that the subject of the order is not required to be informed of the hearing and the order can be granted without the defendant having an opportunity to be present, present evidence or have any representation.
As Recorded in the House Journal, Friday, March 12, 2021: “Shall the bill pass? Rep. Morrissey of Bennington demanded the Yeas and Nays, which demand was sustained by the Constitutional number. The Clerk proceeded to call the roll and the question, Shall the bill pass? was decided in the affirmative. Yeas, 102. Nays, 44.” (Read the Journal, p. 2 -4). Watch the floor debate on YouTube.
How They Voted
(Click on your Rep’s name to send an email)
| Sally Achey (R – Middletown Springs) – NO Janet Ancel (D – Calais) – YES Peter Anthony (D – Barre) – YES Norman Arrison (D – Weathersfield) – YES Sarita Austin (D – Colchester) – YES John Bartholomew (D – Hartland) – YES Lynn Batchelor (R – Derby) – NO Scott Beck (R – St. Johnsbury) – YES Matthew Birong (D – Vergennes) – YES Alyssa Black (D – Essex) – YES Tiffany Bluemle (D – Burlington) – YES Thomas Bock (D – Chester) – YES Seth Bongartz (D – Manchester) – YES Michelle Bos-Lun (D – Westminster) – YES Erin Brady (D – Williston) – YES Patrick Brennan (R – Colchester) – NO Timothy Briglin (D – Thetford) – YES Jana Brown (D – Richmond) –YES Nelson Brownell (D – Pownal) – NO Jessica Brumsted (D – Shelburne) – YES Thomas Burditt (R – West Rutland) – NO Mollie Burke (P/D – Brattleboro) – YES Elizabeth Burrows (P/D – West Windsor) –YES Scott Campbell (D – St. Johnsbury) – YES Bill Canfield (R – Fair Haven) – NO Seth Chase (D – Colchester) – YES Kevin “Coach” Christie (D – Hartford) – ABSENT Brian Cina (P/D – Burlington) – YES Sara Coffey (D – Guilford) – YES Selene Colburn (P/D – Burlington) – YES Hal Colston (D – Winooski) – YES Peter Conlon (D – Cornwall) – YES Sarah Copeland-Hanzas (D – Bradford) – YES Timothy Corcoran (D – Bennington) – YES Mari Cordes (D/P – Lincoln) – YES Lawrence Cupoli (R – Rutland) – NO Lynn Dickinson (R – St. Albans) – NO Karen Dolan (D – Essex)– YES Kari Dolan (D – Waitsfield) – YES Kate Donnally (D – Hyde Park) – YES Anne Donahue (R – Northfield) – YES David Durfee (D – Shaftsbury) – YES Caleb Elder (D – Starksboro) – YES Alice Emmons (D – Springfield) – YES Peter Fagan (R – Rutland) – NO Martha Feltus (R – Lyndon) – NO John Gannon (D – Wilmington) – YES Leslie Goldman (D – Bellows Falls) – YES Kenneth Goslant (R – Northfield) – NO Maxine Grad (D – Moretown) – YES Rodney Graham (R – Williamstown) – NO James Gregoire (R – Fairfield) – NO Lisa Hango (R – Birkshire) – NO James Harrison (R – Chittenden) – NO Robert Helm (R – Fair Haven) – NO Mark Higley (R – Lowell) – NO Robert Hooper (D – Burlington) – YES Mary Hooper (D – Montpelier) – YES Philip Hooper (D – Randolph) – ABSENT Lori Houghton (D – Essex) – YES Mary Howard (D – Rutland) – YES Kathleen James (D – Manchester) – YES Stephanie Jerome (D – Brandon) – YES Kimberly Jessup (D – Middlesex) – YES John Killacky (D – S. Burlington) – YES Charles Kimbell (D – Woodstock) – YES Warren Kitzmiller (D – Montpelier) – YES Emilie Kornheiser (D – Brattleboro) – YES Jill Krowinski (D – Burlington) – PRESIDING Robert LaClair (R – Barre) – NO Martin LaLonde (D – S. Burlington) – YES Diane Lanpher (D – Vergennes) – YES Paul Lefebvre (R – Newark) – YES Samantha Lefebvre (R – Orange) – NO Felisha Leffler (R – Esburgh) – NO | William Lippert (D – Hinesburg) – YES Emily Long (D – Newfane) – YES Michael Marcotte (R – Coventry) – NO Marcia Martel (R – Waterford) – NO Paul Martin (R – Franklin) – NO James Masland (D – Thetford) – YES Christopher Mattos (R – Milton) – NO Michael McCarthy (D – St. Albans) – YES Curtis McCormack (D – Burlington) – YES Patricia McCoy (R – Poultney) – NO James McCullough (D – Williston) – YES Francis McFaun (R – Barre) – NO Leland Morgan (R – Milton) – NO Michael Morgan (R – Milton) – NO Kristi Morris (D – Springfield) – YES Mary Morrissey (R – Bennington) – NO Michael Mrowicki (D – Putney) – YES Emma Mulvaney-Stanak (D – Burlington) – YES Barbara Murphy (I – Fairfax) – YES Logan Nicoll (D – Ludlow) – YES Michael Nigro (D – Bennington) –YES Robert Norris (R – Sheldon) – NO Terry Norris (I – Shoreham) – NO William Notte (D – Rutland) – YES Daniel Noyes (D – Wolcott) – YES John O’Brien (D – Tunbridge) – YES Carol Ode (D – Burlington) – YES “Woody” Page (R – Newport) – NO Kelly Pajala (I – Londonderry) – YES John Palasik (R – Milton) –NO Joseph Parsons (R – Newbury) – NO Carolyn Partridge (D – Windham) – YES Avram Patt (D – Worcester) – YES Henry Pearl (D – Danville) –YES Arthur Peterson (R – Clarendon) – NO Ann Pugh (D – S. Burlington) – YES Barbara Rachelson (D/P – Burlington) – YES Marybeth Redmond (D – Essex) – YES Lucy Rogers (D – Waterville) – YES Carl Rosenquist (R – Georgia) – NO Larry Satcowitz (D – Randolph) – YES Brian Savage (R – Swanton) – NO Robin Scheu (D – Middlebury) – YES Heidi Scheuermann (R – Stowe) – YES Patrick Seymour (R – Sutton) – NO Charles “Butch” Shaw (R – Pittsford) – NO Amy Sheldon (D – Middlebury) – YES Laura Sibilia (I – Dover) – YES Katherine Sims (D – Craftsbury) – YES Taylor Small (P/D – Winooski) – YES Brian Smith (R – Derby) – NO Harvey Smith (R – New Haven) – NO Trevor Squirrell (D – Underhill) – YES Gabrielle Stebbins (D – Burlington) – YES Thomas Stevens (D – Waterbury) – YES Vicki Strong (R – Albany) – NO Linda Joy Sullivan (D – Dorset) – YES Heather Suprenant (D – Barnard) – YES Curt Taylor (D – Colchester) – YES Thomas Terenzini (R – Rutland) –NO George Till (D – Jericho) – YES Tristan Toleno (D – Brattleboro) – ABSENT Casey Toof (R – St. Albans) – NO Maida Townsend (D – South) – YES Joseph “Chip” Troiano (D – Stannard) – YES Tanya Vyhovsky (P/D – Essex) – YES Tommy Walz (D – Barre) – YESKathryn Webb (D – Shelburne) – YES Kirk White (P/D – Bethel) – YES Rebecca White (D – Hartford) – YES Dane Whitman (D – Bennington) – YES Terri Lynn Williams (R – Granby) – YES Theresa Wood (D – Waterbury) – YES David Yacovone (D – Morristown) – YES Michael Yantachka (D – Charlotte) – YES |
Categories: Gunrights
Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. — C. S. Lewis, God in the Dock Essays on Theology
Despite any, and all logical arguments I have, and can make to contradict any attempt at infringing on 2nd Amendment, and Article 16 rights, my district Representative will always say that it is her opinion that it does not, and that “as with all rights, none are absolute.” The sad part (to me) is that she is not one of the woke wanna be Vermonters that over populate under the “Golden Dumb”, she was born and raised here among real Vermonters, whom she has totally turned her back on. I would like to attribute her leftness to the institution of her “higher education” but…. I just know that as a fairly conservative, born Vermonter, living in Vermont is “challenging” these days.
Nowhere at present is there such a measureless loathing of their country by educated people as in America.
–Eric Hoffer,First Things, Last Things,
Right on!
Half the harm that is done in this world is due to people who want to feel important. They don’t mean to do harm– but the harm does not interest them. Or they do not see it, or they justify it because they are absorbed in the endless struggle to think well of themselves.
— T. S. Eliot
“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. No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law, and no courts are bound to enforce it.”
— 16 Am Jur 2d, Sec 177 late 2d, Sec 256
” and no courts are bound to enforce it.” And yet time and again the courts do enforce them. So here we are again.
The courts are definitely compromised, Patrick, but the statement “No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law” supersedes attempted infringement whether by courts, state, or federal legislators.
I’ve more carefully read this bill in the context of Vermont’s Rules of Civil Procedure, and would like any Vermont Senator, Representative or attorney (so inclined) to expound on the above claim that this bill takes away a defendant’s right to bear arms ‘without due process of law’. Vermont’s Rules of Civil Procedure, as cited in this bill, after all, define ‘due process’.
Please don’t misunderstand me. I’m a firm supporter of the 2nd Amendment.
But before I comment further about this bill, please explain why its confiscatory remedies are limited to the imposed ‘relinquishment’ of ‘firearms’. Why does the bill not include any object that can be used as a weapon? …including but not limited to bombs (pipe bombs or Molotov cocktails), knives, spears, a bow and arrow (a crossbow), clubs (baseball bats and hammers), etc.? …even a motor vehicle?
May I suggest that in my opinion, it is because so many people in this country have become so urbanized that the saying that “only two kinds of people have guns, good guys (cops) and bad guys, (criminals) is viewed as accurate. To these folks hunting, target shooting, and self defense are not ligitimate reasons.The days of a kid bringing his firearm to school with him so he can go hunting after school is sadly long gone. Now adays if a kid tried that he’d end up in a jail cell right next to his parents. Ever hear of the The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) ? This is a law which was enacted specifically to protect the firearms industry, and the wholesale/retail sales network from frivolous law suits which were bankrupting the industry. Before it, unscrupulous lawyers would sue a gun company if one of their guns were used in a crime. This would be akin to someone suing Ford if one of their vehicles were found to have been used to intentionally run someone over, and kill them, but who would think it proper to blame Ford ? Do you suppose that if someone killed someone with a Louisville Slugger that someone would sue the bat maker ? Firearms just scare the bejezus out of some folks so badly, and some lawyers are so sleazy that a special protection for the firearms industry was needed. Mind you, it was, and still is lawful to sue someone that produces a product that is faulty, and thus may cause injury. This is the kind of “feeling” that drives the anti gun hysteria, and why we are unlikely to see this kind of reaction to felonious actions involving “bombs (pipe bombs or Molotov cocktails), knives, spears, a bow and arrow (a crossbow), clubs (baseball bats and hammers), etc.? …even a motor vehicle?” or Alfred’s baby, Dynamit Nobel.
Is it a surprise to anyone that legislation like this occurs as far a field from any election as is possible and that not one approving Representative or Senator has commented here on the people’s forum? They operate behind closed doors, then skulk about in the shadows – until election time when memories of this episode will have evaporated – they hope.
Based on a story in todays paper they will have to add base ball bats.
As an avid Sportsman, Hunter and Fisherman who has hunted from Vermont to Wyoming and Alaska for the last 50 years, one never knows how horrible this actual situation can become – losing ones right to hunt, hold or even shoot a firearm until you have been there, and to think of having those very fine cherished tools, albeit being firearms, crossbows, conventional bow and arrows spears, knives, or whatever your passion is to provide food, game, and recreation confiscated without notice is not only unconstitutional it is unconscionable !!!. One should ALWAYS have the ability provided for himself or herself to be heard and their ability to express themselves before their possessions are seized. If this bill is approved then there is no limit as to what can be “taken” next. However this bill is worded, due process MUST be maintained for the Freedom that we have to exist in a Democracy. Individual rights must NOT be minimized to the extent that they no longer even exist.
a waste of the people time and money. There is already this law on the federal books that forbid anyone in a domestic violence case to lose there right to firearms. All states are doing is making more un needed laws that are already on the books instead of enforcing the ones we have that would do the job you want. WE have enough on the books now if they are enforced.