Legislation

No shooting within 500 ft. of occupied building, Purple Paint Law proposed

By Guy Page

A Senate bill introduced Wednesday, Jan. 18 would “prohibit the discharge of a firearm within 500 feet of any occupied dwelling house, residence, or other building or camp occupied by human beings or any barn, stable, or other building used in connection with an occupied building.”

Penn State University photo

S21 is sponsored by Sen. Andrew Perchlik (D/P – Washington) and has been referred to the Natural Resources and Energy Committee. The bill also allows property owners to expand ‘safety zones’ from the current 200 feet to 500 feet. 

Property owners would be allowed to fire guns on their own property, and could give permission to others. 

Violators would be subject to a $50 fine. The law would take effect July 1. 

Perchlik proposes Purple Paint Per Pennsylvania – Perchlik also introduced S22, which would allow property owners to post their land against hunting and fishing by painting a single purple line on a tree or a fencepost. At present, posting notices are printed on paper, which are subject to removal by humans, animals and weather. S22 also was referred to Natural Resources and Energy.

Perchlik’s bill follows the 2020 Pennsylvania Purple Paint Law.

Below is a list of all Senate bills introduced to date.

S.221/18/2023Painted posting of land hunting/ fishingPerchlikDem./ Prog.Natural Resources
S.211/18/2023No shooting within 500 ft. of occupied buildingPerchlikDem./ Prog.Natural Resources
S.201/18/2023Basic Needs Budget and minimum wage calculationRam HinsdaleDemocratEconomic Development
S.191/18/2023Tobacco prohibitionsRam Hinsdale/ LyonsDemocratEconomic Development
S.181/18/2023Flavored-tobacco banLyonsDemocratEconomic Development
S.171/17/2023Sheriff reformsSears/ HardyDemocratJudicial
S.161/12/2023child abuse reporting for clergySearsDemocratJudicial
S.151/12/2023Presumptive probation for non-violent crimeSearsDemocratJudicial
S.141/12/2023Justice expendature reportingSearsDemocratJudicial
S.131/11/2023Referral of cases to community justice centersHashimDemocratJudicial
S.121/11/2023Union electionsRam HinsdaleDemocratEconomic Development
S.111/10/2023Persons prohibited from firearmsBaruthDemocratJudicial
S.101/10/2023Water filling stations in schoolsChittendenDemocratEducation
S.91/10/2023State Auditor examining State contractor recordsBrayDemocratGovernment Operations
S.81/6/2023Counsel for the legally insaneHashimDemocratJudiciary
S.71/6/2023Public defender expanded accessHashimDemocratJudiciary
S.61/6/2023Police interrogation of juvenilesSearsDemocratJudiciary
S.51/6/2023Affordable Heat Act mandateBrayDemocratNatural Resources
S.41/6/2023Juvenile through gun controlSearsDemocratJudiciary
S.31/6/2023Prohibiting paramilitary training campsBaruthDemocratJudiciary
S.21/6/2023Payment, case management for developmental disability servicesLyonsDemocratHealth & Welfare
S.11/6/2023Act 250 and aircraft hangarsSearsDemocratNatural Resources

Categories: Legislation

16 replies »

  1. Senator, Andrew Perchlik,
    I would like to address S21 as I think it is an ill conceived bill at the very least. The City of Montpelier, and I’d be willing to bet, others, allow hunting within city limits with a shotgun. Will this new bill close hunting in Montpelier and others like it ? I live in the town of Calais. Look at Calais on a good map and you will see that a lot of the wood lots are not bigger than 1000 ft, by 1000 ft. There are houses all around the perimeter of these parcels. So would those parcels be off limits to hunters ? I live on about 3 acres. My lot is probably 300′ x 300′. Would I have to get permission from any, or all seven of the landowners within 500 ‘ of my property before I could shoot a woodchuck in my garden ? My neighbor owns 200 acres. I have permission to hunt her property. Would I need to secure permission from all 20+ landowners that border her property to cover myself if I shoot from anywhere but dead center of her property ? To say this is “cumbersome” is an understatement. When I look at this, I do not see a bill that addresses safety, I see a bill that is anti-hunting. 
    Sincerely, 
    Patrick Finnie

  2. Re read the bill. It says 2) The prohibition under subdivision (1) of this subsection shall not apply to: (A) a person discharging a firearm or taking wildlife on land that the person owns or occupies or for which the person holds written permission to discharge a firearm or take wildlife by the person who owns or controls the land

  3. In other states, like Missouri, a purple strip means No Trespassing not just no hunting and fishing. These woke folk…why won’t they leave us alone?

  4. Drug dealers, cartel members, and criminals of all sorts having the red carpet rolled out for them here now will of course immediately heed this law and turn their lives around – as of July 1st, it’s even highly likely that these ne’er-do-wells shall commit their lives to bettering humanity and become ministers, nurses, and scientists instead, ALL thanks to the life-changing experiences and “equity” that the State of Vermont offered them.

    Chipping away, a little more at first – of our civil liberties. Just say: “NO”.

  5. If the Senator harbors an irrational fear of guns, why not propose a 500 mile distance from an occupied dwelling? Is he aware that a gun only fires a bullet in the direction it is pointed? If you are not POINTING it toward an occupied dwelling, what’s the problem? How are you supposed to manage woodchucks in the garden since most gardens fall within 500ft of a dwelling, even a neighbor’s dwelling. As another commenter said, this is not about safety, it is about ideological harassment.

  6. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again…keep pursuing your CONTROL, not safety laws and you will only expand the criminal population by including formerly law abiding citizens into a category that will by default create a new class of criminals. I’ll happily be one…will not comply.

  7. Well if everything we do is going to be illegal in the eyes of our overlords we may as well do whatever we want. Being a law abiding person is not good enough for the controllers.

  8. I’m against gun control laws that take away ownership rights. But I fail to see that this article is about that. It’s reads to me, to be about property rights. I’ve been waiting for the purple stripe law. Paper posted signs are about worthless. They always end up mysteriously missing. It’s annoying to find hunters’ trash, beer cans, food wrappers, cartridge boxes and property damage. At least with the purple paint, trespassing hunters can’t say it wasn’t there. And it will last for years.

  9. We already all know who the leftists are they fly a Ukraine flag in front of their house.

    “There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for me to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What’s there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed or enforced nor objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt.” – Ayn Rand

  10. Symbolism – the opposition uses particular colors, designs, code words, and such to signal their allegience and obedience. Once a person knows the codes, they will see it and recognize it everywhere. (Eyes to see) Why the color purple? The choice is specifically on purpose and many will not make the connection. The intent is nefarious and evil nonetheless. The trickery is something seemingly benign to most people is a ritualistic method of control. You see the basic proposal on the surface and they use a symbolistic color to signal the true intent of control and domination. Nothing new under the sun.

    “The color purple’s ties to kings and queens date back to ancient world, where it was prized for its bold hues and often reserved for the upper crust” “The Persian king Cyrus adopted a purple tunic as his royal uniform” “Roman emperors forbid their citizens from wearing purple clothing under penalty of death”

    • I think the purple comes from the gay teletubbie doll with the triangle on it’s head.
      Yes, it sounds like a liberal self-identifier, or as we call it now, a virtue signal.

  11. LOL, who is going to enforce this new law? The secular progressives in Montpelier made a law not to litter the roadways with lawn grass clippings which wash down the drainage into the sewer system. When a report is made to local PD or a city manager the response is there’s nothing we can do about it. The same is true with snow/ice not being removed from cars/ trucks before entering a state roadway, again nobody is enforcing it. All these feel good laws with no enforcement make a mockery of our justice system, maybe that is the intent?

    • And let’s not forget the garbage police, the plastic bag police, the no idling your car over 5 minutes police and the so-called high capacity magazine police when signed in 2018 there were thousands of them already legally purchased and still legal to own. The only case making the news is still unresolved after two years and after a new supreme court decision. Here’s how the thinking goes from a historical sense, “show me the man and I’ll show you the crime”. All this as we just heard that the courts have about 3,000 unresolved court cases right now. So, let’s make some more unenforceable laws.

Leave a Reply