|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
By Guy Page
In a straight party line vote, the Vermont Senate Thursday afternoon gave preliminary approval to S.131, the Burlington city charter change to ban the possession of firearms in bars.
A Democrat spoke of the bill’s popularity in Burlington, the deleterious effects of mixing alcohol and guns, and the need for better public safety. Two Republicans argued S.131 violates current law banning municipal gun control, raised questions about enforceability, and worried about being left unprotected walking from parking garages to downtown.
The gun control bill sponsored by Sen. Phil Baruth (D-Chittenden) is scheduled for third and final reading today. If approved, it will advance to the House, where the Government Operations and Military Affairs Committee (at least) is expected to examine the bill closely.
The bill passed 17-12, with all 12 Republicans present voting no. Sen. Steve Heffernan (R-Addison) was absent. At the request of Senate Minority Leader Scott Beck, a roll call was taken.
Voting Yes:
Baruth of Chittenden-Central
Bongartz of Bennington
Chittenden of Chittenden-Southeast
Clarkson of Windsor
Cummings of Washington
Gulick of Chittenden-Central
Hardy of Addison
Harrison of Windham
Hashim of Windham
Lyons of Chittenden-Southeast
Major of Windsor
Perchlik of Washington
Plunkett of Bennington
Ram Hinsdale of Chittenden-Southeast
Vyhovsky of Chittenden-Central
Watson of Washington
White of Windsor
Voting No:
Beck of Caledonia
Brennan of Grand Isle
Brock of Franklin
Collamore of Rutland
Douglass of Orleans
Hart of Orange
Ingalls of Essex
Mattos of Chittenden-North
Norris of Franklin
Weeks of Rutland
Westman of Lamoille
Williams of Rutland
As expected, the bill provoked a floor exchange. Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (D/P Chittenden), who helped guide the bill through the committee process, started it off with two key points: 1. Burlington voters want this bill very much and 2) alcohol and guns don’t mix.
All quotes courtesy of goldendomevt.com.
“The charter has passed in 2025 with an overwhelming eighty six point six percent of those voting supporting this change. It is clear that the voters of Burlington want the ability to create more safety in their city by eliminating guns in bars,” Vyhovsky said.
“As a child, at my very first firearm safety class, it was impressed upon me that guns and alcohol do not mix. A conversation that I’ve had again and again with friends and family, whether it be at the range or at another firearm safety course. As a social worker who also has an undergraduate degree in neuroscience, I know why guns and alcohol do not mix,” she said.
The bill is less about gun control and more about public safety, Vyhovsky insisted.
“To be clear, this is not about taking people’s guns away. This is about public safety and preventing predictable tragedies. Just like we don’t allow open flames at gas stations or drunk driving on our roads, approving Burlington banning guns in places where alcohol is flowing and conflict can erupt in seconds just makes sense.”
Disputing the unlimited constitutional right to carry in public, she quoted legal precedent, like 19th century Texas and New Orleans bans on guns in saloons, and more recent Vermont bans on guns in hospitals and schools.
In response, Sen. Terry Williams (R-Rutland) rose to oppose S.131 because it violates the 1987 Sportsmen’s Bill of Rights pre-emption law prohibiting municipalities from enacting gun possession restrictions in violation of state laws.
“S.131 is a direct violation of the state’s preemption statute,” Williams said. “S.131 may be lawful only if passed by the Legislature, but it certainly is illegal today because our preemption law exists and it prohibits what is, what it proposes.
“By using what appears to be a loophole in the preamble of the existing preemption statute which states, ‘except as otherwise provided by law,’ we’re being asked to support a bill that’s illegal. I guess, in a technical sense, violates current law for sure…all in the hope that it will pass in this body, then in the other body, and finally be signed by the governor.”
Williams said he won’t break the law “by violating my oath of office so the one town can violate the Vermont preemption statute, which specifically prohibits what S.131 wants to do.”
Sen. Pat Brennan (R-Grand Isle) said he opposes the bill because it creates situations in which people from out of town (much of Burlington’s hospitality industry clientele) may unknowingly enter a bar carrying a gun.
A native of Burlington, Brennan also expressed concern about how dangerous it is to walk from the parking garage to downtown Burlington.
“This is gonna create a patchwork of firearms laws. It could trickle down to other items, other things, throughout the state. Unpredictable.
“I’m worried about signage. I’m worried about the traveling public, not knowing. I’m worried about our own citizens from throughout the state, not knowing about this regulation. I’m worried about what happens when they do, when they are stopped at the door or in a restaurant with a firearm. And I’m worried, I’m really worried about how we enforce this.
“The only way I can see to enforce this would be to just reinvigorate the stop and frisk law, which I think most of us in this room would not appreciate. So I don’t know how you enforce it. I don’t know if we’re requiring metal detectors at the doors of every establishment in Burlington. I doubt it.
Brennan then presented the flip-side of the public safety argument: that responsible people carrying guns makes people, and the community, safer.
“And I worry about my ability and the ability of every other Vermonter [to stay safe]. I grew up in Burlington. Let me say this. I walked two miles every day in second and third and fourth grade to my grandmother’s. Would I do that now?
“Would I be allowed to do that now? No. Things have changed. Things have changed everywhere, so I’m not singling out Burlington. But I worry, I do go down to Burlington, downtown, out to dinner.
“Sometimes it’s a parking garage, which is not one of the best places to be at night these days. And it’s a two block walk to the restaurant in most instances. I worry about how I’m gonna get there safely with my wife, my grandkids, and so forth.
“I, people may know, do carry occasionally, and especially when I’m in downtown Burlington. To get from the car to a restaurant can be very dangerous.”
Both Williams and Brennan expressed the desire to return the bill to the Judiciary Committee, due to the criminal penalties in the ordinance. They also suggested the Senate could just let the bill lie.
In the end, the Senate voted yes but by a margin that would sustain a veto by Gov. Phil Scott. VDC has reached out to Gov. Scott’s office for his opinion on S.218.
P S. VDC’s coverage of S.131 prompted this online comment by former State Capitol complex security officer Pat Finnie, now retired and living in Washington County:
“Laws like S.131 are not only misguided, but dangerous as they disarm honest citizens, and prevent the possibility for them to defend themselves, and/or, if need be, others. I have never heard of anybody saying “I’m glad I did not have a firearm to defend myself,” or “I’m glad that I, my wife, or other loved one got shot, and all I could do was watch, and wait for the ambulance, and cops to get here!”
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Gunrights, Local government
You can solve the problem, just do not go to Burlington. This will create more police state idiots on the government payroll.
Amen. I seldom drink in public. Often choosing to be a designated driver should others choose to. I haven’t set foot in Burlington for about seven years years, This only hardens my resolve to spend my time and money elsewhere.
One can only hope that the Governor will give his early disapproval and that this bill will never soil his desk. Did the moonbats ever consider that this will mean that more guns will be left behind in vehicles making them more available to thieves? Did they consider that the only way to enforce such a ban for those carrying concealed is with pat downs and/or magnetometers at the entrances? That will not be good for business, regardless if someone is a “gun person” or not. This is just more liberal virtue signaling about “doing something” when the thing that needs to be done is locking up serious criminals when the opportunity arises. Did they ever consider that this proposal would be in direct violation of the Vermont Sportman’s Bill of Rights where municipalities can only regulate the discharge and not possession? Civil rights and Constitutional matters such as this dont matter to leftists.
Cmon Rich, do you really think King Philip the Scott 1st Eunuch King of Castrati has the huevos to veto this and upset his Commiecrat voting base? More than likely, he will not sign it and allow it to become law like he did the three-day waiting period. He is a constant backstabber playing two ends against the middle to get elected. This is what we get when we vote for the lesser of two evils.
This is why we are supposed to be a republic, if we are a republic the majority can not take away the rights of the minority. These people are committing treason to the republic and the. Remount constitution they were sworn to defend. They need to be removed from office.
We are a constitutional republic but the Communists controlling our state do not care about any constitution U.S. or VT. They have a rigged elections and a faux Republican governor and they will not be removed any time soon. Do you have any suggestions on how to remove them?
Reply to James. Armed rebellion.
What does the Lt. Governor have to say about this vote?????????
He’s busy distracting voters with other issues, rather than defending our constitution. He and Scott are very concerned about what the United Nations want, not their sworn duty.
So the law abiding citizens will not have one of the means to protect themselves from bodily harm, those who disobey the law will be at a great advantage. Perfect……….
I haven’t visited that cesspool in 30 years except to go to the airport. If I don’t go for another 30 this will be one reason.
Fortunately, you can go to the Burlington airport without having to actually set foot in the cultural cesspool of Burlington. Did someone demand to see your government-issued picture ID when you went there?…because that would be racist.
Let’s hope the governor vetoes this one as it won’t get override .
The question is will “Republican” King Philip the Scott 1st Eunuch King of Castrati veto the bill forcing the legislature to override the veto or will he sign it, or will he be a coward and not sign it letting it pass into law like he did the 3 Day Waiting Period Bill.
https://www.vermontpublic.org/local-news/2023-06-02/vermont-gun-bill-including-72-hour-waiting-period-becomes-law-phil-scott
We all remember how he promised to protect Vermonter’s 2nd Amendment rights when he first ran for office. Then he stabbed us all in the back and signed the unconstitutional 30rd magazine ban. That bill included an increase on age to purchase a firearm to 21, a ban on bump stocks, and put in universal background checks prohibiting the private sale of firearms without going through a dealer.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/vermont-governor-signs-bill-that-raises-age-to-buy-firearms-makes-it-easier-to-take-guns-from-people-who-pose-threat
Hey any Burlington Business owners who serves alcohol, the bars are the first step, but you lonely little resturant owners, you will be asked next post the libs goofy little sign” No Firearms ” and see who enters you establishments your cliential will change and not for the better, so lock your cash drawers, and remember your no longer being protected by a armed lay-abiding citizen if needs be, but you’ll have your sign and that means nothing to criminals……………….. good luck !!
Hopefully the Governor steps up and stops this nonsense being pushed by Burlington
what used to be the Queen City is now a ” Cesspools “, and they think this will help.
The proposal, as written, would prohibit firearms in any establishment that serves alcohol, including restaurants…even applying to patrons who are not consuming alcohol. If they get away with this, then they will go incremental, and make it apply to
public parks, the Church Street Marketplace, sidewalks, parking lots, churches, restaurants that dont serve alcohol etc etc, until they have covered every square foot of the craphole of Burlington. Best to just ignore it if you carry concealed, or better yet, just dont patronize ANY businesses in the People’s Republic of Burlington.
The entire City of Burlington is nothing but a cess pool of crime and drugs! This does nothing other than to take away the rights of Law abiding citizens!
this a very bad bill for native vermonters we are civil oppendent citizens here in vermont, it is mostly people that the state allows to come here an help them out with money housing, over our own homeless vermonters. police have nothing else to do but kill people and vermont made some drugs legal, so this part is kicking vermont in the ass. we do deserve to carry to protect our families and other law abiding citizens. we on’t need a dictator running Burlington or any where else in vermont.
Remember, the senate cave monkeys in the state house voted for this.
I fled the People’s Republik of Vermont in 2021. Virtually every week brings another issue to confirm that I made the right decision.
Maybe you can sell Burlington to California..
🤔🤔
Many thanks to our Republican Senators . The rest of them need to be charged with crapping all over, excuse me, breaking the oath of office that each and every one of them swore to uphold .
I TOLD YOU SO. I posted this yesterday morning before they voted.
When some legislator’s son committed suicide, they used it as an excuse to pass the useless three-day waiting period to purchase a firearm on people who already own guns. Now they are trying to pass a law so firearms can’t be carried in a bar when the incident was not inside the bar. The Communist/Progressives will use any excuse to incrementally take away 2nd Amendment rights. This bill S.131 will pass in the Senate because they do not care about the Vermont or U.S. constitutions. All they care about is advancing their political agenda.
The question is will “Republican” King Philip the Scott 1st Eunuch King of Castrati veto the bill forcing the legislature to override the veto or will he sign it, or will he be a coward and not sign it letting it pass into law like he did the 3 Day Waiting Period Bill.
https://www.vermontpublic.org/local-news/2023-06-02/vermont-gun-bill-including-72-hour-waiting-period-becomes-law-phil-scott
We all remember how he promised to protect Vermonter’s 2nd Amendment rights when he first ran for office. Then he stabbed us all in the back and signed the unconstitutional 30rd magazine ban. That bill included an increase on age to purchase a firearm to 21, a ban on bump stocks, and put in universal background checks prohibiting the private sale of firearms without going through a dealer.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/vermont-governor-signs-bill-that-raises-age-to-buy-firearms-makes-it-easier-to-take-guns-from-people-who-pose-threat
All the testimony and constitutional facts presented to the legislature like Gun Owners of Vermont and the Vermont Federation of Sportsmen’s does every time they ram more gun control down our throats is useless. The Commiecrats don’t care, there is no consequence for their illegal unconstitutional actions, and they know it. It’s why they do it.
I for one whenever possible WILL NOT OBEY OR COMPLY TO ANY UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAWS.
The 2nd Amendment was enumerated in our Bill of Rights by the Constitutional Convention of 1787 to give “We the People” the means to protect the Constitution and the Bill of Rights from those who would take them from us. You can’t take away someone’s right to free speech, freedom of assembly or freedom of religion without first taking away their ability to resist. THE 2nd AMENDMENT DOES NOT GRANT US THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS. THE 2nd AMENDMENT PROHIBITS THE GOVERNMENT FROM INFRINGING ON OUR RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS – PERIOD! THEREFORE, ALL GUN CONTROL UNDER THE CONSTITUTION IS ILLEGAL!
I am too old to care about going to bars but this law opens up a can of issues in my mind. What about the bar owners? Are they supposed to do some strip searches to make sure someone isn’t hiding a gun in their undergarments? And, in the event a gun does make its’ way into the bar, is the owner of the bar going to be held responsible for the shooting that could occur because they failed to uphold the law. Furthermore, I’m not in the know of just how many “gun toting” guys and gals are patronizing the bars in Burlington but has the impact on the bar business been considered? Are the bar proprietors going to be able to, or be expected to, protect their customers should it become a necessity? Have any bar owners been consulted with or had input into this law?