Sheriff won’t serve Banyai arrest papers – but he’s complying anyway

by Guy Page

In one short video, Second Amendment news blogger Liberty Doll has succinctly nailed the Daniel Banyai story – both the complex historical perspective, and the latest information on a judge’s warrant for his arrest.

Banyai built the Slate Ridge gun range and training facility in Pawlet. Some neighbors didn’t approve of him or his facility. He has had conflicts with the Board of Selectmen of the small Rutland County town. The presence of Slate Ridge ruffled feathers in the Legislature, who responded by passing a law banning ‘paramilitary training.’

As reported by Liberty Doll, and the July 10 Manchester Journal, a Rutland County judge has issued a warrant for Banyai’s arrest for failing to follow his order to close Slate Ridge. However, the Rutland County Sheriff pointedly says his office has no contract with Pawlet, and that in any case making a big show of force isn’t a smart idea.

But the warrant-without-a-cop-to-serve-it may be moot, anyway. A letter from Banyai’s lawyer appearing on Liberty Doll’s video claims Banyai will comply with the court order. Reason given: he can’t take care of the animals on his organic farm if he’s in jail.

Categories: Gunrights

22 replies »

  1. The moral of this story is ask permission first. it’s cheaper.

    Second if you are not a 6th generation Vermonter or a rich NY Wal-Streeter. You are a second class citizen in Vermont.

    Banyai’s Bonzia has been a disservice to all constitution loving people.
    He is not a hero, He is the kind of person who the “left” use to demonize us deplorables.

    I hope we have learned a lesson here.
    Please everyone keep your powder dry.


    • Not quote sure what country you were raised in, but maybe you should find out the truth. He did get permission. Your not one of us. You are the left. You are the reason we have no rights anymore not Banyai. I’m sire you voted for Scott, the man had taken more rights away from us than any Republican cause of YOU….

    • Donald L. Cline : “A free citizenry does not ask its governments’ permission to exercise a right. It does not register its exercise of a right. It does not waive any other right, such as the right to privacy, or the right to due process, or the right to be secure from being compelled to waive a right in order to exercise a right, in exchange for permission to exercise a right such as the right to keep and bear arms which government does not have the authority to issue or deny in the first place. It does not permit government to claim the exercise of a right is probable cause, or prima facie evidence, or even a suspicion, of a crime having been committed. It does not discuss, or negotiate, what rights it will or will not exercise with government or with any government functionary. In short, a free citizenry, founded in principles of liberty, does not give up its right to determine what kind of government receives its Consent to Govern. A free citizenry respects, honors, and protects the lawful rights of others, by force of arms if necessary, else liberty cannot be preserved for anyone”.

      Donald L. Cline: “A federal government that does not derive every scintilla of its lawful and limited authority from the Constitution of the United States is by definition a rogue occupation government and criminal regime. Its authority is null and void and no one is bound by any rule of law to obey it”.

      Donald L. Cline: “A State government that exercises any power prohibited to it by the Constitution of the United States as amended is by definition a rogue occupation government and criminal regime. It’s authority is null and void and no one is bound by any rule of law to obey its prohibited color of law”.

      Donald L. Cline: “You cannot arm slaves and expect them to remain slaves.
      Nor can you disarm a free people and expect them to remain free”.

      • He made progressives feel bad, and according to their twisted philosophy about “microaggressions”, that is the equivalent of a physical assault.

  2. “A well regulated militia being necessary for the security of a free state”. Where’s the ambiguity ? “regulated” = trained, militia = As historically defined by Oxford Languages,
    (in the US) all able-bodied citizens eligible by law to be called on to provide military service supplementary to the regular armed forces . Question, Is paint ball now viewed as “paramilitary training” ? What is that next ? Where does it stop ?

    • The next stop is the citizens being arrested & imprisoned for their opposition in any form to these unconstitutional laws; which was precisely in the minds of our founding fathers when they wrote those words imbued in our Constitution.

  3. Remember when Vermont was a free state? It followed the US Constitution to a T, and it wasn’t very long ago. It was prior, however, to the Communists and Deep State and swampers taking ahold of this nation whilst Americans either slept or did drugs.

    Many are STILL engaged in both – to the utter delight of your “government”. Toke away, duuuuudes…..

  4. Seems to me that SOMEONE made a law just for /against him. Is that even legal???

    I would really hate to see that is the case. Seems like they want to start something with the people of the state.
    But who am i to say… Oh I know a nobody like him.
    based on what a cop said to me the other day, I know now they shoot centermass unlike real shooters. You really want to go against people you THINK cannot shoot if you take away their shooting place? Others exist and you cannot stop us all, if you think so, believe that, at your peril.

      • I have heard Phil Baruth compared to a refreshing cleanser used by women on a mid summer’s eve, and the bag it came in .

      • Patrick, another term for him and them is Satan’s spawn. They can’t turn away or change their ways now. They were warned, they know what they are doing, but they chose the path to their own ruin willingly and knowingly. Woe onto them.

  5. Since when is it illegal for people with common interest to gather together? Like the comment above, is paintball considered paramilitary training? What about biathlon training? Finland used skis and rifles to attack the Germans in World War two. From what I’ve seen the owner got permission and permits prior to building his range. This sounds and looks like the classic in your face neighbors who caused the initial stink. Then it blossomed into involving our very anti-constitutional, anti-firearms ownership and gun control crazy progressive legislature that fashioned a law to take care of a small town problem. I don’t know this guy and I’m not a lawyer but this sounds like an unconstitutional taking and civil rights violation. I think he should be talking to some deep pocket organizations for assistance. After all, isn’t that what progressives do. They pass a questionable civil rights law in violation of the constitution knowing that it will have to be adjudicated to get rid of it. Law-fare as it’s called, used to punish those who don’t fall inline with the current anti-freedom trend.

  6. I think, not that anyone should care what I think, but there is a lot more to this story than is reported on ALL sides. The truth is rarely black and white. The video is at least pro 2A. But she invokes at 4:37 “that he will not be doing it Martin Heemeyer style”. She then snaps her fingers and says, “Shucks”. Firstly, it’s “Marvin” not Martin. Secondly, the face, the snapping of the fingers and the word “shucks” would lead one to believe she is disappointed he will not be causing destruction and then killing himself, which is what Mr. Marvin Heemeyer did in Granby, CO back in 2004. That seems like a peculiar thing to say. Maybe I’m missing something.
    There is just a lot of things that don’t add up in any of this case. And in random order, things like:
    Why did he receive a permit and why as it then taken away?

    Why did they order him to destroy his berms? What possible environmental, legal or any issue could someone have with berms? What if they were hügelkultur mounds?

    Why would he have to take down his buildings? How many times has the state historically ordered this be done and then not worked with the property owner to get them up to whatever code and take their fines/fees?

    What really transpired between he and his neighbors, as I would hazard a guess that this is the root of the entire problem? If you look at the complainants in the case, one of them, Hulett, lives directly across the street. Hulett owns a trucking company so he may have deep ties in the community.

    Why did Mr. Banyai go after the townspeople in a personal manner? Regardless of its veracity, calling out the people in power by publicizing their immoral/illegal actions and who have the ability to control you, is a little like poking sticks at the monster and being surprised when he eats you.

    Why did the state legislature get involved and pass a law banning such organizations in our state? Ostensibly, one of the very things we are known for around the world… The Green Mountain Boys and their “paramilitary” or militia activity. How did that happen? Who pushed that one up the road to Montpelier? And why?

    Those are just a few of my questions. It really angers me to see that this incident caused a change in the legislation regarding training facilities. I mean, cripes, some of us cannot travel far due to family and livestock responsibilities and so finding a place to train is not easy. Not to mention that the legislation was a crock of excrement. The language and conditions are reprehensible and could be manipulated in a variety of ways.

    I agree wholeheartedly with commentor, “Dano”. Except that I think Mr. Banyai has some skin in this game of who did or said some egregious unneighborly things. He is not the complete innocent party in this situation. He is being unfairly targeted for sure, but he is not blameless.
    I have to say, it is unpleasant when one of my “neighbors”, who comes up to his property on weekends and fires a great deal of firearms at all hours of the day and causes one of my dogs to shake in the corner and my turkeys to gobble incessantly which pisses off my immediate neighbors. But which makes me sympathetic to Mr. Banyai’s neighbors. Immediately after being annoyed at the noise my weapons training neighbor makes disturbing my rural tranquility is the potentially comforting thought that, well, hopefully this neighbor is suitably well armed and would join in a mutual assistance group to fend off unsavory types should any untoward events occur. So, have to take the good with the bad. Hoping someday to meet this neighbor and form a relationship. Sometimes these things should happen organically and not be forced.

    Back to Mr. Banyai. Why would the town go after him so hard? Why the over-the-top reaction by the town and state government? Who is behind this? Truly behind it? And why? Those are questions that no one is answering that bear the most impact on this case. Those are the questions that need true investigative journalism, something that is expensive to do and requires a true commitment to the profession. And takes time. Lots of time. And time is money.
    Ah, nothing is simple, is it? Wish it were more clearcut and straightforward. Maybe someday all of this will come out. I for one, would truly like to know the whole truth.

    • Regardless of who or how he offended, what actual laws has be broken?

    • I believe that the root of this is a neighbor dispute however it’s been said that the someone on the board in the town belongs to a certain anti-gun 501c3 and that another has a stake of ownership in another local gun range.

      With that said I remember him saying that he tried to work out hours that would work for his neighbors around him but instead of working with him they said he couldn’t shoot at all, which isn’t neighbor like nor does it help to sort this out.

      As for the state creating a law, never let a situation go to waste, I bet that bill (which has several copies in other states) was just waiting in the wind for Ms. Baruth to put it forward as to further the agenda of disarming America.

  7. Weaponized lawfare. The State and the Judiciary colluding to subvert the rule of law to intimidate and bully their way over a private citizen’s God given, civil, common, Constitutional rights. Daniel Banyai is being used as a tool displaying what “they” will do to anyone they deem a threat or defy their narratives. Daniel Banyai is only one of many the State and the Judiciary have drubbed into the ground with their tyrannical, criminal conduct. Vermont is the testing ground and the litmus test for how much they can get away with because much of the populace is either asleep, woefully ignorant, or Marxist sympathizers. The war is real.

    • Banyai is absolutely being used as a poster villain by the gun-phobic left to see how far they can go to restrict Constitutionally-protected activity. According to this legislation, just inviting some friends over to your home for target shooting and discussing firearms seems to be in violation, so it is clearly a violation of the First Amendment. That does not matter to the cretinous vermin New York transplants like Phil Baruth.