Vermont's solution to the gun issue: An act...extreme risk protection orders.

While many think Vermont is a green mountainous state in New England covered with a thick growth of liberals, and it is, yet Vermont has a fundemental conservative core that finds a common cause in an 'individualist' mystique and a live and let live "if it don't scare the cow's it don't bother me" anthem.

Yeah, yeah there's a stark divide between the extreme environmentalist and business interests; farmers and river keepers; old Vermonters and new Vermont transplants from NY, CT, MA. That's a tough mashup but the pendulum seems to be swinging back toward the center. Environmental regulations and anti change 'transplants' drove Vermont's economy into the ground. 20,000+ middle class jobs and households left between 2003 and 2015. With that we saw a shift in the last elections.

My point here is that Vermont might be a little 'different' but it's a microcosm, perhaps, of current American politics.

The Vermont Constitution is specific. Right out of the gate, the right to bear arms is connected to self defense. It's a personal right. In this, restrictive laws have to be crafted very narrowly. The Vermont Constitution and Supreme Court opinions keep the legislature and executive behind a fairly bright line.

Article 16. That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State--and as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up;

Vermont has had its own close calls with school violence and students making credible terroristic threats. One, in Burlington, had the flavor of Parkland, FL where the school board and law enforcement created a 'hands off' policy. No one died but the 19yo 'student' kept up his terroristic threats, it took 4 incidents before criminal charges were levied. The second just happened, just days post Parkland. Law enforcement didn't delay and acted.

This is Vermont's solution. The Bill has passed the Senate with an amazing 30-0 vote. The Vermont Senate has some ardent Second Amendment supporters, close to a majority of the Senate would fall into 'cold dead hands' ground. It's unknown what the Vermont House will do, but I doubt it will be near unanimous without narrowing some definitions, IMO

In short it allows law enforcement, or others, to petition the court to disarm someone deemed an 'extreme risk':

• It requires a hearing before a Superior Court Judge.
• It requires (with an exception) notification of the respondent and a hearing.
• If the petitioner knowingly lies or files to harass the respondent it's $1,000 and a year.
• If the issue is emergent the judge can issue the order without notification or hearing
• - but, this requires a States Attorney and a hearing must be held within 14 days.
• Initial protection orders are 60 days and can be extended. (One version says year by year.)
• Weapons are held by law enforcement, a non connected third party or a federally licensed gun dealer.
• The weapons held can be sold for the respondent.
• The weapons are returned to the respondent after the petition expires or terminated by the court.

Your thoughts?

Cheers
Labour

 

I liked this comment from one Senator:

Sen. Randy Brock, R-Franklin, was among the senators who spoke in support of the bill on the floor before Wednesday’s vote.

“I’m a longtime member of the NRA and I’ve been rated as an A+ rating by the NRA in the past,” Brock said. “This is not a gun control law, this is a lunatic control law. And I use that term very specifically, it may not be a scientific term, but it’s a term that all of us can understand. It’s designed to focus on the person who is extremely dangerous in the moment to himself and others.”

https://vtdigger.org/2018/02/28/senate-unanimously-approves-extreme-risk-gun-bill/

The interesting point here is that type of gun didn't need to enter the deliberative process or the bill itself.

Another interesting point, the bill doesn't speak to a respondent’s mental health it just requires extreme risk, clearly identified. It also leaves out doctors or other dark arts practitioners.

There are some issues I don't like wit the bill, but for them to be addressed medical and psychiatric terms would need to be included. Perhaps it's better to leave them out, save the petitioner and respondent from the battle of the experts.

 

This won't pass the house, intact anyway, and I doubt Gov. Scott would sign it as is. The Act makes an exception for family members but that's still too much government for most Vermonters.

Keep in mind, here in Vermont a 16yo can purchase any gun without a parent's ok or presence.

Keep in mind that everyone in Vermont can carry openly or concealed, no permit required.

Keep in mind that most felons can own firearms without waver in Vermont.

This coming week is Town Meeting. 6 March, Tuesday. Anything that hasn't been passed by both houses and signed by the Governor might get a quick withdraw. Town Meetings can be brutal for State Senators and Representatives.

Tuesday's going to be interesting.

Cheers

Vt. Senate gives nod to gun background check measure

http://www.wcax.com/content/news/Vt...o-gun-background-check-measure-475585323.html

MONTPELIER, Vt. (WCAX) The Vermont Senate took another step Thursday to tighten gun control in the Green Mountains, advancing a measure that would require background checks for the private sale of firearms.


By a 17 to 13 margin, the Senate passed an amendment expanding the state's background check system. Under the bill, the private transfer of a weapons -- including sales, trades, or gifts -- will require a federal background check just like purchases from a federally licensed firearms dealer.

"Will this new more comprehensive background check require a little bit more from Vermont gun owners? Yes," said Sen. Philip Baruth, D- Chittenden County.

Sen. Debbie Ingram, D-Chittenden County, says there's nothing wrong with that. "What we're doing, I think, at worst, is inconveniencing people," she said.

Sen. Baruth's idea has been locked up in committee for years, but the landscape has changed after the mass school shooting in Florida two weeks ago and a foiled plot here in Vermont.

There are exceptions to the background check amendment. Transfers to a law enforcement agency are exempt from the requirement, as are transfers to military and law enforcement personnel and immediate family.