On Friday morning, March 15, the Senate Judiciary Committee will be meeting again to “mark-up” several gun bills, and they could potentially vote on some of the legislation. It’s important that you contact members of the committee to make your voice heard.
Earlier this week, the committee held a public hearing in Randolph Center at Vermont Technical College where gun owners drastically outnumbered anti-gun activists. The committee is considering several pieces of legislation, both good and bad.
A few of the bills are pro-gun and should be supported as they address some of the problems created by last year’s S.55. Bills which should be supported include:
S.1 by Sen. John Rodgers would repeal the July 1, 2019 sunset on allowing large capacity ammunition feeding devices to be transported into Vermont for shooting competitions
S.2 by Sen. Rodgers is an act relating to permitting large capacity ammunition feeding devices to be transferred from one immediate family member to another by a properly executed will.
Similarly, S. 13 by Sen. Rodgers is an act permitting the transfer of large capacity ammunition feeding devices between immediate family members.
However, NRA members should respectfully ask that the committee NOT advance S.22 by Sen. Phil Baruth, the architect of last year’s S.55. This bill would create a 48-hour waiting period for all firearms sales and require that when a firearm is not in a person’s immediate possession or control, the firearm must be locked in a safe storage depository or rendered incapable of being fired. This legislation would kill gun shows and decimate local businesses. This legislation would have virtually no impact on public safety or suicide prevention. There is zero evidence that waiting periods have any type of impact on suicide prevention or criminal use of firearms. In addition, the storage provision of the bill would render firearms useless in self-defense situations. This bill would tip the scales toward criminals as law-abiding gun owners would be forced to keep their firearms under lock and key. Some discussion has been given to amending S.22, so please be clear that you object to S.22 in its entirety.
Please contact members of the Senate Judiciary Committee and respectfully ask them to oppose S. 22 and support S.1, S.2, and S.13.