Gov. Peter Shumlin on Thursday denied that his office made a deal with gun rights groups to gain support for a firearms storage initiative.
The gun rights group, however, said the understanding was that the safe firearms storage measure would be folded into a larger bill to prevent the addition of gun-related amendments.
Louis Porter, secretary of civil and military affairs who serves as the administration’s liaison to the Legislature, said both statements are correct.
“There was no deal to preclude other legislation,” Porter said. “Our goal for this piece of legislation was to keep the focus on this fee and on protecting those Vermonters, primarily women, who might otherwise be at risk from their spouses or partners. We thought that goal was best achieved by putting this proposal in the fee bill.”
The legislation in question has to do with the storage of firearms belonging to people subject to relief from abuse orders. Anti-domestic violence advocates want safe storage facilities so judges can order people accused of domestic abuse to store the guns for the length of the order.
Shumlin is a vocal supporter of gun storage for people who have been accused of domestic violence.
“We’re talking about folks who have been abusive to their partner or spouse, usually wife,” Shumlin said at a news conference in Barre.
“It just seems like common sense that we would have, in a place where a judge or law enforcement has interceded, a process by which we can get dangerous objects – it could be weapons, guns, it could be baseball bats, whatever it might be, out of the hands of the perpetrators in situations where risk to an innocent person is quite possible,” he said.
Judges can order someone not to possess firearms as part of a relief from abuse order, law enforcement and anti-domestic violence advocates say, but they sometimes do not do so because there are not adequate storage facilities.
The bill authorizes the Department of Public Safety to establish standards for storing firearms and to keep a list of locations that agree to store them, including federally licensed firearms dealers and cooperating law enforcement agencies, such as sheriffs’ departments.
Experts in domestic violence say the most dangerous time for a victim is right after he or she has gone to police or the court to report violence and obtain a relief from abuse order.
The Vermont Network Against Domestic and Sexual Violence is the chief supporter of the measure.
Deal or no deal
The Vermont Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs, which serves as the state chapter of the National Rifle Association, initially agreed to support the measure when approached last year by the governor’s office.
But when the idea reached bill form, specifically the version the House passed earlier this session, the group withdrew its support.
In the beginning, the concept was more vague, said Evan Hughes, the federation’s legislative liaison.
“This was a very, very non-specific agenda when we first started,” Hughes said Thursday.
The original idea was simply to create a storage facility for relinquished firearms, he said. When the concept of a fee for storage was introduced, and when questions arose over whether a person can also elect to store guns with a friend or relative, the federation withdrew support.
There is also controversy over whether a person should have to relinquish guns and pay for storage during a temporary relief from abuse order, before he or she has had a hearing.
The governor’s office Wednesday proposed an amendment to the bill to the Senate Judiciary Committee. Hughes said that amendment, which included a cap on the amount people can be charged for storage, improves the bill.
“I think we’re pretty darn close. I think this is all going to work out,” Hughes said.
The firearms storage measure is part of a larger bill about fees, H.735. That bill is before the Senate Finance Committee, which typically reviews the routine bill.
The Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday held a three-and-a-half-hour hearing on the gun-storage measure.
Hughes said in the process of negotiations with the administration, parties agreed to put the storage measure in a larger bill so other amendments couldn’t be added on.
“Initially, the idea was to put it into something else simply so it wouldn’t get Christmas-treed with a bunch of other stuff,” Hughes said.
VTDigger reported on that agreement in March.
Shumlin denied that if the parties agreed that if the federation supported this bill, there would be no other firearms bills this session.
“I didn’t think that there was a deal. We talked about a bill that made sense for Vermont and we all came around the table and agreed that this made sense from almost every vantage point,” Shumlin said.
Shumlin declined to say how the Senate should amend the bill. He said he supports the original version.
“The House has passed a bill. It’ll go to conference committee and that’s where I’ll get involved in talking to all the parties and, hopefully, coming out with a bill that everybody can rally around. I think we can do that,” Shumlin said.
