Depending who you asked Tuesday night at the Statehouse, S.31 is either a burden on lawful gun owners and a “solution in search of a problem” or a “common sense” piece of legislation aimed at keeping people safe.
It’s either the first step toward registering firearms, their eventual confiscation and the erosion of constitutional rights, or it’s a public health measure that could reduce avoidable deaths and keep guns out of the hands of domestic abusers and other violent criminals.
Those were among the viewpoints aired at public hearing on the proposed legislation that drew several hundred people to Montpelier. Supporters wearing green Gunsense Vermont T-shirts were outnumbered by opponents wearing blaze orange clothing who filled the House balcony and much of the overflow space.
S.31 has three components. First, it would make it a crime to sell a gun privately without the supervision of a licensed dealer, who would perform a background check on the purchaser. Second, it would also allow state-level prosecutors to enforce federal firearm possession laws and third, it would require Vermont to report the names of people with mental illness who a judge has ruled are a danger to themselves or others to the National Instant Background Checks System — the database used to check if someone is able to purchase a gun.
The bill is currently before the Senate Judiciary Committee, but the mental health reporting component will be reviewed by the Senate Health and Welfare Committee before it reaches the Senate floor.
One-hundred-and-eight people signed up to testify before a joint meeting of the two committees. Of those who signed up to testify, 67 were opposed and 43 were in favor, though not all were able to speak during the two-and-a-half hour hearing.
Twice during the hearing, senators took a recess when the bills opponents could not contain their cheers and applause for like-minded speakers, and in a few cases, their derision was aimed at the bill’s supporters.
“We all know that criminals do not obey laws. They will not comply with background checks. S.31 will only affect your honest Vermont constituents,” said Charles Ferry, president of the Barre Rifle and Pistol Club.
Ferry and others in orange repeatedly said that Vermont is among the safest places in the U.S. and does not have a problem with gun violence.
Proponents argued that criminals avoid licensed firearms dealers who would require they undergo a background check and are able to obtain guns in private sales, often facilitated using online classifieds.
Connie Baxter, of Dummerston, is a grief counselor who has worked with the families of gun violence victims.
“Opponents say this bill is unnecessary because Vermont has such a low crime rate, and yet there have been three murders by individuals using guns in Windham County in just the past six months,” Baxter said. “If this law saved just one life … wouldn’t that life be worth the small inconvenience to law abiding citizens of submitting to a background check when making private sales in our state?”
But Paul Manganiello, a physician from White River Junction, said opposition to the bill runs deeper than the inconvenience of background checks. He supports S.31 as a public health measure that has the potential to reduce avoidable gun deaths, he said.
“Unfortunately, no one wants to recognize the elephant in the room: the lack of trust some Vermonters have in government,” he said, which makes it difficult to have a reasonable conversation about the merits of S.31.
Many of the bill’s opponents describe a “slippery slope” where universal background checks lead to gun registration and eventually gun confiscation and the denial of constitutional rights.
Ed Wilson, a federally licensed gun dealer from Morrisville, said universal background checks are unenforceable without registering guns.
“The purpose of S.31 is to build a legislative framework for registering all guns,” Wilson said. Several others made similar points, arguing that gun laws could be used by the government for tyranny in the future.
Both sides accused the other of carrying water for powerful out-of-state interests.
Eddie Garcia, of St. Johnsbury, highlighted the support S.31 has from Everytown for Gun Safety, an organization formed by a merger of Michael Bloomberg’s Mayors Against Illegal Guns and Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America.
Garcia called Bloomberg’s advocacy a “nationwide war on the right to bear arms.”
Dotty Kyle, of Warren, said Vermont’s sportsmen’s clubs have morphed into a political arm of the gun industry, and have gun owners “whipped into a froth” to increase sales of weapons there would otherwise not be such a great demand for.
Tim Bombardier, chief of police in Barre, said the Vermont Chiefs of Police Association does not support S.31 because the chiefs aren’t convinced it will reduce domestic violence related gun deaths.
Bombardier did say that the association could support stand-alone legislation that required reporting people with mental illness who a judge has ruled are a danger to themselves or others to the federal background check database.
“Vermont is one of the states that has chosen to not report these individuals to … the federal gun system. That loophole is on us,” he said.
Sen. John Campbell, D-Windsor, the primary sponsor of S.31, who was in attendance Tuesday night, said it’s too early to say whether he would consider splitting the bill into its component pieces and attempting to pass them individually.
Ed Cutler, president of Gun Owners of Vermont, said all three portions of the bill have problems and are unpalatable to his group, which would oppose each section as stand-alone legislation.
“Either way we’ll be back,” he said, “And either way we won’t comply.”
CORRECTION: An earlier version of this story said the chiefs of police didn’t state a reason for opposing S.31. In a transcript of the hearing, Bombardier said the chiefs weren’t convinced the bill would reduce domestic violence related fatalities.
