Editor’s note: This commentary is by Paul Manganiello, MD, who is medical director of the Good Neighbor Health Clinic in White River Junction and an emeritus professor of the Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth.
[O]n Feb. 10, public testimony for S.31, criminal background checks for firearm sales, was given in Montpelier before the joint Senate Judiciary and Health committees. Unfortunately, no one wanted to recognize the “elephant in the room”; it is obvious that some Vermonters lack trust in their government, and voiced concerns that legislative regulation is a precursor to legislative confiscation. This is not the case; the Legislature needs to bring gun safety legislation for our citizens in line with Vermont hunting legislation.
There is a history of firearm regulation in Vermont, which has not translated into confiscation of personal firearms. In Vermont, there are statutes that are concerned with hunter safety, i.e., the need to show certification of the completion of a hunter safety course, before receiving a hunting license [Act 87, 1986]; an individual is also limited in the capacity of the magazine, six cartridges, with automatic loading rifles being banned [Act 130, 1923].
In looking at the Vermont state hunter’s safety records, the annual rate of hunting related injuries, standardized per 100,000 hunting licenses issued, was: nine in 1988, five in 1998, and four in 2008; and in 2012, the most recent information, there were no reported hunting accidents.
The National Rifle Association has lost its way, starting out with a mission to educate gun owners in the safe use and storage of firearms, they have now become the chief spokesperson for gun manufactures, and needlessly stirring up fear in gun owners that the state is after their guns.
Despite what opponents of S.31 claim, that a problem does not exist and that this is contrived by supporters of S.31, there is no doubt that Vermonters have been injured or killed as a result of gun violence.
The 1993 federal law, the Brady Bill, has worked in denying millions of convicted felons, fugitives of justice, individuals convicted of crimes of domestic violence, or individuals under court ordered restraint from obtaining firearms; but as we know there are loopholes which need to corrected in order for current laws to be more effective.
This has become a polarizing issue, both sides accusing the other of using trumped-up statistics to support their position. Despite what opponents of S.31 claim, that a problem does not exist and that this is contrived by supporters of S.31, there is no doubt that Vermonters have been injured or killed as a result of gun violence.
We also are aware of the fact that, like motor vehicle legislation, although we might not be able to eliminate firearm deaths, injuries and intimidations, we can certainly reduce them from happening.
There is an old statistical saying that when something bad happens to someone you don’t know, it is a statistic; when something bad happens to a love one, it is a tragedy. I would hope, that no Vermonter ever experiences a tragedy as a result of gun violence. S.31, as similar legislation has been shown in other states, will reduce the chance of that happening.
