A bill that would ban paramilitary training camps, such as Slate Ridge in West Pawlet, drew positive comments Thursday from members of the Senate panel reviewing it. However, some lawmakers expressed concern that proving someone violated the proposed legislation would be difficult.
The bill, S.3, would make it a crime to operate a paramilitary training facility if the person doing it “knows or reasonably should know that the teaching, training, or demonstrating will be unlawfully employed for use in or in furtherance of a civil disorder.”
It would also make it a crime to “assemble with one or more other persons” for paramilitary training if the “person knows or reasonably should know that the teaching, training, or instruction will be unlawfully employed for use in or in furtherance of a civil disorder.”
Violations would carry up to five-year prison terms and up to $5,000 in fines.
The Senate Judiciary Committee took up the bill during a hearing Thursday. At the end of the discussion, Sen. Dick Sears, D-Bennington, the committee chair, said he initially didn’t think the bill would go very far, but recent changes make it more likely to advance.
The committee is expected to take additional testimony on the legislation.
While committee members generally spoke in favor of the latest version of the measure, questions kept popping up about the possible difficulty of convicting someone of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt.
Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky, P/D Essex, asked how the bill could be implemented ahead of someone taking violent action.
“I want to make sure that we are able to proactively stop these kinds of things rather than reacting after civil disorder or disobedience happens,” Vyhovsky said.
“I think looking back we can say, ‘Well, of course they were training to have an insurrection because then they tried to have an insurrection,’” Vyhovsky added, “but I really want to be thoughtful about thinking proactively and how we stop things before they happen.”
Sears suggested investigations could include gathering texts and Facebook posts showing planning taking place. “Social media seems to be a great way to find out things about some of these folks,” he said.
Senate President Pro Tempore Phil Baruth, D/P-Chittenden-Central, who serves on the committee and introduced the bill, said the measure is modeled after similar legislation in other states.
“Yes, it’s limiting the state’s power, but it’s also giving the state power,” he said. “It’s a cautious balance. “That’s why 25 states have adopted it, including red states.”
The bill was prompted by difficulties the state encountered in trying to address Slate Ridge, a controversial “gunfighting” training facility in West Pawlet.
For years, Slate Ridge has been the source of enormous tension in West Pawlet. Neighbors have reported that Daniel Banyai, the facility’s owner, has repeatedly threatened and harassed them, and they also complained about hearing frequent gunfire and explosions. Banyai often published personal information, including names and home addresses, of community members and organizers who spoke out against Slate Ridge.
Gov. Phil Scott, speaking to the issue about two years ago, said there was little enforcement action the state could take, since no state laws had been violated.
Since then, the town government has taken action against Banyai in the state’s Environmental Court, contending he lacked the permit to operate the facility at the site.
An Environmental Court judge recently ordered Banyai to deconstruct unpermitted buildings on his property or face jail time.
“I do think that this law at least would allow the state to do something,” Sears said during the hearing Thursday, adding that he knew it was frustrating for the neighbors of Slate Ridge to hear from state officials that there was little that could be done.
In addition to making it a crime to operate such a facility, the legislation would allow state prosecutors through a civil process to seek an injunction to close it down.
The most recent draft of the bill adds several “carve outs,” or exemptions, including for facilities that offer training in self-defense, safe firearms handling, and recreational hunting or target shooting.
Chris Bradley of the Vermont Federation of Sportsmen’s Club spoke on the bill Thursday, telling the committee that, with the exemptions recently added to the legislation, he wasn’t concerned that the measure would infringe on any constitutional gun rights provisions.
“It’s difficult to see any Second Amendment issue,“ Bradley said.
However, he said, it may be difficult to gain a conviction.
“How do you prove what’s in someone’s mind?” Bradley said.
