Last Friday the Legislature finished the second half of the 25-26 biennium, and I am pleased to say that we did very well:
- 3 “Assault Weapon Ban” bills were introduced but went nowhere.
- 3 “Gun Bans in Government Buildings” were introduced but went nowhere.
- A Burlington Charter Change that would ban guns in Burlington bars (and restaurants / hotels) made it through the Senate Government Operations Committee and then made it through the Senate, where the majority simply ignored Constitutional Issues. Fortunately, the House Government Operations Committee DID understand the Constitutional issues, and it then died on the wall.
Then came H.606, billed as the “Omnibus Gun Bill,” which had 5 parts:
- The 1st section would have made it a felony to steal a gun.
- The 2nd section increased the penalties for second and subsequent offenses for a Prohibited Person found with a firearm.
- The 3rd section would have expanded the definitions of who was a Prohibited Person.
- The 4th section would have banned machine guns and “rapid fire devices”; and
- The 5th section would have attempted to bypass the Protection in Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) to allow “public nuisance lawsuits” against gun owners and individuals or companies who sell firearms or firearm accessories.
We got Section 1 changed to better conform to existing State law. We did not see any major issues with Section 2, and we attempted to influence Section 3 to no avail.
On Section 4, it was our testimony that got the language changed to conform to existing Federal law regarding machine guns, with that change dropping any reference to “rapid fire devices.”
Section 5 of H.606 was so egregious, insidious, and vile that the VTFSC made a public commitment that we would kill that section BEFORE H.606 was even introduced into the House Judiciary Committee, and: We Got That Done.
H.606 was then voted out of the House and went to Senate Judiciary where we intended to fix the remaining concerns with the bill; primarily issues with Section 3.
Senate Pro Tempore Phillip Baruth had other plans, however.
Senator Baruth had gone out on a limb in publicly committing to do everything he could to push through a “No Guns in Bars” ban, and if he could not get that done through the dead-on-the-wall Charter Change, he would do it as an amendment to H.606, except that the ban would be statewide, NOT Burlington specific.
Two other amendments were also introduced, one dealing with establishing better procedures for the handling of firearms that have been ordered to be relinquished by an individual either through an Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO / “Red Flag Laws”) or through Domestic Violence; the second amendment would have reduced the current 72-hour waiting period by the time taken to have a firearm shipped to a legal purchaser.
Unfortunately for Mr. Baruth, a question arose internally as to whether his “Statewide Ban on Guns in Bars” was “germane” to the original bill – and it was not. To get around that, Pro Tem Baruth called an emergency meeting of the Senate Rules Committee with the hope that they would sanction a new bill to be created, even though the final date a bill could be introduced had passed, along with the usually critical “Crossover” date. The Committee voted 3-2 along party lines to allow that to occur, so a new bill was born: S.329.
S.329 as introduced was an exact copy of H.606, except that it NOW had a “No Guns in Bars Statewide” section. It was then further amended to include the proposed amendment that would reduce the 72-hour waiting period for the time it may have taken to ship the firearm. S.329 was then voted out of the Senate Judiciary committee; it was voted out of the Senate and was then sent over to House Judiciary – where it then died.
In the meantime, what had been H.606 had everything removed that was originally in it and was then amended to JUST be a bill dealing with firearms relinquishment. H.606 was then voted out of the Senate Judiciary, it went over to the House Judiciary, where they passed the bill on a 6-5 party line vote, and it then passed the House.
The bottom line in all this is that we did eat a single 3-section bill (H.606) that had to do with relinquishment, a process that does need to be uniform across the state. Unfortunately, we did not agree with the last version of the bill – but will look to amend this language in subsequent sessions.
Of course: We are also waiting to hear back from the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals on our challenge to the 72-hour Waiting Period – a decision we should have in hand before the end of this year – even if they do drag their feet.
We did VERY WELL this past biennium and we look forward to continuing the fight for our Constitution, Freedom, and Liberty in the 2027-2028 session.
Thanks To Each of You for your Unwavering Support!
If you like what we do to protect your rights, you can donate to our efforts using this page, and please forward this to your like-minded friends and family.
