The Vermont Senate gave preliminary approval Thursday to a proposal that would mandate background checks for most gun transactions, including private sales between individuals.
The measure, authored by Sen. Phil Baruth (D/P-Chittenden), had languished for years in the Senate Judiciary Committee. On Thursday, Baruth bypassed the panel by amending another bill on the Senate floor to include the universal background check language.
Baruth’s amendment passed the Senate by a vote of 17 to 13. The underlying legislation, which addresses state storage of seized firearms, will face another vote in the chamber on Friday before it is sent to the House.
The Senate’s embrace of universal background checks came after a paradigm shift in Vermont gun politics, prompted by a school shooting two weeks ago in Parkland, Fla., and a narrowly averted incident at Fair Haven Union High School.
“Let there be no mistake about one thing,” Baruth said Thursday on the Senate floor. “Mass shootings are a viral phenomenon, and Vermont has caught that virus, like every other state in the union.”
Baruth’s amendment would require those selling, giving or otherwise transferring ownership of a gun to obtain a federal criminal background check of the recipient, performed by a licensed firearms dealer. It would not apply to members of the military, law enforcement officials or those buying guns from immediate family members.
During Thursday’s debate, some senators argued that requiring background checks for private sales would place an undue burden on law-abiding gun owners while failing to prevent dangerous people from obtaining them.
Sen. Joe Benning (R-Caledonia), who opposed the amendment, took to the Senate floor to read from a long list of mass shootings conducted by those who had undergone background checks. He said the measure would be “totally ineffective” at stopping such violence.
Baruth employed an analogy to push back on the argument. “Imagine if we said we are not going to have a speed limit because there’s no way to know whether all the cars on the road are going the speed limit,” he said.
Sen. John Rodgers (D-Essex/Orleans) said he opposed the bill because it would force those engaging in gun transactions to pay a fee to the dealer conducting the background check. He said such fees sometimes amounted to $100. Rodgers argued that those selling guns were often strapped for cash. He also called it difficult and time-consuming to find a gun dealer willing to conduct background checks.
Others, including Sen. Becca Balint (D-Windham), the Democratic majority leader, said it was long past time for the Senate to address mass shootings.
“We should take every single legal step that we can to reduce the epidemic of gun violence,” she said. “The time for hand-wringing and shoulder-shrugging on this issue is over.”
Those who voted for the amendment were: Sen. Tim Ashe (D/P-Chittenden), Claire Ayer (D-Addison), Becca Balint (D-Windham), Baruth, Chris Bray (D-Addison), Francis Brooks (D-Washington), Brian Campion (D-Bennington), Alison Clarkson (D-Windsor), Ann Cummings (D-Washington), Debbie Ingram (D-Chittenden), Ginny Lyons (D-Chittenden), Mark MacDonald (D-Orange), Dick McCormack (D-Windsor), Chris Pearson (P/D-Chittenden), Anthony Pollina (P/D-Washington), Michael Sirotkin (D-Chittenden) and Jeanette White (D-Windsor).
Those opposing it were: Sen. Benning, Carolyn Branagan (R-Franklin), Randy Brock (R-Franklin), Brian Collamore (R-Rutland), Peg Flory (R-Rutland), Jane Kitchel (D-Caledonia), Dick Mazza (D-Grand Isle), Alice Nitka (D-Windsor), Rodgers, Dick Sears (D-Bennington), David Soucy (R-Rutland), Bobby Starr (D-Essex/Orleans) and Richard Westman (R-Lamoille).
The background check proposal is one of a number of gun-related initiatives currently under consideration by the legislature. Another, which would raise the legal age to buy firearms in Vermont from 16 to 21, is expected to face a vote in the Senate on Friday. It would also be attached to the gun-storage legislation, known as S.55.
Earlier Thursday, the Senate gave final approval to S.221, which would allow authorities, after obtaining a court order, to confiscate guns from those who pose an “extreme risk” to themselves or others. That legislation faces tougher sledding in the House, which prefers yet another bill, H. 422. The latter, focused on those suspected of committing domestic violence, does not require a court order.
At a press conference Thursday afternoon, Gov. Phil Scott called on the legislature to send him one or the other before the end of the week, when lawmakers are scheduled to take a one-week recess for Town Meeting Day.
“I think Vermonters are looking for us to do something,” he said. “This sends a message that we care, we can put politics aside and do what’s right.”
Scott, who until two weeks ago opposed all forms of gun control, has said he would “probably” sign a universal background check measure into law. He also supports raising the legal age to buy firearms to 21.
John Walters contributed reporting.
Related Stories
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
If Scott signs this he stands no chance of being re-elected. But maybe that’s what he wanted, sell out Vermont so he can go back to racing cars.
How in the world are you going to know if I sell a gun to somebody who isnt family? You dont know what guns I have and you dont know what guns the guy I sell to has. That is the way we are going to keep it. This legislation needs to die.
The issues addressed in the article above are not about “gun politics”. Guns don’t kill other guns: guns kill PEOPLE. We are talking “people politics” plain and simple.
Traitorous violators of their oath of office! By way of compromise, we can give them a wall around burlington so they can have their safe space. Seems to me that there will still be a great deal of violent crime there. But hey, at least they’ll all kill each other off. No more!!! We will not comply in any way! Your opinions of my rights, mean nothing! Can’t wait to see who funds the defense of this atrocity in all of the lawsuits that will barrage the state!
Good for the Senate, good for Scott if signs this bill. This is a step forward for common sense gun safety. Anyone opposed continues to support a system which allows easy access to weapons of war.
Adults being adults. Imagine that. Amazing the disregard for human life trumps the right for you to own your military style gun until your relative gets gunned down. At least for VT, we are ahead of the game because our politicians are acting like politicians. Doing good for the community and keeping it safe. Not reacting after the fact. Until all automatic weapons are removed from the streets (including law enforcement and I said automatic) and we take care of our mental problems seriously, many more will be murdered including possibly yourself, unfortunately.
Well so much for “Vermont Green Mountain Boys”, so much for our rights to bear arms. so much for True Vermonters protecting themselves, families and property, so much for having a private life. The legislatures in Montpelier will have Vermont a GUN FREE ZONE state, a sanctuary state!!! They are already working on that.
Can’t buy a gun till you’re 21 yr. Mmm but at 18 you are required to sign up for selective service, to go off and fight, at 18 you can buy a bar, just can’t drink in it. At 18 you are considered an adult. Blaming the NRA, the guns, the gun manufacturers are completely stupid. The ones to blame are the people who know the person is unstable and don’t do a damn thing..So much for Gov Scott, the flip-flop Gov…Be real surprised if he’ll be elected again..
I haven’t heard anything from the legislature about what the funding source is going to be to enforce this law. It probably would only cost about $ 100 billion or so to post law enforcement In each household in the state that has guns. I am a hunter and own 5 guns and shotguns. I am more than willing to do anything that could stop even one of these tragedies. What I don’t understand is the legislature passing any bill for anything that does not include a funding source for enforcement. In my opinion, this law would do nothing to prevent tragedies from happening. The people who do things are not known to be law abiding citizens.
There has never been any doubt in my mind that it is not about guns. This is about control and nothing more. What a slippery slope we are taking! What is next? I just cannot fathom the great number of people that do not understand the meaning of, “shall not be infringed.”
The constitution and laws of the land can be changed. They are meant to be changed. The Constitution is a “living document”, to be changed with the times. It’s not the bible of your religion. A suggestion of laws and precedent laws to be updated. At least that’s what my peers told me 45 years ago. The last federal amendment to the constitution was in the 1990’s. We’re living under Grandpas laws now. Time to move on and update the laws of the land for your Grandchildren. No?
Waiting breathlessly for the Vermont legislature and/or Seven Days to list the verified list of shootings committed with private sale firearms that were verifiably purchased here in Vermont since, say, 1980? Not sure FBI will be able to help with the data research since we know, for a fact, the agency often ignores citizen-reported intel about terrorist and/or psychotic threats, e.g., San Bernardino and Jacksonville FL. But, if you do research on really finely-tailored wool suits, beautifully-knotted silk ties, and crafted italian leather shoes, FBI personnel are some of the most stylish dressers in the world.
Excellent article! Very helpful in understanding all the cross currents regarding this issue. My hope—the legislation will be passed, lives will be saved, and the common good will prevail. The 2nd amendment argument is baloney. It’s time to realize it is not one of the ten commandments. Times change, and we must too! I didn’t vote for Scott last time, but I may this tiime.
Yes! Universal background checks have decreased firearm death significantly in other states where they’ve been enacted. Thank you VT legislators!
Fully support background checks for all those buying guns. It’s common sense. The slippery slope argument doesn’t hold up. Good for you, stay the course. Nancy Thein, Rochester.
I always knew Scott was a spineless RINO.What a chump!!!
So encouraging to see this bill pass in the Senate. Gives me hope for the future. Thanks to the Senate and for Scott for doing the right thing.