By a 17-13 vote Friday afternoon, the Vermont Senate gave final legislative approval to S.55, a wide-ranging package of gun restrictions. After final review by the legislature’s legal team, the bill will go to Republican Gov. Phil Scott, who said after the vote that he would sign it, assuming it passes routine muster by his chief counsel.
“I have every intention of signing it,” Scott said. “I made a commitment that I want to do everything we can to provide our citizens with the safety they deserve.”
Earlier in March, the Senate approved a version of S.55 that required universal background checks for gun purchases and a 21-year-old minimum age for gun purchases. The House then amended the bill to include a ban on bump stocks and limits on gun magazine capacity.
The latter sparked some opposition in the Senate — most notably from Sen. Dick Sears (D-Bennington), who was the original sponsor of the bill. In the end, he voted against it because of concerns about the magazine provision and a hasty approval process in the House.
The 13 “no” votes included all seven Senate Republicans, along with Jane Kitchel (D-Caledonia), Dick Mazza (D-Grand Isle), Alice Nitka (D-Windsor), John Rodgers (D-Essex/Orleans), Bobby Starr (D-Essex/Orleans) and Sears.
The final round of debate on S.55 took less than two hours, and appeared to be more theater piece than free discussion. The vast majority of senators never spoke; only two amendments were offered, and one was quickly disposed of; and after the vote, there was a general acknowledgment that the outcome was known from the start.
On Friday morning, the Senate Judiciary Committee — chaired by Sears — made a number of amendments to the House version of S.55. The most noteworthy would have eliminated the magazine limits. The Senate debate, originally scheduled for late morning, was pushed back by 90 minutes. The delay appeared to allow time for some backroom dealmaking to prevent an overlong or untidy floor process.
The debate began with Rodgers, a gun owner and fierce advocate of gun rights, offering an amendment of his own. It would have stripped out the magazine limits and the increase in the legal age to purchase guns. Sears then offered a substitute amendment reflecting his committee’s morning work. Senators voted unanimously to scrap Rodgers’ offering — even Rodgers himself voted against his own amendment — and moved on to consider Sears’ amendment.
Sears expressed doubts about the enforceability of magazine limits. He also objected to what he called “errors” in the House bill due to an overly hasty process.
Rodgers provided the verbal pyrotechnics. “If we pass this bill, maybe it’s over,” he said. “Maybe the Vermont I grew up in is gone.”
That was just a warmup. Rodgers bemoaned the influx of outsiders “who came to take away that Vermont.” He then launched into an apocalyptic vision of a future where Vermont is overrun by climate-change refugees: “I wonder where all the folks from New York City will go when it’s underwater,” he said.
Rodgers cited the 40-plus conflicts going on around the world, the threats of terrorism, authoritarianism and natural disaster. “If chaos erupts and bad people invade my house,” he asserted, “I’d rather have a 30-round magazine than a 10-round magazine.”
Sen. Joe Benning (R-Caledonia) offered a calmer approach, arguing for passage of Sears’ amendment as a way to keep the discussion going. Had the Senate approved Sears’ version, then the House and Senate would have had to form a conference committee to work out the differences between the two bills. “The Senate is a contemplative body,” Benning said. “We should rise above the passions of the moment.”
The Sears amendment was defeated 18-12. There was a moment of surprise when both Rodgers and Starr voted against Sears, whose head spun around when Rodgers cast his vote. Sears glared at the two Northeast Kingdom seatmates for a moment and shook his head.
The Senate then turned to the House version of S.55.
Sears took the floor to argue against the bill. “If you vote ‘yes,’ you’re approving a bill with errors,” he said. “If you vote ‘yes,’ I hope you consider how you’ll fix the bill before it gets to the governor.”
Senate President Pro Tempore Tim Ashe (D/P-Chittenden) pointed out that most of Sears’ changes were additions to the House bill, not mere corrections, and added: “If the bill moves on and is signed by the governor, there will be opportunities to fix it.”
As the debate wound down, Sears asked if his name could be taken off the bill, which listed him as the sole sponsor. After a brief recess and a senatorial huddle, he was told that his only option was to withdraw the bill entirely. He declined to do so.
“I knew all along I could have made a motion to withdraw the bill,” Sears said after the final vote. “It would have been like a nuclear option. I wouldn’t do that to my colleagues.”
At that point, the final tally was a formality.
Afterward, Sears acknowledged the historic nature of the moment. “This is the first step on gun control in Vermont that I’ve seen in my time here,” he said. “We’ve done a lot of things to get guns out of the hands of people who shouldn’t have them, but we’ve never taken a step at what I consider gun control.”
Gov. Scott, in a brief media scrum after the vote, acknowledged that passage of a bill like S.55 would have been unthinkable as recently as two months ago. But then came the Parkland, Fla., school shooting, followed almost immediately by an extremely close call in Vermont. The police affidavit in the latter case, with its detailed depiction of a young man’s preparations to conduct a mass shooting, changed the governor’s mind.
“After reading the affidavit and coming to the conclusion that we weren’t insulated from this type of horrific incident, that this could happen in Vermont, I made a commitment to keep an open mind, let the legislative process work,” Scott said.
“What’s being passed at this point in time doesn’t intrude on the Second Amendment,” he added. “It doesn’t take away their guns, and I believe that we will get accustomed to the new normal.”
Two other gun bills are both a single legislative step away from the governor. H.422 would allow police to confiscate weapons after an arrest or citation for domestic violence. S.221 would allow judges to issue extreme risk orders, which would allow removal of weapons from anyone deemed an imminent danger to themselves or others.
Scott said the next chapter in preventing gun violence is a suite of school safety and mental health initiatives currently being considered by the legislature.
“It’s not just about guns,” he said. “There’s an undercurrent of violence in our country that we have to address.”
Related Stories
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
In another comment I predicted the magazine restriction would kill this bill. I was foolishly operating under the assumption that I was still living in Vermont.
At this point I think we can officially abandon the myth of Vermont “reasonableness”.
I hope Phil Scott knows that if he signs this bill, his political career is over. He barely won the race against Minter and if signs this legislation, the next outcome won’t even be close. The folks that voted for him will not put up with betrayal. Phil Scott is a coward, and has been very disingenuous. I was warned of his RINO tendencies, but I thought him better than the alternative at the time he was elected (Minter). Now I’m not so sure. He certainly is a big disappointment that doesn’t seem to care what his constituents care about. This legislation doesn’t make anyone more safe and can potentially do the opposite. Scott simply caved in.
This will get the people going!
Want 30round Magpul Mags?!
Donate $10 to the VTFSC Defense fund THIS Saturday!
at the STATE HOUSE!
SHARE THIS!
WHO: RECOIL Magazine and MAGPUL Industries
WHAT: Will be giving away 1,200 standard capacity MAGPUL PMAG rifle magazines free of charge to Vermont citizens (one per person, while supplies last) and accepting donations to the Vermont Federation of Sportsmens Clubs.
WHEN: 2:30pm Saturday, March 31 until all magazines are distributed
WHERE: The distribution will take place on the Statehouse steps or from the back of a red Ford F-150 in the parking spaces on State Street in front of the Vermont Statehouse.
I hope Phil Scott knows that if he signs this bill, his political career will NOT be over and he will have the support of many voters who would not have otherwise voted for him, including a lot of kids who will be coming of voting age. If he signs this legislation the next outcome won’t even be close. He’ll win by a landslide.
If an 18 year old with an assault rifle with high capacity magazine and no background check shot up a Vermont school, then the Vermont John Rodgers “grew up in” would also be gone.
The irony of the bizarre, Rambo-esque, survivalist fantasyland that John Rodgers lives in is that he has a much higher statistical chance of being killed by hitting a deer on a Vermont roadway than he does by being killed by the terrorists coming to his door that he speaks of. And if an authoritarian government comes to his door, his guns will not save him against the most heavily armed government on the planet. Your AR-15 will do nothing to save you if a US gov’t drone is dropping a bomb on your house. Just ask the Afghanis. Sorry John, but your logic is illogical.
Ernie, the Taliban controls or contests half of Afghanistan at this point. We’re not going to win that war.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/0…
https://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/20…
If you’re going to make a point about how popular resistance against a super power is futile you shouldn’t have mentioned Afghanistan, that’s practically their national sport.
I’m unaware of the extreme danger anyone who goes to a school in Vermont is of being gunned down by an assailant wielding an AR-15. Last I heard, this was one of the safest states in the USA. Yes, there was a close call recently but…nothing happened. The last time I can recall a murder in a school was pushing 10 years ago.
This dovetails with a 25 year trend of decreasing violence in the USA. It’s done this as gun control as been passed and then died off on a federal level.
What has gone dramatically up is the coverage of what little violent crime does happen. So, if things are getting safer everywhere, including in Vermont, then why are we passing legislation based on media-driven fears? Our politicians are literally admitting that they’re reacting to a made-up hysteria. This isn’t good leadership.
It’s also laughable because there’s so much of the stuff they want to ban out there that the supply is likely to dry up for decades. It will marginally affect the supply. Plus, it will just join the list of things Vermonters cross the Connecticut River to buy. Even if these gun control measures could stop crime, they will be worthless, largely symbolic.
See ya later phil!
Keith Stern 2018
https://www.vermontgetsstern.org/about
The legislators of this state has conned their constituents into believing that this nonsense legislation will make everyone safer. Shame on all of you including our “Republican” governor! This is a simple school security issue and the state has been taken over by outsiders who have a very different agenda than you may think. We have more than 22,000 gun laws in this country, if we would enforce the laws we have and address the obvious, these senseless things would not happen. “Let’s enact sensible gun laws” I hear being said all the time, if this was true why are we enacting non-sensible laws? The truth is that the people pushing this nonsense do not want to solve the problem because solving the problem automatically blocks their agenda! What you are witnessing should not be underestimated, this a huge power grab and the undermining of America and it’s future!
Does anyone know what day it will go into effect?
I hope Scotts race career is more productive than his political career because after this term is up thats how he will have to feed his family if he signs this bill. Bye Bye Rino.
Of course Dick Mazza voted against this…how would the Heroin dealers he (knowingly) rents to defend themselves from the police with this law in place?
http://youtu.be/v2jc1TzlqLo
Mark my words, I have talked to A LOT of hunters, and gun owners like myself and they all agree that the next step these liberal out of staters ( that are under the golden dome) will be is to take our guns!!!!! They have Flip-Flop Scott just where they want him…. under their thumb.!! Our Vermont youth who are looking forward to purchasing their first rife to hunt are now told NO not till you’re 21. All because of these gun haters. We have been brought up with guns, our parents, grandparents, uncles, cousins friends all grew up around guns, learned how to use them and respected the guns.. Vermont one of the safest state in the Nation on guns.
S.55, plus H.422 would allow police to confiscate weapons after an arrest or citation for domestic violence. S.221 would allow judges to issue extreme risk orders, which would allow removal of weapons from anyone deemed an imminent danger to themselves or others. Shame on the legislators and the Governor for turning on Real Vermonters…
Dave Geer great link. Fantastic. Thank you for putting the truth on here when it comes to what this entire debate is all about.
At first legal shooting light the day after Phil Scoot signs Snake 55, please stay home and shoot in a safe direction for an hour, make your voice heard. Be safe above all.
So, the magazine ban is obviously unenforceable, as the AG’s office admits, but I’m bored at work and decided to scan the bill to see if there are any work arounds more cheeky than just buying mags in NH. Here’s something worth looking at in a list of exemptions from the ban:
“a large capacity ammunition feeding device that is manufactured
or sold solely for use with a firearm that is determined to be a curio or relic by
the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. As used in this
subdivision, curio or relic means a firearm that is of special interest to
collectors by reason of some quality other than its association with firearms
intended for sporting use or as offensive or defensive weapons.”
Fun fact: The AR 15 was designed in the 50s and some of the older models are now C&R eligible. People also collect them for their historical and technical novelty so it passes the “special interest” test. Therefore it’s legal to sell AR 15 magazines in VT that exceed 10 rounds if they’re in a bucket marked “Colt SP1 Magazines”
Whats being passed at this point in time doesnt intrude on the Second Amendment,
Except, you know, removing the rights of adults without due process.
Do you know what this photo is from? https://twitter.com/ClintonMSix14/status/9…
A small army of federal agents tried to take Cliven Bundy’s land but men equally armed held the line.
a federal judge has ruled in favor of Cliven Bundy gun control has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with control!
Fortunately Phil Scott is only the Governor, and only for one term, if that.
https://mobile.twitter.com/RealJamesWoods/…
“Fortunately Phil Scott is only the Governor, and only for one term, if that.”
Um, he’s already in his second term. Do try to keep up.
Well guess the legislators, the Senate and most of all the Governor come next elections I hope, will be out of work.!!! Unless they pull a rigged election, wouldn’t be the first time.. Vermont, a safe state, where our youth were brought up to hunt, how to use a gun, took safety courses (on how to shoot and respect a gun,) where hunters went out to hunt to put meat in the freezer…Now our youths and we now are treated like criminals, killers all because of the mentally deranged boy in Fla. The FBI, the Sheriff both received reports on him, all failed the students and adults at the school that was killed. In my opinion, they were COWARDS !!! Yes, our children need to be safe in school, but people reported to the FBI and the Sherriff and were ignored by the ones who should have done something. Now Vermont so-called lawmakers have failed the citizens of Vermont by blaming law-abiding gun owners for the deed of someone else in another state.. I have no use for liars, especially the ones in Montpelier. making promises to get elected and then do a flip-flop. Gun haters are what they are.!!!
The stature of Ceres, Goddess of Agriculture has been removed from the statehouse. The Legislature is rumored to be pushing for a statue of David Hogg for the replacement. Is this true?
Isn’t this an admission that 30 round magazines are not for hunting, just for shooting people?
“Rodgers cited the 40-plus conflicts going on around the world, the threats of terrorism, authoritarianism and natural disaster. If chaos erupts and bad people invade my house, he asserted, Id rather have a 30-round magazine than a 10-round magazine.”
I can’t say I think his desire to be able to shoot more people is, you know, moral.
If anything, it’s yet another reason to outlaw those magazines.
What I find amazing. Europe has strict gun control, yet their murder rate is higher than NYC. how can this be, well the new form of killing is with a knife. Does this mean all our steak knives will be taken from us? Seriously, we all need to understand it is not the gun or knife, but the person.
If you take our guns, the only ones left with them will be? Who? Law abiding citizens? Wake up.
“Europe has strict gun control, yet their murder rate is higher than NYC.” Europe is not a country; European countries have different gun control laws. NYC is not a country either and is mainly governed by the laws of NY state and the US.
Comparing murder rates is also useless. But if you look at rates of firearms deaths (or more narrowly firearms homicide rates), you’ll find that most western European countries have rates that at WAY lower then Vermont’s and I assume, a fortiori, NYC’s.
Since many gun control laws are intended to help prevent suicides and accidental shootings as well, so the broader measure of total firearms deaths is the most relevant.
Vote them out. Fight it in court under article 16 and 2a.
Making it a crime to possess a piece of plastic is insanity. Especially without any intent or knowledge attached to it. We do not criminalize people for commonly owned products that produce no harm unless they are used unlawfully.
Putting someone in jail for a year because they have possession of a gun magazine or pistol magazine is ludicrous. Labeling people as criminals for this “non behavior” is insanity. Especially since it appears the legislature makes any possession a strict liability… so grandma driving in a car with a mag in the trunk, no gun whatsoever- too bad, one year in jail. You’re a criminal, grandma. No intent or knowledge required to arrest you and charge you with a crime. Think about that for one second.
Is that what we are about in Vermont now… turning everyone into criminals?