Gun Hearing 5

Opponents of newly proposed firearm waiting period legislation wave miniature American flags after fiery testimony at the State House on Tuesday evening.

MONTPELIER — The gun debate raged on at the State House Tuesday.

One side said proposed legislation for a 24-hour waiting period for handgun sales would help reduce suicides in the state while the other said it won’t accomplish anything except for infringing on people’s rights.

The Vermont House Judiciary Committee held a public hearing at the State House on S.169, a bill that’s been passed out of the Senate that would impose the waiting period if passed into law. There were more opponents of the bill than supporters in attendance judging by those who wore hunter orange shirts as a symbol of their support of the Second Amendment.

Many of those who supported the bill wanted the committee to extend the waiting period to 72 hours. A House bill had been introduced to do just that and the Senate’s version originally called for a 48-hour waiting period. It also called for the waiting period to apply to all gun sales, but the Senate Judiciary Committee decided to limit the waiting period to handguns only. Supporters said they wanted the waiting period to again cover all gun sales.

Rob Black is the father of Andrew Black, 23, of Essex, who shot and killed himself in December after buying a handgun from a licensed seller a few hours prior. Rob Black and his wife Alyssa made national headlines after they talked about their son’s death in his obituary and asked for a waiting period on gun purchases.

“I can’t tell you how many, but I can tell you this law will save lives,” Rob Black said.

Opponent Ed Wilson said the Legislature is made up of people “who just don’t like guns.” Wilson said those at the State House want to do anything possible to make it more difficult to own, buy and use guns.

He said legislators are willing to break their oaths to protect the Vermont Constitution in order to so.

“Tonight there will be people here who profess to be hunters and gun owners who will tell us they see nothing wrong with this law on their ability to shoot a deer. I’d like to remind them the Second Amendment was about shooting tyrants, not deer,” he said.

Supporter Thomas Ely is the bishop of the Episcopal Church in Vermont. Ely said he’s also a member of Bishops United Against Gun Violence, a network of over 80 Episcopal bishops working to stop gun violence in the United States.

“I know that not everyone who purchases a gun intends to do violence to themselves, or others, but sadly some do. Strengthening the provisions of S.169 to include a 72-hour waiting period on all gun purchases might slightly inconvenience some and yet could well save the life of someone you or I know and love. Once a gun, any kind of gun, has been used to end one’s life, inflict injury or take the life of another, there is no waiting time left to offer — only regret and mourning time,” he said.

Opponent Bob Readie quoted former Gov. John Weeks in his inaugural address: “Our God-given rights, as enshrined in the U.S. and Vermont Constitution, are not open for negotiation. They cannot be legislated away nor can they be regulated away.”

He said any person, organization or government attempt to do so will be met with the strongest resistance.

“Suicide is a horrible thing. My rights are my rights,” Readie said.


You must be logged in to react.
Click any reaction to login.

(4) comments


Vermont, July 8, 1777
Chapter 1. Section XVIII. That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of the themselves and the State.


There is no such thing as "gun violence". This is a focus-group-driven buzzword and talking point to create an imaginary bogeyman as the main anti 2nd Amendment propaganda tool. There are PEOPLE who commit violence with guns, but there are many more people who commit violence without them.
And, since the term "gun violence" is a catchword/cliche, the title suggests an unattainable goal. People have been robbing and killing other people, using the weapons of the day, since the beginning of man on this planet, which identifies the real issue - controlling criminal impulses in humans, not the otherwise legal instruments they use to commit crimes.
Anyone who doesn't realize and/or acknowledge this isn't thinking, s/he is 'feeling', and our liberty cannot depend upon what anybody 'feels'.


*"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."*

_*A well regulated Militia*_
Richard Henry Lee: “A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves…and include all men capable of bearing arms.” (Additional letters from the Federal Farmer, at 169, 1788)

James Madison: “A WELL REGULATED militia, composed of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country.” (1st Annals of Congress, at 434, June 8th 1789

"The militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves, ... all men capable of bearing arms;" - Richard Henry Lee 1788

A Regulated Militia was anyone 18-40 that was capable with firearms.
Im Well Armed, Well Versed in Firearms, and I am one of the People (US Citizen)...therefore I am part of a Well Regulated Militia.

*_being necessary to the security of a free State*_
It says exactly what it was intended for, not for the defense of your home but the security of freedom within the "state" meaning Country. This encompasses the entire Country, not just a home or individual....

_*the right of the people to keep and bear Arms*_
The Right of the People, meaning every man, woman, and child has an Individual Right. Meaning that even if the majority of people demand to have their Rights taken by the Government I still have my Right, I never forfeited or gave consent for them to be taken and no one speaks for me. Even if Government wrote laws to diminish the Constitution those Rights are still mine as the Government does not have a higher claim of Authority over me than I do. Keep and Bear means on person or in hand, any and all arms* that exist. Arms meaning any weapon used for offense or defense.

_*shall not be infringed.*_
I shouldn't have to break this down but meaning zero restriction. No regulations, no restrictions, no taxes, that all bearable firearms/accessories/parts/ammunitions/destructive devices and all other weapons are to be free to own by the citizenry. No Government or Union/Group shall interfere on this Amendment in any form or manner, for the citizens will carry arms to keep the security of the free state, against all threats foreign or domestic.

Nunn v. State, 1 Ga. (1 Kel.) 243 (1846) is a Georgia Supreme Court ruling that a state law ban on handguns was an unconstitutional violation of the Second Amendment. This was the first gun control measure to be overturned on Second Amendment grounds.[1]
"Nor is the right involved in this discussion less comprehensive or valuable: "The right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed." The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is, that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right, originally belonging to our forefathers, trampled under foot by Charles I. and his two wicked sons and successors, reestablished by the revolution of 1688, conveyed to this land of liberty by the colonists, and finally incorporated conspicuously in our own Magna Charta!"


Gun Laws help no one but Government and Criminal, leaving good people defenseless. Criminals dont care about law and Government thinks they are above law, law only applies to the people that follow and obey it.

In the USA where 400 MILLION Firearms are in the Hands of 100 Million Gun Owners (1/3 of the US Population) you would think that there would be more than 12,650 of Death by firearms per year, especially when most household and daily use objects kill many more times the amount of people per year. Most of that 12,650 Deaths are from Gang on Gang Violence, Police Kills, and Accidental Deaths, less than a 3rd of those deaths are from Legal gun owners using them against others and there isn't a single Law that could be imagined that would actually change it for the better but the legislation proposed and implemented creates defenseless victims adding to those numbers as criminals prey on those that cannot defend themselves. 100,000,000 of 400,000,000 Armed and less than a 3rd of 12,650 deaths attributed to those that obey the law - that percentage is insane when the media constantly floats "Gun Violence" (nonsensical term) so often. Hammers, Fists, Knives, Chainsaws, Toothpicks, Cosmetics (Make-Up), Food, Cars, Alcohol, Smoking all kill many more people per year than all firearms combined and Doctors are the 3rd leading cause of Death in the USA (250K) but you don't see any of the movements the firearms industry sees to ban them or regulate/restrict them.

What is also crazy is that people think police should have firearms and not gun owners, they fear gun owners but studies have shown that firearm permit holders are 30% more law-abiding than the police. Guns save 250K-3 Million people per year in defensive use against violent crimes (Rape, Muggings, Robbery), many times not even firing a shot.

Is there any other object that SAVES so many people per year? That takes such a small percentage of lives? That is as demonized as firearms? Now on to Mass Killings, these people are MURDERERS...and murder is against the law, yet they are still doing it, they use all types of methods to commit these atrocious behaviors but when its not firearms its usually not reported by the media.

There have been 38 Mass Killings with Knives alone since 2006 and the average death count is much higher than the average death count of firearm-related Mass Killings. There are many more with Bombs (Already regulated heavily and Illegal to own without permits), cars, baseball bats, and other objects but when have you seen a report within the USA about these Mass Killings? There is a agenda and a narrative, whether you believe so or not, there is no other reason for the selective reporting of information. They paint a terrible picture on the media that certain guns are worse than others, some are "military assault weapons" (false made up term). They say the AR15 is one of them but the AR15 is not military and nor does it have select fire. Its a tactical looking hunting rifle and have been used in just a handful of Mass Killings, most are committed by handguns and rifles that shoot no more than 5 rounds before reloading. The firearm isnt important, the persons intent, mental stability, and nature is, especially when every Mass Killing has a trend that can easily been seen if you look. All Mass Murderers have been medicated with Psychotropic medications, have mental instability issues. They go to areas with little resistance (Gun Free Zones) that are largely populated, why restricting the access of more people to firearms will only lead to more defenseless victims.

Magazine Limits only effect those that obey the law, meaning criminals (murder/assault is already illegal btw) will ignore them and use them anyway no matter what laws are implemented. Magazine restrictions only reduce the chances of a law abiding citizen surviving a deadly scenario as each bullet is a chance at defeating a criminal or murder and limiting those chances is asinine. A person who isnt breaking the law should be able to have what ever they like to defend themselves, no matter how crazy it sounds to anyone else - it is their Right outlined by the Constitution. Are people really that inept where they think people that commit mass murder care what a politician decides to say or sign in to law? Do you think criminals look up what laws they need to follow up until they decide to commit a crime? What is wrong with public servants today - you are supposed to be helping and working FOR the people...not against them. There isnt a piece of legislation that will stop evil people from doing evil things and that is why we need to be armed and ready as that is the only way to ensure safety whether you agree or not. I hear alot of crazy quotes from officials like "why do you need more than 10 rounds?", have they not wondered how accurate people are under stress or fear during a attack? They will miss atleast a handful of shots and the shots the hit the attacker may not even effect them - 10 rounds may be enough for one attacker but what if there are 2? 3? What if they are on PCP/Drunk or on other drugs? You are just creating scenarios where a person is limited in surviving and their life may be saved if they could carry the standard 17 round magazine or more if they would like. You are doing more damage than good with gun laws, an average of 250,000 to 3 million people are saved every year by using their firearms for defense, many times not even firing a shot.

What happened to America? Why is it that it's perfectly acceptable to punish good people for the deeds of bad people whenever firearms are involved but not elsewhere? Could you imagine the outrage if you told folks they could no longer purchase pain medication because SOME people abuse them and die from overdoses. Oh and the hordes of people would lament and demand their meds and they would be told "surely you can do without those drugs because even if it saves just one life, it's worth it". Oh the people would be outraged and it's not even a Constitutional RIGHT to take prescription drugs.
I mean, that's just one random example but you get the point. Why are good, law abiding citizens of the United States of America having their God given rights stripped away based on the actions of a handful of evil people? It makes no sense whatsoever, yet they call it "common sense" go figure.

“The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and the name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void and ineffective for any purpose since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it; an unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed … An unconstitutional law is void.” (16 Am. Jur. 2d, Sec. 178)

" We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, that to secure these rights governments are instituted among men. We...solemnly publish and declare, that these colonies are and of a right ought to be free and independent states...and for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine providence, we mutually pledge our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honour. "

" Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends [life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness] it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government. " - Thomas Jefferson

Government cannot give you anything unless it has taken it from you beforehand. Government isnt a good thing and it boggles my mind why anyone would want more of it, every problem we have today is BECAUSE OF GOVERNMENT. We have jumped away from the Constitution and how the Government was supposed to function and turned it into a nanny state/police state and everyone is miserable because of it.

The Constitution only OUTLINES our Rights, it does not give them and those Rights predate even if Government "outlaws" or "bans", or writes legislation up against the Second Amendment it is "Null and Void" and it is our Duty as Citizens to ignore Unjust Laws. The shooting should have started in 1913 Fed Reserve Act and again 1934 NFA...Its way over due and the Tree of Liberty needs to be watered.

You are only responsible for yourself and your family, taking care of others outside of this group should only be voluntary. Government should not extort the population of their own hard earned monies to give to others, it should be a voluntary system. Government should be reduced drastically and people should govern their own actions like you do during your daily one needs Government telling them whats okay, whats not, what they can or can not have or what they can or can not do....that's what being an Adult is. I do not need a "ruler" and no one holds a higher authority over my own life than I do.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.