A group of young Vermonters and gun control activists gathered at the Vermont Statehouse Tuesday morning to call on lawmakers to pass several proposed gun-control bills.
The demonstration came in reaction to a school shooting in Florida last week and an incident in Fair Haven in which authorities stopped a would-be school shooter before any violence took place.
“Fix this before my kid is texting me from under a desk,” read a sign held by a demonstrator standing in a light rain on the Statehouse steps.
The demonstration was organized by GunSense Vermont, but the presence of students from the Vermont Commons School brought the message home. The students called on lawmakers to pass new gun laws before more shootings take place.
In a slow, quiet procession, the students wove through the halls of the Statehouse bearing signs that read “protect kids not guns” and “right to own a gun or surviving school.”
Demonstrators said they were hoping to make gun control an unavoidable topic in the Statehouse. Three gun control bills are currently in the Senate Judiciary Committee. One would mandate background checks for all gun sales. Another would allow police to confiscate weapons when they make an arrest for domestic violence. A third bill would create a court process allowing police to confiscate guns from those ruled to be an “extreme risk.”
The universal background check bill has been stuck in the committee since last year and hasn’t moved because three of the panel’s five members oppose it. (A 2015 attempt to mandate background checks was also thwarted by a 3-2 vote in the same committee.) The current bill’s lead sponsor, Sen. Phil Baruth (D/P-Chittenden), said last week that the Senate should be ashamed for doing “jack shit” about gun violence.
Burlington Mayor Miro Weinberger attended the Tuesday morning rally in Montpelier and said student involvement at the event gave him hope that the years-long political deadlock around gun control would come to an end.
“It is very hopeful to be standing with so many of you this morning,” Weinberger said to a crowd in front of the Statehouse, “and particularly to be standing with our kids and children who have been so eloquent on this issue. That, I hope, is what will finally change this terrible dynamic and lead to action.”
Weinberger joined other advocates in calling for statewide, mandatory universal background checks, as he has since the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in December 2012.
“The rest of the world simply does not tolerate this kind of massacre of its children,” Weinberger said. “The United States and the state of Vermont should not either.”
But if lawmakers don’t pass any statewide measures, Weinberger said it’s unacceptable to block local gun control. Burlington voters in 2014 approved a measure banning guns in bars, requiring residents to lock them up when not in use and allowing cops to confiscate them from those accused of domestic violence. The legislature has so far refused to approve the necessary changes to the city’s charter, blocking enactment of the proposed policies.
“If Montpelier can’t or won’t get the job done, at the very least this Statehouse should allow cities and towns that want to move forward on their own to protect our children, our domestic violence victims and our police officers,” the mayor said. “We should be allowed to take responsibility and do that as our own communities.”
Weinberger says a statewide policy would make more sense, but he’s already hedging his bets.
“I have begun conversations about whether we could bring [the charter changes] back this year,” he said in an interview with Seven Days Monday. “I do plan to spend some time on this.”
John Walters contributed reporting.
Related Stories
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
“Regarding the sharks – they can’t read, so a sign would probably not be useful. The signs in the schools, on the other hand, are for human beings, many of whom can read. “
Yet the criminals who commit these acts pay about as much attention to those signs as sharks would in Sydney bay if their netting system was replaced by “shark free zone” signs.”
why insist on doing the same thing over and over while expecting a different result? Clearly no amount of new laws save for a complete banning and repossesion of ALL guns would work. Heck even if we could get rid of every gun in this country it would still not solve the problem of schools being a soft target.
Its worth noting that the deadliest school attack in America was carried out with explosives- not guns. If you dont believe me- research the “Bath School Disaster”
Citizen, there are no “god given rights” at all, only those written by the men who wrote the Bill of Rights. Which, you’ll recall, wasn’t part of the Constitution in the first place.
And, while we’re copying and pasting random quotes to prove whatever point we’re trying to make, here’s one from our old friend John Adams: “To suppose arms in the hands of citizens, to be used at individual discretion, except in private self-defense, or by partial orders of towns, countries or districts of a state, is to demolish every constitution, and lay the laws prostrate, so that liberty can be enjoyed by no man; it is a dissolution of the government. The fundamental law of the militia is, that it be created, directed and commanded by the laws, and ever for the support of the laws.”
Regarding the sharks – they can’t read, so a sign would probably not be useful. The signs in the schools, on the other hand, are for human beings, many of whom can read. Just like the other laws in our country, these guidelines are written out and then people are expected to follow them or pay the consequences. Unlike other laws, like those against jay-walking or poaching, one person breaking the law can cause a lot of dead children.
Finally, abortion doesn’t really have anything to do with murdering children – it’s the removal of a number of non-sentient, unfeeling cells. Like the ones that lead one to believe that there shouldn’t be stricter gun control measures, apparently.
“Furthermore, what does it matter if they’re from out of state? “
they are attempting to change our states laws. I have to live here long after they are done with their elitist education. If you dont care about the laws in this state then what are you doing commenting here?
as for the sharks- You really think hanging “gun free zone” constitutes “how a civilized society deals with relative dangers.?
Seriously?
Sydney bay recognizes an out of control danger that they have no way of dealing with beyond taking protective measures to ensure that danger does not get anywhere near the general public. They take an ACTIVE approach to safety. You are seeking another PASSIVE approach where you feel passing even more laws will somehow protect our unprotected schools. Murder has been illegal for quite some time yet it continues to take place in areas where security is lacking. Do you seriously think that is a sane approach to dealing with “relative dangers”?
and are you really a doctor?
Your level of reasoning leaves me concerned…
Thommy you state that suicides by guns goes down when guns are restricted but does the suicide rate over all go down or do the mentally ill just find a different pathway (i.e rope or a knife or a car that is driven into on coming traffic) to heaven. Are we suppose to restrict anything that could be used to cause harm? Thommy the point is that your stance on restricting guns does nothing to combat the mental illness that is the core of the problems. I propose as a law abiding gun owner a tax of 1% on all ammunition and 2% on all firearms to go into a fund to be used to treat mental illness. Other than infringing on your fellow citizens god given rights what is your solution to the mental heath issue?
Snow Creek:
Unfortunately private schools do not have to report on the make up of their student body, however, their FAQ does list a number of towns from which students come from. Furthermore, I hope you’re aware that sticker price does not actually equate to actual price when it comes to education. The cost of education is very much akin to car buying now. Furthermore, what does it matter if they’re from out of state? Their opinion somehow matters less? In your mind does someone need to be a seventh generation Vermonter to actually have a valid opinion?
In terms of the mental health bit and gun buying – are you sure? Most evidence associates a decrease in suicides caused by guns when guns are restricted, either temporarily or permanently. Look no further than studies in Quebec, Ontario, British Columbia or Australia. Also, I wasn’t referring to Sydney Bay in terms of sharks being perpetrators of crimes or being cognizant of the English language. I was referring to it in the context of how a civilized society deals with relative dangers. If guns are the major driver of school shootings and there exists data in other countries that suggest that regulating guns would be a negative pressure in terms of the rate of school shootings… then maybe we should regulate guns?
Citizen, please don’t refer to me as “boy”. It’s insulting, it’s rude and it’s inappropriate. Second of all, I am fairly certain that I referred to the Second Amendment as being dubious in terms of grammatical interpretation. There’s no need to interpret my educational background and somehow appeal to it.
There exists three commas, and thus four sections, within the Amendment, or, alternatively one comma. Why is there a debate over whether or not there are one or three commas? One version was passed by Congress and the other ratified by the States. Depending on which version you choose to accept, “a well regulated Militia” is either a separate clause to “right to bear arms” or is a dominant clause to it. Therefore, one can interpret the amendment as allowing for solely an armed national guard, or an armed national guard and an armed populace. Complicating this matter, the definition of “arms” is not terribly struct. It simply does not allow for the application of scrutiny. For example, does it allow for the possession of nuclear arms? Under your strict interpretation of the amendment, it indeed does allow for that.
I am a gun owner and hunter. I am all for full background checks when buying a gun at a gun dealer or at a gun show. I don’t know all of the gun control proposal that these people would like to see become law. Hypothtically, lets say that all the controls being proposed that funding for enforcement is available, became law. We would then be able to have real data that could be analyzed to see what effect the new laws woul have on gun violence. I have my opinion about what the results would be, as others have their opinions. But only solid statistics can answer the question.
Why hasn’t anyone put the blame where it belongs THE SHOOTER !!!! I have even seen on the news where they are feeling sorry for him. That he is misunderstood, poor boy parents are dead, no one likes him, that everyone is blaming him..that the gun is to blame.. You, people, need to understand that guns have no brains, it can not think, it does not walk, it can not make its self-shoot on its own. The one who controls the gun is the SHOOTER. The evil sick person. He was reported to the FBI 8 times at least 8 times, they were told what he was saying and planning,, The FBI did nothing, they FAILED the 17 people who were killed..Even the FBI said they were wrong in not following up on it. Taking away our guns will not stop killing, as it will only be law-abiding citizens who will be without guns, criminals will always have guns. I will not go to a place that has a sign that says “Gun Free Zone” because that’s an invite to criminals..I want to see a sign that Says ” This place is protected by guns”..
lbs- If you can show me a current list of how many students are enrolled from instate at Vermont Commons School and how many are enrolled from out of state/internationally-then perhaps I will admit a mistake if my assumption is incorrect
IF however you are basing your assumption on what their website proclaims then I would suggest you rethink your statement.
The cost of tuition per year to attend Vermont commons school is $25,725…
Thats well out of the range of the median income for the average Vermont household
And when they have a section on their website solely dedicated to “international applications”… it hints that their student body doesnt reflect the ideals of residents of Vermont… As the type of people who can afford such a costly education are far and few in this state. Its just not withing the realms of an average resident of this state
Just sayin
So proud of these kids for having the courage to speak up on this important issue.