In his first public comments since a mass shooting in Connecticut two weeks ago, Gov. Peter Shumlin said Thursday he’ll support federal legislation being drafted by a presidential task force on gun violence.
“There can’t be a human being in America who has seen the events of what happened in Connecticut and not recognize that we have to do everything in our power to bring some sanity to the availability of weapons of war to people who are unstable and crazy. Period,” Shumlin said in an interview with Seven Days.
But Vermont’s gun-toting governor cautioned that, “State-by-state solutions don’t work,” and said he wouldn’t support efforts in the Vermont legislature to tackle gun violence at the state level.
“If they worked, we would’ve solved the problem already. We know that if one state has strict restrictions, you can go purchase an assault weapon at another state or gun show,” he said. “So I fully support President Obama’s and Joe Biden’s urgency to come up with a 50-state solution that will work.”
Shumlin, who chairs the Democratic Governors Association, declined to say what approach he thought the federal government should take, but said it should be “multi-faceted” and include enhanced services for those with mental illness.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
“I’m a deer hunter, as you know. I’ve never used a semi-automatic weapon in my life”
I don’t believe Shumlin or Baruth actually know what a semi-automatic weapon is. Many deer hunters, duck hunters, rabbit hunters use semi-automatic weapons. What they are proposing to ban (i think…) are fully automatic weapons.
Most handguns are semi-automatic…
I am also disappointed in the Guvs dismissal of armed guards in schools. The fact is CT has very strict gun laws, and a ban on firearms on school grounds. That didn’t prevent the tragedy. While having 2 or 3 cops patrolling the school wouldn’t have stopped it either it would likely have saved several lives. Unfortunately if that is whats necessary to protect children at school then it should at the very least be part of the discussion.
A mandatory gun lock law would probably go along way to limiting access to guns as well and would eliminate the need to ban certain guns altogether.
Regardless, a “semi-auto” ban will go nowhere… it just doesn’t pass constitutional muster. SCOTUS has allowed assault style guns to be banned but a blanket semi-auto ban wont fly. Baruth needs to educate himself a little on this issue before throwing out proposals.
Semi-autos are not the problem, it is restricting access to all guns for crazy people. A good marksman can kill dozens of people with a bolt action before anyone figures out where the shots are coming from. You can build a bomb that can kill a thousand people buy going to the feed store. Any gun laws should apply to all guns, and those gun laws should not apply to people without any mental issues or criminal records. The Swiss government issue fully automatic firearms to civilians for home defense that are higher caliber and more deadly than any weapon we can buy at a gun shop in the US and they have very little gun violence because they have good mental health care. As long as we have people willing to commit these crimes the crimes will occur.
Vermont has the least restrictive gun laws in the nation, a very high rate of gun ownership and the lowest rate of gun deaths and gun crimes both per capita and total. On the other hand Washington DC, California, NY and CT have the toughest most restrictive gun laws in the nation yet they also have the highest gun crime rates both per capita and total. Obviously gun laws cause gun crimes and Vermont certainly does not need either.
“Getting tough things done.”
What a crock . . .
Our hippocrite governor, who repeats the phrase “states should lead the way” ad nauseum when it comes to virtually any policy initiative that’s popular with the left wing of his party, suddenly wimps out on state leadership on gun control because he’s afraid of a repeat of what Bernie shamefully did to Peter Smith in 1990 — bringing out the gun nuts to defeat a candidate at election time.
Shumlin does easy things with a Democrat-dominated legislature and calls them “tough.” But when it’s time to get an ACTUAL tough thing done, like restricting the easy availability of weapons of mass killing, he ducks and runs for cover.