Burlington should encourage other towns and cities around the state to propose their own charter changes related to firearms, the Vermont legislature’s leading gun-control advocate told a city council committee on Monday.
“The more towns you have presenting charter changes on this, the more it will prod the legislature to do something,” said State Rep. Linda Waite-Simpson (D-Essex Junction). She added that it will be more difficult for the legislature to reject a charter change related to gun control if other municipalities join Burlington in advocating such regulations.
The city council’s charter change committee is hearing testimony related to a proposed ordinance that would ban assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition clips in the city. The full council voted 10-3 in favor of further considering a resolution containing those restrictions that was offered in January by City Councilor Norm Blais (D-Ward 6).
He and the other two members of the charter-change committee seemed receptive to Waite-Simpson’s suggestion. Councilor Tom Ayres (D-Ward 7) said it would be vital to “try to have rational and respectful discussions” with residents of the Northeast Kingdom, “where there’s bound to be opposition” to gun control of any sort.
Waite-Simpson (pictured) noted she has received assurance from legislative leaders that the issue will be taken up in local meetings after the current session ends. The hope is that consensus can be reached on some aspects of gun control, she said. Waite-Simpson’s own set of proposed regulations never got to the floor of the Vermont House despite the emotional upwelling that followed a lone gunman’s massacre of 26 first-graders and educators in Newtown, Connecticut, late last year.
Many Vermonters’ resistance to any restrictions on guns remains unyielding, Waite-Simpson said. She cited two examples of the state’s status as an outlier.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
Isn’t it great that the US Constitution is The Supreme Law of the Land in the USA (The Supremacy Clause)? Which enshrines the 2nd Amendment as inalienable. And which marks these traitors as treasonous swine in service to Tyranny… That The Constitution is The Supreme Law of The Land in the USA means that any state or local attempt to breach the rights proscribed in The Constitution is INVALID. If you want to live and not be prosecuted to death for treason, stop serving tyrants. THAT’S your ONLY SOLUTION. This tact of serve tyrants and try to diminish The People’s rights is ONLY A PATH TO UTTER DESTRUCTION. You have been warned.
It is time to have them impeached and removed from office.
The Constitution of Vermont specifically states that representatives:
1. will not propose, or assent to, any bill, vote or resolution, which shall appear to you injurious to the people.
2. nor do nor consent to any act or thing whatever, that shall have a tendency to lessen or abridge their rights and privileges, as declared by the Constitution of this State.
These anti-gun bills were PROPOSED to take action on a certain subset of the citizenry, lawful gun owners, in order to strip them of their rights to own certain weapons, magazines and accessories under the guise of “public safety”.
While they may be able to weasel out of part 1 by saying they don’t “think” it is injurious to turn law abiding citizens into felons with the stroke of a pen, and to confiscate property once deemed “legal”…
Part 2 is clearly violated by lessening AND abridging our rights to Keep and Bear Arms.
It is time to hold them accountable for their actions against the people of this state.
Regarding magazines/clips think of it this way; if 2 home invaders with guns decide to target your home they will have between them a minimum of 16 bullets, perhaps as many as 30 bullets or more if they have “high-capacity†mags which are actually “standard†btw. You will need to be able to match their firepower to defend your home. In many parts of Vermont the nearest cop is at least 20-40 minutes away, especially at night. Recall the family of Dr. William Petit in CT and what was done to them.
Them fools in the Northeast Kingdom is too dumb to be trusted with guns! Fortunately we have smart people, people with hyphenated names from respectable zip codes, who are going to step in and put a stop to two centuries of lawlessness and child endangerment.
Gun advocates use fear-mongering, please do not give in to their politically motivated ignorance. There are effectively zero incidents of any civilian carrying a semi-automatic being saved from another civilian threatening them with a semi-automatic weapon. Open your iron curtain, look out into the world and you will see that gun control is the most effective means of being saved from being shot. Anecdotal stories are meaningless in the face of 30,000 deaths each year from guns. Anyplace that bans automatic weapons has a safer and more civil society. If you want to be an anarchist and hand everyone hand grenades, bombs and AK-47s, go buy an island and feel safe and secure. In a society of 300 million people, banning semi-automatic weapons is the only sane response. Shame on each and every one of you who propagate the myth that guns make anyone safer.
Actually it is the anti gun lobby using fear mongering and lies. I have been in 2 incidents where a firearm protected myself and my children one of which was from someone with a semi automatic firearm. Gun control is the most effective means of BEING SHOT while not being able to defend yourself. If you want to keep pushing you better be prepared for a reversal as our interests are also being pushed forward. Repeal of the 1934 decision to ban fully automatic weapons as those are precisely what the 2nd amendment is about so yes keep pushing and I hope you are prepared for your just desserts. We did buy an island to be free on, it was paid for with the blood of our ancestors. If you do not like the way our island functions then our borders are open. LEAVE.
Everyone — refrain from personal attacks in the comments please. Already had to moderate one comment that went over the line.
Gun Grabbers are AFRAID of guns.
Criminals killed over 12,000 unarmed people with firearms and YOU want to disarm MORE people?
How does disarming law-abiding people make them safer from criminals?
How does your gun-free utopia of Detroit and Chicago rate on gun deaths since guns are illegal there?
Highest gun control = Highest gun deaths
Lowest gun control = Lowest gun deaths
If you don’t like the facts, move somewhere else.
Your First Amendment right of free speech does not give you the right to infringe on my Second Amendment right to protect my family.
Leave us alone.
Oh, and in TODAYS news:
http://www.yumasun.com/article…
Gun owner defended himself against armed criminal… Oh, but you insist this doesn’t happen…
I was not offended by her comment and did not take it personally. I must wonder why you chose to delete my response to her though. I do not believe my comment was at all offensive, a personal attack or in any way a violation of the websites posted policies. Am I overlooking something?
Rep. Waite-Simpson has shown an undesirable attitude towards Vermonters. We are not dummies to be manipulated by the NRA or the Anti-Gun crowd like her. The willingness of the Burlington Council to bypass state law in an effort to indirectly confiscate Private Property and impose illegal restrictions on law abiding citizens does a disservice to all Vermonters. We need sane policies that include facing mental health problems and violence in general. The opposition to Waite-Simpson’s gun control measures is not the NRA it is a grassroots movement in Vermont. We can read and comprehend the issue. We believe in keeping our children safe and we also believe in our Constitution.
If you spent more time learning how to comprehend and read English you might have more productive things to do with your time than play with guns. I did not say no crimes happen with guns, I said they almost never occur with semi-automatic weapons. All of you nihilistic gun lobby shills want everyone to have military style assault rifles such as AK-47s to protect themselves. We will ban these weapons, the faces of the dead children haunt us if they don’t haunt inhuman perversions of nature like you.
Because I’m not letting this turn into a fight between two people.
First, it seems to me that Waite-Simpson is trying to legislate a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist in Vermont.
Second, I don’t know why anybody would think that making a law banning large magazines and certain semi-auto weapons would stop someone who is determined to go on a shooting spree. Literally millions of these weapons and magazines are already out there and can be had by anyone willing to find them and buy them, either legally or illegally.
And last but not least, visiting a gun dealer to become better acquainted with guns is an empty exercise. Holding a gun to learn about shooting is like sitting in a car to learn about driving. If you Representatives of the people would REALLY like to know what you’re talking about, arrange a trip the the gun range with an experienced shooter and learn about guns by actually using them.
Ok, first of all, judging from your two posts, it’s painfully obvious that you have been fed a great deal of mis-information. Virtually every confrontation between criminals and civilians are with semi-automatic handguns. Very few criminals opt for a bulky and hard to conceal rifle or a revolver with it’s limited number of rounds. Oh, and by the way, automatic weapons for civilian use have been very tightly regulated in the US since 1984, so tightly regulated that it amounts to a virtual ban.
Second, your 30,000 deaths number is misleading. You make it sound like those deaths were all murders. They are not. These were the numbers I found in a fast search;
Fatal firearms accidents………………………613 in 2007 according to JustFacts.com
Suicides by firearm…………………………18,735 in 2009 according to the CDC
Murders by firearm………………………….11,493 in 2009 according to CNN
Third, in a city with some of the most stringent gun laws in the country, murder runs rampant. Chicago is proof that tighter guns laws DO NOT equate to safer streets.
Fourth, In 2011, more murders were committed by knives (1,694), hands, fists and feet (728) and blunt weapons such as clubs and hammers (496), than were committed by ‘assault weapons,’ according to FBI data.
Interesting. Didn’t appear to be any form of fight. She claimed a gun could not be used in self defense and I was violent for thinking so. I ignored the name calling. I replied with two instances that I have used a firearm in self defense of myself and family and you deleted it. Censorship… I’ll not be visiting your website again. Thanks for the reply.
K. See ya!
“First, it seems to me that Waite-Simpson is trying to legislate a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist in Vermont.” Rather, it has not happened yet on the scale of what the rest of the nation has seen….yet…but it will. All it takes is one flip-out with a semi-automatic in his/her hands, the kind that Adam Lanza, and your problem will exist here in Vermont in a very big way. All it takes is just one. A kid in Barnet, Vt, pointed a pistol at a school bus the other day. Someday, it will.
that Adam Lanza used…
Guy walks into a school and shoots a bunch of kids…blame guns. Terrorist puts a bomb on the side of a busy street and kills a bunch of people… blame the terrorist?
This ordinance is reactionary at best, and it will fail. There is no doubt that a lawsuit wouldn’t follow, one that the city would lose. Of course we all know BTV finances are great and there is a banner crop on the money tree in City Hall Park.
“Waite-Simpson
said. “You’ll be charged with negligence if you leave your
8-year-old in the bathtub and he drowns,” she noted, “but
you won’t be if you leave your 8-year-old alone in a room with a
loaded gun and something happens.”
That’s a pretty ridiculous statement. Mrs. Simpson is either a moron, or thinks everyone else. If you won’t have a problem if your 8 year old shoots someone, then maybe Mrs Simpson should focus on FIXING THAT ISSUE.
“Councilor Tom Ayres (D-Ward 7) said it would be vital to
“try to have rational and respectful discussions” with
residents of the Northeast Kingdom, “where there’s bound to be
opposition” to gun control of any sort.”
Yes Tom, because clearly those NEK residents can’t possibly be in their right minds. You have to TRY and have a rational discussion with them and see if you can get them to give up their guns. Mr. Ayres, that is one of the most offensive and inflammatory thing I’ve read in a while. Why don’t you just call everyone in the kingdom gun toting toothless hillbillies lacking the mental capacity of the refined genius residing in Burlington. Just resign, or at the least never ever leave Chittenden County