Two years ago, Ann Braden wouldn’t have predicted that a major candidate for governor of Vermont would run a television advertisement calling for gun control.

“But it often takes time for the state capital to catch up to public opinion,” says Braden, who founded Gun Sense Vermont after the December 2012 school shooting in Newtown, Conn.

Now, with less than three weeks remaining before Vermont’s gubernatorial primary, one candidate is staking her candidacy on the controversial issue. In a television advertisement released Wednesday, Democrat Sue Minter ties firearms to domestic violence and pledges to take on “the gun lobby.”

“We need to keep guns away from domestic abusers and require background checks on all gun sales,” she says. 

https://youtube.com/watch?v=vyECf1BmgoU

It may not be the riskiest strategy in a Democratic primary. The Castleton Polling Institute found last February that 97 percent of Democrats support universal background checks. Even independents and Republicans overwhelmingly support the concept, the poll concluded.

But gun rights supporters are a highly motivated crowd — and Minter’s ad could galvanize them against her in a general election, should she prevail. Both Republican gubernatorial candidates, Lt. Gov. Phil Scott and retired Wall Street banker Bruce Lisman, say they oppose new state gun laws.

Evan Hughes, vice president of the Vermont Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs, says his organization “expects that this type of ad will motivate its membership.” He says the group has no current plans to endorse a candidate — but that could change.

“She’s in a tight primary and she’s looking for some way to get further out on the left than her two opponents,” Hughes says. “It’s the federation’s position this will hurt her.”

Minter’s Democratic rivals, meanwhile, take issue with her suggestion that she’s out in front on gun control.

“I’m the candidate for governor who’s willing to talk about it,” she says in the ad. “I won’t back down from this fight. You can count on it.”

According to Peter Galbraith, a former ambassador and state senator who is also seeking the nomination, “Saying you’re a leader on an issue doesn’t necessarily make you one.”

While acknowledging that Minter first called for universal background checks last December, he notes that he only joined the race in March. He argues that he was the first to call for an assault weapons ban — and that he’s the only one who plans to actively lobby for one. Both Minter and a third candidate, former senator Matt Dunne, say they would sign such a ban but wouldn’t make it their first priority.

“That is an agenda I will push for when I am governor,” Galbraith says. “I won’t just sign it if the legislature sends it to me. It’s something I’ll push for.”

Dunne spokeswoman Jessica Bassett says Minter’s campaign is trying to “muddy the truth” and accuses her of skipping a debate last month in the Northeast Kingdom rather than defend her position where it’s least popular. 

“The reality is that Matt Dunne has talked loudly and frequently about his support for universal background checks,” Bassett says. “Any claim to the contrary is nothing more than a political strategy to mislead voters.”

Actually, Dunne’s position has shifted several times during the campaign. Last December, he told Seven Days that he did not favor universal background checks. A few days later, he said he was “open to a discussion” about any approach to reducing gun violence. In April, he embraced universal background checks. Asked repeatedly in June whether he supported an assault weapons ban, Dunne’s campaign at first refused to say. He later said he did.

Minter stands by the notion that she’s led the way.

“I know that I’m the candidate that’s been talking about it from early on and continues to raise it and continues to talk about domestic violence,” she says. “I have not heard them raise that.”

And Minter says she’s not worried about alienating general election voters in her quest to win the primary.

“Every issue has its challenges, and I will not back down,” she says. “I will also say I think the conversation is shifting — across this country and here. I hear many people thanking me for standing up for this issue.”

Braden, who has not publicly endorsed a candidate, agrees. She notes that in recent weeks, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) took part in a filibuster to support gun control legislation, while Congressman Peter Welch (D-Vt.) joined in a sit-in on the House floor to support similar measures. All three once opposed new federal gun laws.

“We’re seeing lawmakers really quickly catching up on this issue, and I think Sue is really one of the driving forces in that effort,” Braden says. “It’s like a snowball rolling down the slope, gaining momentum.”

Related Stories

Got something to say?

Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!

Paul Heintz was part of the Seven Days news team from 2012 to 2020. He served as political editor and wrote the "Fair Game" political column before becoming a staff writer.

12 replies on “With Focus on Guns, Minter Seeks to Separate Herself From the Pack”

  1. Wow, I thought she was the smartest candidate in the Democratic primary until I saw this.

  2. A typical case of a solution looking for a problem.
    VT is not NYC or New Orleans or some large area, we have been proud of our hunting heritage.

  3. The true figures that every voter can easily research for themselves, state that she lies to promote a political agenda to further herself. Is there any wonder why the American and Vermont Public can’t stand what politicians have become. Same ole’, Same ole’ ,,, make it hard on honest, average, hard working citizens for a politician to move themselves ahead.
    Please research the facts for yourself to open the eyes of Vermont to these lies. Vermont is almost always the safest Gun state in the Country and has the least gun control.
    Ask Lady Minter why if her and Ann Braden’s theory’s on Gun control are correct, there were more gun deaths in Chicago than days in the month. Let’s make Vermont… Chicago Miss Montp !

  4. Vermont has a major problem with domestic violence and suicides, and gun control will help. Vermont also exports a lot of weapons that are used in crime elsewhere, and it’s time for us to take responsibility for our “gun pollution”, the same way we complain about coal plant pollution drifting in from the Midwest.

    Otherwise, hunting is a dying tradition, and I say, let it go. Better for the animals, better for the environment, better for our young people not to learn that violence is acceptable. Go Sue Minter!

  5. Yup another out of stater from Pennsylvania, with a master’s degree in urban planning from Massachusetts , another democrat who does urban planning who thinks they know everything,who wants to do gun control for everyone..She served on President Barack Obama’s Task Force on Climate Preparedness and Resilience, co-chaired the White House Task Force Subcommittee on Disaster Recovery and Resilience..that there should tell you something, she worked for obumass.. Vt is a hunting state has been from the very beginning..We are not, NYC, Ferguson,MO, Baltimore, Maryland or Chicago, Illinois who has the Strictest Gun Laws in the United States and has the highest gun crimes and killings.. We are Vermont..We need to elect a Republican, a true Vermonter who was born and raised here, who understands all about guns..Guns don’t go around shooting people on it’s own, it’s the person behind the trigger..But liberals don’t understand that..Let them do gun control, then it will be no one will have guns..

  7. Outside of a few pockets, Vermont is a very rural and very republican state. I doubt any measure of gun control is going to change that.

  8. GreenMan from your post you think controlling guns will control domestic violence? You need to figure out what causes it and how it happens. I grew up in the Kingdom and there was a high incidence of domestic violence and abuse there. Hardly any involved guns so if you want to pass laws that you think will control guns and reduce domestic violence and then think you have accomplished something, then go for it but it will do nothing to reduce the incidence of domestic abuse. You will feel better but domestic violence will not be reduced

  9. Three contenders for the Vermont governors seat arguing as to which one is more anti gun. Cute.

  10. Another out of stater trying to push out of state values on Vermont. How much of that out of state anti-gun money did you take Sue?

  11. Well dudes, get your buddies to run for office. Do the big demographic mix up. My ancestors didn’t hunt with or own AK’S by the way.

  12. SevenDays seems fixated on only discussing their “chosen ones” when it comes to the Democratic Gubernatorial Primary race. Of course, Paul Heintz is well aware that I am in the Democratic race, however including a pro Second Amendment candidate in his story would dilute his narrative of all the Democratic candidates vying for the titles of “first to raise the issue”,” or “strongest opponent of gun rights.”

    Nobody has ever claimed that that SevenDays is not biased or that they are bi-patrician and this editorial sleight of hand does nothing to alter that impression.

    Even though Paul didn’t bother to ask – I believe that our current gun laws are sufficient to protect our citizens and our communities. Sue Minter argues that guns facilitate and possibly are the proximate cause of domestic violence that escalates to murder. However the truth is that, in 2014 (the most recent year for which statistics are available) guns are involved in only 40% of the fatal incidents (with 20% caused by hand tools, 30% from blunt force trauma and 10% from intentional poisoning).

    Further, the statistics fail to identify if the gun use was used as an offensive weapon or was used by the victim to defend themselves. In Minter’s narrative, the listener envisions male aggressors victimizing their female partners, however the vtnetwork report tells a far different story.

    The details can be found at: http://www.vtnetwork.org/…/2015-DV-Fatal…

    Bottom-line, putting additional gun laws “on the books” won’t improve the situation when the existing laws are not being enforced AND further restriction will only be observed and followed by the law-abiding – the criminals could care less about the laws and taking guns away from honest citizens only makes them unable to defend themselves when the perpetrator arrives at their doorstep!

Comments are closed.