David Codrea at Guns Magazine has this exclusive article on how the anti-rights politicians are attempting to do away with state preemption in Vermont:
Back before a handful of other states adopted “Constitutional Carry”
laws providing for permitless carrying of concealed firearms, the
practice was called “Vermont Carry,” as the Green Mountain State stood
alone throughout the 20th Century in not prohibiting it. Long known for
lenient gun laws and low numbers of homicides, Vermont represented the
perfect real-world test of economist John Lott’s “More Guns Less Crime”
thesis.
Which made it a threat to the gun-grabbers…
Vermont had also enacted firearms preemption legislation, meaning
laws were set by the state, prohibiting municipalities from establishing
a “patchwork quilt” of conflicting ordinances that would make it
practically impossible to “lawfully” possess a gun and comply with
edicts across all jurisdictions. And so far, despite Vermont being a
notoriously “progressive” state politically (“Independent” Senator
Bernie Sanders openly identifies as a socialist), the 2-edged sword
preemption can present has been blocked in the legislature: Several
attempts at enacting “gun control” edicts in 2013 did not make it out of
committee, and Governor Peter Shumlin even signed the Sportsmen’s Act,
ensuring those bow hunting or dog training could also carry a handgun
for self-protection provided they did not use it to harvest game.
Thwarted at the state level, anti-gun forces turned their focus on
eviscerating state preemption, and the City of Burlington provided the
perfect political environment. Overwhelmingly dominated by the left (the
Council is comprised of two Independents, four Progressives, seven
Democrats and one Republican, and the mayor is a Democrat), the
Council’s Charter Change Committee, per the Vermont Journalism Trust’s
VT Digger news website, proposed ordinances to “ban assault weapons,
restrict those with domestic violence convictions from obtaining a
firearm, require a permitting process for concealed weapons, ban
firearms from establishments that serve alcohol, and require that
firearms be kept ‘under lock and key,’ separate from another locked
location where ammunition is kept.”
More Here at Guns Magazine
What is WRONG with these Yahoos, Apparently they can't READ, Heller & McDonald... Requiring a Weapon to be Locked Away, and unLoaded is Unconstitutional, In your Residence, Period, as judged by SCOTUS in Heller, and Heller applies EVERYWHERE in US Territory, via McDonald. This type of Statute is Unconstitutional ON ITS FACE, and would not pass the first Federal Court Challenge. Thes Yahoos are just Illiterate or completely STUPID....
ReplyDelete