Unique-Public-8594 t1_javvg7o wrote
From the article:
> bills recently introduced into the House include:
> H395 (Masland, D-Thetford) increase instate energy sources. Decrease Hydroelectric from Canada.
> H457 (O-Brien, D-Tunbridge), imposes taxes on food depending on how far food travels from place of origin.
> H450 (Howard, D-Rutland), gives supplemental income, health insurance, retirement benefits to legislators.
> H447 (Mrowicki, D-Putney), bans paramilitary group training and open-carry of semi-automatic weapons (with exceptions for police, etc.).
> H445 (Cina, P-Burlington), places a moratorium on developing a new correctional facility.
> H444 (Noyes, D-Wolcott), establishes a trust fund to pay for long-term care.
> H440 (Burditt, R-Rutland Town), requires safety belts on new schoolbuses.
> H435 (Cina & Sheldon, D-Middlebury) overhauls Vermont’s economy to be ecologically friendly.
Details in article.
OhMyAchingBrain t1_jaw3axj wrote
I consider myself Democrat leaning but there is a lot of stupid in that list....
PiermontVillage t1_jaw7k4k wrote
A lot of bills get proposed every session. Very few get enacted. That’s sorta how a democracy works.
OhMyAchingBrain t1_jaw7s5d wrote
Ya. I know. I am just suprised people will put their names on some of that stuff.
VTGrown t1_jazia6v wrote
Democracy works by proposing stupid bills and seeing which ones don't get shot down..?
hulknc t1_jb08jgm wrote
Throw spaghetti at the wall and see which one sticks, back it until it fails or until you’re voted out.
Meow_Meow_4_Life t1_javwvs6 wrote
Is paramilitary training and open carry an issue in Vermont?
trueg50 t1_javzzh1 wrote
Kind of, and no.
There was a guy in Pawlet not following town rules, threatening neighbors, and doing a shooting program. It's an ongoing struggle that has worried police/neighbors/town officials with how he is not following rules. We will see what he does now that the court has issued major fines and ordered him to demolish buildings.
As for open carry, absolutley not a problem, just another case of "seeing something else where and deciding its an issue needing solving here". It also is a nice bonus if it demonized gun owners and makes firearms "that much scarier/hard to own". I hope the open carry measure is stripped out.
lantonas t1_jaw62cs wrote
> As for open carry, absolutley not a problem, just another case of "seeing something else where and deciding its an issue needing solving here". It also is a nice bonus if it demonized gun owners and makes firearms "that much scarier/hard to own". I hope the open carry measure is stripped out.
Hopefully open carry of semi-automatic weapons is enforced against police as well. I hate seeing police open carry their semi-automatic pistols
xxxDog_Fucker_69xxx t1_jawhnyx wrote
No they just want to take your guns. I’m pretty sure these people have never fired a rifle let alone actually been to gun club to educate themselves.
Chess_Not_Checkers t1_javxrp1 wrote
There's a camp in Pawlet that I guess is of concern. I think it's going to be hard to draw the line between some guys target shooting together and some guys training themselves militarily, though.
Americ-anfootball t1_jayk0p2 wrote
No, the “paramilitary training” facility in pawlet that obviously influenced the writing of this bill was already a flagrant zoning violation at the local level in a number of ways. It’s just that zoning enforcement takes a while because due process of law and all that jazz, and Banyai is an uncommonly bad faith actor who is willing to face jail time rather than admit he’s got no case. If the legislature actually cared about this as a real land use issue, they could take a look at the powers delegated to municipalities for zoning enforcement, or the statutorily define process for zoning enforcement cases that wind up in environmental court. In any event, it’s a solution in search of a problem, and the worst kind of performative legislating.
I think it’s pretty obvious that the open carry ban piece, if passed, would never ultimately survive a second amendment challenge, but is also likely in violation of the state constitutional right to bear arms as well. If the piece about “paramilitary training” facilities covers even non-commercial peaceable assembly for the sake of militia training, that seemingly violates the first and second amendments on its face.
Preempting municipal zoning to ban commercial firearms training facilities statewide is probably also not constitutionally survivable, but that’s the piece that seems closest to passing the sniff test out of the litany of problematic clauses in this bill
[deleted] t1_javxtzf wrote
[deleted]
Blueslide60 t1_jaxjjdf wrote
It definitely is a big issue in southwest Vermont. The entire community was scared of the training center/security compound and the guy that ran it. Our Governor said he was unable to do anything legally.
Loudergood t1_jawyqmj wrote
Where are the folks that blame things on Chittenden county now?
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments