Letters to legislators: Include federal firearm license dealers in essential businesses list

Editor’s note: This is part of TNR’s Letters to Legislators Series.

Dear Governor Scott,

On behalf of the citizens of the great State of Vermont, we are asking you to please include Federal Firearm License dealers in the list of businesses considered essential during the Covid-19 crisis as other States have done.

As I’m sure you are aware, many residents have chosen to purchase a firearm for protection during this time of uncertainty and Article 16 of the Vermont Constitution guarantees them that right.

Many of these transfers have been put on hold due to the NICS system being overwhelmed by the volume of background checks in recent weeks. Closing FFLs essentially strips these people of their natural right to protect their family under Article 16 and the Second Amendment.

Additionally, Vermont’s restrictive law prohibiting the transfer of standard capacity magazines has made it difficult for FFLs to maintain inventory as suppliers must now ship firearms with Vermont compliant magazines which are harder to get.

We ask that for the duration of this crisis, the governor suspend the ban on standard capacity magazines as well as the ban on private transfers of firearms so that Vermonters might be able to obtain the means to protect their families as guaranteed by our constitutions.

Thank you for your consideration.

In Liberty,
Eric Davis
President, Gun Owners of Vermont

Image courtesy of Public domain
Spread the love

16 thoughts on “Letters to legislators: Include federal firearm license dealers in essential businesses list

  1. Come on folks, how in Heaven’s name can you justify including firearms’ dealers on the list of essential businesses????? Are you kidding me???? These are the same people who believe 20 and 30 round magazines for assault type guns are critical for hunting. CRAZY!!!!

    • Our state and federal constitutions have nothing to do with hunting. In fact, Fish and Wildlife Dept. laws specify certain amounts of rounds for hunting (IE. water foul 3 rounds) and others.
      If you truly believe that Article sixteen and the Second Amendment are about hunting it’s time for you to do some research. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness has nothing to do with hunting. You will find the 2nd amendment in the Bill of Rights in our federal constitution. It is second in the list of 10 rights that protect us from the government. Protecting your family when the police can not show up is essential. You can do that any way you wish, but it is not your call to tell the rest of us what to do or how to do it. Hopefully, none of us will ever have to resort to using our firearms and no one can predict the future.

    • How? Consider the following.

      The right to defend one’s self is not only constitutionally guaranteed, it’s as much a common-sensical action as staying out of the rain to avoid getting wet.

      Calling 911 when someone breaks into your house to rob you, or worse, won’t help you in real time. Public law enforcement can’t react that quickly. A “reciprocal deterrent”, on the other hand, is not only reasonable, not only lawful, it’s ‘essential’.

    • Post Script:

      Thank you, Mike, for your question and the opportunity to answer it. Hopefully, now, you and others with similar questions, understand the rationale behind, and importance of, the 2nd Amendment of our Constitution.

  2. Eric, your letter is spot on. I continue to push our legislators to uphold our constitutionally guaranteed gun rights. As we all know there is little interest on the part of the majority to care one iota about any right associated with legitimate firearm ownership.

    In numerous of memos over the past two years, I have received three actual acknowledgements and comments that a letter was even read. Their answers are nebulous at best. No real position is expressed on their part. One recent memo was addressed to 67 recipients. I enacted the “notify when opened” switch on my email. Only 10 people even opened the memo, one was three weeks after it was sent. Legislators could care less what constituent opinions are…. their minds were made up months, weeks, etc. before there is any public discussion when it comes to firearms.

    • Don’t anyone ever mistakenly assume that the commenter “Mike” is a conservative believer in Constitutional rights. We have a socialist troll in our midst.

      • Keep in mind, the Constitution protects everyone’s right to express an opinion, whether or not you agree with it. And as one who has been characterized as a ‘troll’ on that other VT digital media outlet, I can only hope TNR readers are above the practice of ad hominem attack. If you disagree with someone, explain why. Then, at least, you have the opportunity to change an opinion.

        • If this was merely an issue of ad hominem attacking, then the point would be valid. However, when one makes simple statements without supporting arguments, and said statements are of a nature both contrary to the Constitutions and an outrage in their foundations, the assertion of ad hominems is quite weak. Moreover, given the propensity of the posting individual to make such simple & baseless comments means that he has no desire to listen to rational opposition, and should be identified for what it, in fact, truly is. You will note that at no time have I ever said anything about censoring. Even socialists should have a free voice. But they should also give reasons for their assertions.

          • Describing someone as ‘a socialist troll’ isn’t a suitable reason for disagreeing with them. This “Mike’ fellow is asking a question:

            “…how in Heaven’s name can you justify including firearms’ dealers on the list of essential businesses?”

            My answer is that the right to defend one’s self is not only constitutionally guaranteed, it’s as much a common-sensical action as staying out of the rain to avoid getting wet.

            Calling 911 when someone breaks into your house to rob you, or worse, won’t help you in real time. Public law enforcement can’t react that quickly. A “reciprocal deterrent”, on the other hand, is not only reasonable, not only lawful, it’s ‘essential’.

  3. I received this e mail from the Firearms Policy Coalition and with the govonors lite martial law declaired,perhaps there is a Vermonter that would like to accept their offer or talk to them.

    Dear Vermont Citizen
    We’re reaching out to you this afternoon because we are looking for patriots to assist us with potential legal action against anti-gun Government action in your area.
    Specifically, we are looking for potential plaintiffs in upcoming litigation who would like to be a part of suing the Government for infringing on your fundamental rights.
    In order to qualify as a potential plaintiff, you must:
    Be a resident of Vermont
    Be over 21 years of age
    Have no major criminal history
    Not a prohibited person
    Preferably a non-gun owner looking to acquire a firearm
    Have been denied due to Coronavirus-related infringements on liberty
    If you are over 21, a resident of Vermont, have no criminal history and do NOT currently own a firearm – but want one – you are an ideal prospective plaintiff in our litigation.
    Should you wish to participate in our upcoming legal action, please respond IMMEDIATELY via email or contact our Legal Team at FPCHotline.org.
    Stay Free,
    The FPC Legal Team

    With the Legislatures infringement of the Bill of Rights and violation of Vermonts Constitution along with the governors signature of those violations,it is beyond time to bring even more pressure to bear by means of many court actions,to end these lawless actions perpetrated on Vermont citizens.

  4. Ain’t letting any of them take my rights and freedoms. Being of the military, I protected their same rights while putting my life on the line.

  5. If the governor does not suspend the ban on standard capacity magazines and private transfers, then the ‘Stay Home, Stay Safe’ mantra should be changed to merely ‘Stay Home’.

    What happens, governor, when the county sheriffs start losing deputies due to illness? Same with the State Police. Use a little forward thinking and give us back some lost freedom.

Comments are closed.