Burlington city council votes to solve a problem that doesn’t exist
I used to live in Vermont when I taught ROTC at the University of Vermont in Burlington, but I lived in St. Albans. There was a saying outside of Chittenden county that went; “the nicest thing about Burlington is that it’s so close to Vermont”. At the time, communist Bernie Sanders was mayor and there was a Republican governor and they were always at odds. Folks who live outside of Burlington are generally libertarian and scoff at the flatlanders who moved to Burlington from New York City – like Sanders and Howard Dean.
A local TV station reports that the Burlington City Council has voted to approve an assault weapon ban in the city even though none of the weapons they call assault weapons have been used in crime in the city;
Burlington Police Chief Michael Schirling said most gun crime in the city involves hand guns, not assault weapons.
Burlington Police could not provide statistics on how many crimes involves assault weapons as that information was not readily available.
But the citizens of Burlington know;
“How many semi-automatic rifles have been shot in the city of Burlington with people injured? None,” said Bob Reid. “How many large capacity magazines were used in those rifles? None.”
Well, that doesn’t really matter, because all that’s important to liberals is that they be seen as “doing something” no matter that there’ll be no effect on the particular issue. It’s their intentions that are paramount.
Luckily, for the residents of Burlington, they’ll get a vote on the scary-looking gun ban in their city, but, they should fire their city council in the interim.
January 8th, 2013 at 9:36 am
Now, if the scary-looking guns are all the ones with the black barrels, does that mean the guns with camo paint aren’t scary-looking? And if not, does that make them not assault weapons? Just wanting to be clear on this.
January 8th, 2013 at 9:41 am
I’m waiting for someone to say that calling black guns scary-looking is racist.
January 8th, 2013 at 9:42 am
I will be interested whether this covers semi-auto pistols.
I have my permit for NH so can carry in both states.
Wheel gun when in Burlington now?
Sanders makes my skin crawl when I see him on TV.
He continues to look like a filthy crazed commie.
January 8th, 2013 at 9:46 am
@ #3, he looks like that because that is exactly what he is.
Times are getting interesting…almost as if people want to have a totalitarian government. Nahhh….
January 8th, 2013 at 9:46 am
Look for the state Supreme Court to pecker-smack those fucktards when the law is challenged.
Unfortunately, elections have consequences and we are dealing with teh stoopid on this side of the Conneticut River as well.
My favorite is this state representative from Keene who thinks Concord needs to “restrict freedoms” of conservatives because she’s apparently threatened by a couple of libertarians who are threatening to move to NH but have yet to do so:
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/01/02/New-Hampshire-Legislator-We-Need-to-Restrict-Freedoms-of-Conservatives
Apparently BlueHampshire scrubbed the offending post, but I’m sure I can find someone who has archived it. Now imagine if a GOP state rep or senator down in, say, Texas said they needed to restrict the freedoms of liberals to discourage them from moving to Texas, etc.
Where’s your outrage, libtards? Where’s your shame? Oh, that’s right–you have none when it’s your people doing it.
January 8th, 2013 at 9:49 am
In Western Mass we have the city of Northampton, a well known communist enclave. They are continually passing idiotic, and ultimately meaningless, resolutions about something of social importance to them…a couple of years ago they passed a resolution opposing the GWOT…..it’s pretty entertaining watching these clowns prance about pretending to be serious politicians…
January 8th, 2013 at 9:55 am
VOV–don’t forget Concord MA just started a ban on bottled water. That oughta be a hoot.
January 8th, 2013 at 10:05 am
Sparky, I can’t believe the tub of lard in that photo is a female….I believe that these people flying under the radar is a classic example of the clear bias of the local and national medias. Outrageous, ridiculous, anti-constitutional comments by a liberal remain relatively unreported. As the writer of the article pointed out, could you imagine the dialogue from the left if this were a conservative suggesting that gays be discouraged from moving to the state?
January 8th, 2013 at 10:10 am
Jonn-
Spot on…Liberals just want to be seen as “doing something”!!
January 8th, 2013 at 10:22 am
@8 VOV–it’s worse than that. SHE is also MARRIED (to a man) and has a couple of progeny, apparently.
You ought to see her voting record as well. Now I’m going to preface this by saying that no, I am NOT a NH native, but then again, I didn’t move here like so many flatlanders do to get away from their shitholes and then piss and whine to create the very same policies that will create the shitholes they just left.
IOW, I find it laughable that brain-dead tub o’ goo who originally came from RI should be lecturing ANYONE about the “New Hampshire way of life.”
Effin seriously?
January 8th, 2013 at 10:24 am
Why not, Governator Arnold banned 50 cal rifles although none have ever been used in a crime
January 8th, 2013 at 10:24 am
@8
I don’t think anyone of that girth could fly anywhere, including under the radar. I suspect they’re slithering under the radar.
January 8th, 2013 at 10:25 am
This is democracy in action! The hearing room was packed. All who spoke did so in opposition to the proposed ordinance. Put another way, NO CITIZEN spoke in favor of the ban. Result? It passed, 10-3. Now, who elected these knuckleheads? It’s a microcosm of what’s about to happen nationally. And THE PEOPLES have no one to blame but themselves by either having voted for obama/Moron or by not bothering to vote at all.
January 8th, 2013 at 10:37 am
I guess by your standards Stanley McChrystal is a gun grabbing facist too. You guys just don’t get it.
January 8th, 2013 at 10:45 am
“Joe the Troll” woke up from his nap and is back.
(Joe, when you’re done washing your sheets from peeing in them last night over nighmares you had about scarry guns, go back to the DU and rant over there. I, for one, am not interested in what you have to say over here.)
January 8th, 2013 at 11:10 am
@14
Joe, don’t guess. You’re just not very good at it.
Instead, go back and look at all the recent stories about private armed citizens fighting off gutterslime, especially the one where the woman shot the intruder multiple times with a revolver. She just didn’t have enough rounds to keep him from getting up and driving off. It’s not that she couldn’t hit the guy, she did so multiple times in the face and neck. I’ve no doubt if she had one of those scary high capacity weapons that scumbag would be dead instead of costing tax-payers money.
Unless and until you’re able to address those situations, keep your mouth closed. Your intellectual dishonesty is polluting my oxygen.
January 8th, 2013 at 11:11 am
So USMC, is Stanley McChrystal a gun grabbing fascist or not?
http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/01/08/former-gen-mcchrystal-assault-rifles-are-for-battlefields-not-schools/
January 8th, 2013 at 11:14 am
Joe. I usually leave responses to you to others but I’ll make an exception here. First, the “gun grabbing Fascists” description is yours, not ours. Second, McCrystal is not our representative or spokesman any more than General Marty Dumpster is. Why do you assume otherwise?
January 8th, 2013 at 11:18 am
No, “gun grabbing fascist” is your description, or this site’s description, of anyone who is in favor of any kind of gun control. Look at the “category” of this posting. So is he or isn’t he?
January 8th, 2013 at 11:23 am
(Laundry done already?)
MSNBC, Stanley and you are all entitled to your opinions, and none of them represent my beliefs – so honestly, I’m not interested in any of them.
Go back to bed.
January 8th, 2013 at 11:23 am
Not sure you want to use McCrystal as an example, Joey the Rockclimbing Hero. I don’t know of too many other GO/FO types who’d let a Rolling Stone reporter have free run of their staff, then let them publish an article about the inner-workings of their command. Especially when that article contained comments bashing the POTUS made by members of his staff. NcCrystal’s judgement therefore is, to be charitable, highly suspect.
January 8th, 2013 at 11:25 am
http://thisainthell.us/blog/?p=33475
Here you go Joe.
January 8th, 2013 at 11:28 am
Joe: by the way, firearms of all types are banned on school properties by Federal law (18 USC 922). You knew that, right?
That law did a hell of lot of good in stopping Lanza, didn’t it?
January 8th, 2013 at 11:29 am
Joe. First, I did not use that term so I re-read Jonn’s post to find it. Damned if I can find his calling the Burlington council a bunch of gun grabbing fascists. Second, as for McCrystal, he emphasized that his opinion was HIS opinion, saying, “I personally don’t think there’s a need….” And nowhere did he say what you and others are attributing to him. I think he has earned his right to express a personal opinion. Don’t you?
January 8th, 2013 at 11:32 am
2/17 Air Cav: sure Joey-boy does – just so long as that opinion matches his. Otherwise, he probably considers it wrong-headed hate speech.
January 8th, 2013 at 11:39 am
Used to be a truism (and probably still is) that Russians liked a strong leader who would tell them what to do whether they liked it opr not. Looks like Burlington is headed that direction. Remionds me of what the Colorado folks say about Boulder: “Five square miles surrounded by reality”.
My wife was born and raised in New Hampshire and would love to live there… me, I’d rather have an anesthesia-less vasectomy than to move to the New England area. Been there too many times….lotta real pretty countryside spoiled only by ‘way too many of its inhabitants.
January 8th, 2013 at 11:49 am
If assault weapons had been banned from his mother’s house hold, it probably would have stopped Lanza, or at least greatly mitigated the carnage.
January 8th, 2013 at 11:52 am
And if the Titanic had been an airplane it wouldn’t have struck an iceberg and sank…
January 8th, 2013 at 11:53 am
“Five square miles surrounded by reality”. Hey, what is it the neocons say, we’re an empire, we create our own reality? That’s what Boulder does too, and a hell of a lot better reality than a lot of yours.
January 8th, 2013 at 11:53 am
@27. Sure Joe. Without the Bushmaster, he would have only used the two handguns (no reload would have been, what, 16 rounds each) AND that pump shotgun would not have been left in his car. Wanna try again?
January 8th, 2013 at 11:53 am
Joe – then take me up on my offer, dingus. 2nd Amendment says confiscation ain’t happening here, and the SCOTUS agrees.
January 8th, 2013 at 12:01 pm
Joey, what the fuck is an “assault weapon”? Before you can even attempt to say something intelligent(which would be a first), define what it is.
January 8th, 2013 at 12:06 pm
“Burlington city council votes to solve a problem that doesn’t exist”, like the problem that didn’t exist in Newtown until a few days ago.
January 8th, 2013 at 12:07 pm
For one, a Bushmaster is an asault weapon.
January 8th, 2013 at 12:08 pm
Come on, Joey. What’s the definition of an “assault weapon”? You want to grab all of em, surely you know what they are, right?
January 8th, 2013 at 12:08 pm
Bullshit. You don’t even fucking know what it is you want to ban.
January 8th, 2013 at 12:13 pm
http://granitegrok.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Guide-to-Firearms11.jpg
January 8th, 2013 at 12:32 pm
@34- no, a “Bushmaster” is not an assault weapon, it is the name of a manufacturing company, much like Colt or Winchester. This is why we can’t begin to take you clowns seriously when you demand that we succumb to your idiotic opinions. If you can’t be bothered to even do cursory research on the issues, why the fuck should we trust you to write the laws on them?
January 8th, 2013 at 12:34 pm
Joey-boy: the problem that existed in Newtowne was the crazy guy that CT law didn’t allow to be involuntarily committed even when he desperately needed to be committed for society’s protection.
That problem cleared itself when Lanza finally snapped violently. Unfortunately, that snap also took the lives of several innocents.
Wanna see who’s responsible for the Newtowne killings, Joey-boy? Look in the freaking mirror. You and your ideological brethren are the ones that made it effectively impossible to get dangerous loons in CT involuntarily committed. And you’ve been pulling out all the stops to deflect attention – and blame – for that failure ever since.
http://thisainthell.us/blog/?p=33355
January 8th, 2013 at 12:34 pm
For, Joe.
http://gunfax.com/aw.htm
An AR-15 is not an assault rifle/weapon.
January 8th, 2013 at 12:35 pm
Claymore, I’m sure that Joey has been using that chart for years.
Joey, does your logic(?) then make a Remington an “assault weapon”?
January 8th, 2013 at 12:36 pm
Actually, UpNorth, if Joey sticks with the program, the plan–ostensibly–is to ban assault weapons (those care the ones used when you fire first, I think.) Then the plan is to restrict ammo and mags that hold more than 10 rounds. Then, it’s a matter of adding to the ban list more ammo, more guns, and 10-round mags. Then it’s time and place restrictions such that, ultimately, a derringer is the only legal weapon permitted IF used at a range.
January 8th, 2013 at 12:37 pm
Keep contorting all logic in order to justify your death cult, sane people don’t buy it.
January 8th, 2013 at 12:38 pm
Nice program. My program would be a total rewrite of the 2nd.
January 8th, 2013 at 12:39 pm
@10…married to a dude? I’d never have guessed that in a million years.
I thought she was the dude….I might have a less than stellar record when it comes to a discerning taste around females…but, not that less….good Lord man.
Joe likes to promote protecting the rights of those who have shown themselves to be unable to mingle in society due to a mental illness, while restricting the rights of those who have been shown to pay their taxes and obey the law at every turn.
January 8th, 2013 at 12:40 pm
@27, “Assault weapons”, like the VA Tech shooter? How well did the assault weapon ban work out in Columbine in 1999?
January 8th, 2013 at 12:45 pm
@44, since we are rewriting Amendments maybe we should rewrite the first to exclude you. Don’t like that? I guess it sucks when someone else is trying to take away your rights like you are doing.
January 8th, 2013 at 12:45 pm
Joey: a rewrite of the 2nd Amendment ain’t gonna happen. If anything, it’s more likely the SCOTUS will use an upcoming case to state clearly that the 2nd Amendment’s “right to keep and bear arms” includes concealed carry.
You need to take me up on my offer.
January 8th, 2013 at 12:46 pm
Here’s a definition that the Left would love to adopt and–if they can be honest for once–would admit to wanting to adopt for their assault weapon ban:
An assault weapon is a firearm that is mechanically, chemically, or electronically capable of firing an actual or digital projectile.
January 8th, 2013 at 12:50 pm
Joey–knowing where you live, I gotta belive you hide under your bed wetting your panties for several months out of the year known as deer and elk seasons.
You haven’t the first fucking clue of which you speak, scooter, and what you don’t even realize is that to those who DO know what they’re talking about, it’s very very apparent you’re just throwing around a bunch of bullshit you could never even begin to support.
January 8th, 2013 at 1:01 pm
Still waiting, Joey. Come on, if you’re so intelligent, it shouldn’t be all that hard to come up with a definition of what you want to ban.
January 8th, 2013 at 1:04 pm
@ Joe #17: My AR15 is not an “assault rifle”. Learn your terminology, and the law, then get back to us, you tool-less wonder.
January 8th, 2013 at 1:32 pm
NHS,
Not as bad as you poop your pants when military guys like McChrystal call for GUN CONTROL! BOO! Got scared for a second huh?
January 8th, 2013 at 1:36 pm
Frankly Joe, McChrystal is entitled to his opinion. And again, opinions are like assholes.
So while he can blather on about his OPINION, I’ll keep the LAW. I win.
See how that works, Joey?
January 8th, 2013 at 1:47 pm
@44 I (surprisingly) agree with that a bit. Really, rewriting the 2nd is the only valid way that I see to push gun control. Mind that I’m not on the side of gun control, and don’t sure see any major constitutional changes in the near future, but generally doing things the right way feels a lot more valid than backdooring them.
January 8th, 2013 at 1:56 pm
Reaperman: there are two very good reason you’ll won’t see that tried. The first is the requirement for passage of any such proposed amendment by a 2/3 majority of both Houses of Congress. The second is the requirement for ratification of any such amendment by 3/4 of the states. Neither has the proverbial snowball’s chance, and our “liberal brethren” know that full well.
January 8th, 2013 at 1:56 pm
Of course according to Joe we will have to ban a rifle that holds fifteen 200 grain rounds in a tubular magazine that can fire all of the rounds in under 20 seconds, because it must be an assault weapon with those stats.
Opps, it is a 1860 Henry lever action rifle, over 150 years old.
January 8th, 2013 at 1:58 pm
Hondo that’s why they never have tried the Constitutional way.
January 8th, 2013 at 2:00 pm
77 11C20: correct, amigo.
They’d also have to ban the Winchester 1873.
January 8th, 2013 at 2:13 pm
@55 – The Constitution was written with the purpose that we adapt to it, not to the premise that it adapts to us. Think about it.
January 8th, 2013 at 2:16 pm
No doubt the fine folks at the Al Gorezeera network will be happily covering this topic in the weeks ahead…
January 8th, 2013 at 2:17 pm
Outlaw matches and lighters … fire destroys buildings!
On another note:
Jo Jo … you are a quite the spokesman!
January 8th, 2013 at 3:02 pm
@56 oh I know that it won’t fly. It sure beats all of these unconstitutional ideas I hear floating around. All they will do is make some lawyers rich, waste lawmaker/court time, and maybe give politicians some fresh material for slinging at campaigns.
January 8th, 2013 at 3:31 pm
haha, Joe’s got nothing and he knows it. His argument consists of “what-ifs” and childish name calling. And I love how he says that a Bushmaster is an assault weapon. No clue what Bushmaster is, no clue at all.
I told you before Joe, if you don’t like what is in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights, there’s an Amendment process for that. Use it or shut up.
January 8th, 2013 at 3:59 pm
Hanover NH was feeling left out.
http://m.wptz.com/news/NH-gathering-calls-for-action-on-gun-laws/-/17442258/18050550/-/jecy0z/-/index.html?channelid=8870596#.UOxaCfJDVVk.facebook
The money quote: She said “people are determined to defend their second amendment rights no matter what, and it’s very difficult to get people to change their minds.”
Ya think?
January 8th, 2013 at 4:02 pm
@26/David – I knew what you meant in your comment about Boulder being “Five square miles surrounded by reality”.
I’ve posted a link to substantiate that:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/roughly-200-hold-candlelight-vigil-for-justice-after-boulder-elk-shot-by-off-duty-cop-and-sing-we-shall-overcome/
January 8th, 2013 at 4:08 pm
H1–look at the institutes of “higher” education in Hanover and Keene, and tell me that there isn’t a high concentration of teh stoopid there.
I’m on the other side of the state and have to deal with it coming out of Durham and Dover.
January 8th, 2013 at 4:19 pm
NHSparky,
I typically wear my NRA hat when going down town to vote.
Have yet to be polled on the way out, what a suprise.
They take one look at me and stare at the ground.
When I scan the voting center I can’t help but wonder how many of the college age voters in attendance are voting, twice.
Until photo ID’s are required nationwide, we will never know.
January 8th, 2013 at 4:40 pm
@68 I kind of like the simplicity of an inked thumb over ID. It seemed like such a good idea when I saw Iraq doing it. It’s way cheaper to verify, still pretty hard to fake, and a little less big brotherish. Probably still need voter registration to keep the felons and foreigners out of the process or we could save some real cash.
January 8th, 2013 at 5:14 pm
Sparky – though Pemmy was frozen over?
Joe – just out of curiousity, how would you rewrite the 2nd? I’m just curious since most of your ilk try to always say “well, it applied only to flintlocks etc” and ignore that the militia clause states that the eligible citizenry be well-armed: i.e arms similar to the military’s, and oh, no: that would be the closest civilian equivalent to an M4, right? Or do you feel there is no such thing as a militia? Or that they should not be well-armed? Please blather on… let’s hear you a) redefine the 2nd in such a way that all the rest of the Amendments still apply and b) hile you’re at it, define what you think an assault weapon really is? Try not to use the word scary… we’re mostly grown-ups here.
January 8th, 2013 at 6:22 pm
@ 69 – I had the same thought. Inked fingers are cheap. And, when the fight was on in MN this past fall about voter ID, I suggested it. Shockingly, all the whack jobs I live near were opposed to that as well.
January 8th, 2013 at 6:27 pm
Reaperman, Winter Soldier: inked fingers only work when people can vote only in person on a single day. It doesn’t prevent people from voting twice if one of those votes is cast via absentee ballot obtained from another state or via early voting. That’s how many college students reputedly manage to vote twice – once at college, and once in their home state via absentee ballot.
January 8th, 2013 at 6:40 pm
I did not read all of the comments but as a life long Vermonter with family roots in the state going back to Ethan Allen I do have one thing to say. The Vermont Supreme Court has already spoken to this subject quite emphatically. There is no “home rule” in Vermont. This happened last time it was tried. Burlington’s opinion may make them feel all squishy and warm inside but has no basis in law and is nothing but fodder for the press and themselves.
January 8th, 2013 at 8:28 pm
Joe,
IF (and that’s a mighty BIG IF) you and your ilk (look that one up) do manage to re-write or eliminate the 2A, and all my weapons are suddenly illegal, just remember this:
“If the law does not protect me from thee, it no longer protects thee from me.”
Words to think about (as deep or as shallow as you prefer).
Not brag, not threat, just fact.
How far can your head swivel?
January 9th, 2013 at 12:58 am
It’s an unfortunate byproduct of the long term tourists who moved to Vermont because they saw an episode of Newhart. They believe in manipulating the mechanism of government to make futile, wasteful gestures instead of solving real problems with real solutions. In this case, the Vermont Constitution clearly says you have a right to a firearm, period. Not for hunting, not for target shooting, but to defend yourself. Additionally (and fortunately) Vermont lawmakers were wise enough to clearly forbid municipalities in state code from making laws relating to the ownership, possession, carriage or transportation of firearms.
The next act of this little passion play will come with Town Meeting. Newspapers will breathless report that “Umpteen Vermont Towns vote to outlaw assault weapons and bad attitudes”. What they will fail to report, as with the impeachment votes a few years ago, is these measures are introduced “from the floor” at the end of town meetings by zealots who hold out for exactly that purpose. They generally are not included in warnings, or more importantly in absentee ballots such as those sent to servicemembers or the homebound, and are voted upon only by those who can physically attend the meeting. Vermont’s “perfect exercise in democracy” is actually a mechanism for disenfranchisement of those serving their country whose suffrage is dependent upon absentee ballots.
January 9th, 2013 at 8:42 am
An interesting aside, several years ago Burlington, VT became only the 2nd or 3rd city to allow al-Jazeera access to the municipally owned CATV network. At the public hearings the commission allowed supportive comments from a diverse group of progressives including a member of a Iraq veterans group against the war. The individual in question admitted publicly that he and others who served in Iraq had willfully murdered innocent civilians (an NCIS investigation proved him to be a liar). Jokingly, Burlington is often referred to as the Peoples Republic.
January 9th, 2013 at 4:50 pm
Some Americans will be Disarmed…
Despite the facts, some are arguing that long metal tubes embedded in plastic, ie. rifles, are evil. Senator Feinstein is arguing that we should ban and confiscate the tools of self-defense, though she owns and carries firearms herself, and works behin…
January 18th, 2013 at 6:33 pm
[...] that private citizens aren’t rolling over and just doing what is being dictated to them. We talked about the city council when they decided to draft a gun ban for the city while most of the citizens who showed up for the [...]