Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Firearms Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Vermont sportsmen's federation cautions against municipal gun bans, cites Supreme Court rulings and preemption concerns
Summary
Chris Bradley, president of the Vermont Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs, told the Senate Government Operations Committee on Jan. 28 that municipal firearms restrictions risk constitutional challenges following recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings and that the federation prefers statewide clarity over a patchwork of local rules.
Chris Bradley, president and executive director of the Vermont Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs, told the Senate Government Operations Committee on Jan. 28 that the federation opposes municipal firearms restrictions and urged lawmakers to avoid a patchwork of local regulations.
Bradley said the federation, founded in 1857, represents clubs across Vermont — he told the committee it comprises roughly 5,051 member clubs and about 15,000 individual members — and that the group works closely with the Vermont Department of Fish and Wildlife. He summarized a series of U.S. Supreme Court decisions he said shaped current Second Amendment law: District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010), Caetano (2016) and the 2022 Bruen decision. Bradley argued that those rulings limit the scope of allowable "sensitive places" for firearm restrictions and warned that broad municipal bans could create a constitutionally vulnerable patchwork.
On municipal authority, Bradley referenced the state preemption concept that limits municipal regulation of firearm possession, transportation, storage, hunting and related activity. He said municipal variations could impose burdens on lawful, traveling gun owners and described a preference for uniform statewide rules rather than differing local ordinances. Bradley also said the federation would be willing to discuss safeguards such as screening, guards and building security where appropriate.
Committee members questioned why the matter was before Government Operations rather than Judiciary; members said they expected related firearms bills to move through Judiciary. The chair said the committee planned to take testimony Feb. 6 and invited witnesses to return when bills are formally before the committee.
Bradley closed by offering to meet individually with senators to explain the federation's positions and to provide background on constitutional limits.
