Vermont is to anti-gunners what Nebraska is to beach goers. That said, Nebraska has beaches and Vermont has gun control advocates. In fact, you can see four (all?) of them in the video above, brought to you by Gun Sense Vermont. The civilian disarmament org is lobbying for universal background checks (UBC); they want all private gun sales and transfers to go through a federal firearm licensee (a.k.a., gun store). As we’ve pointed out here before . . .

UBCs are ineffective for crime prevention, an expensive impediment to citizens seeking to exercise their gun rights, and an unconstitutional form of backdoor gun registration. Someone should explain that to these Fudds (hunters against gun rights, named after Elmer Fudd). STAT.

ADDED: Thanks to Bryce in the comments below, here’s Gun Owners of Vermont’s video fisking of Gun Sense Vermont’s Fuddtastic distortions and prevarications:

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

65 COMMENTS

  1. Give the old fart a taste of the bad medicine that was just voted into effect in Washington. Let him take hold (“possession”) of his buddy’s gun temporarily while crossing a fence out on a hunt and get busted for a felony. Or try to take his grandchild to a Hunter’s Ed course that’s been lobotomized because none of the students can actually, you know, handle someone else’s firearm.

    • No one’s getting busted in Washington because none of the cops wanted the bill to pass. Still, the second someone pisses off the wrong officer at a shooting range, straight to jail for misdemeanors.

      • Universal background checks is a joke. The people that shouldn’t have them will get them because they are not buying guns at gun stores or from private parties, unless they are crooks and buying a $350.00 gun for $50.00 because it’s stolen. Criminals don’t pay retail for guns. Criminals don’t care about background checks, because they aren’t going to take a background check!
        Are people really this stupid? It’s NOT common sense, it’s stupid sense. It’s people not using their brains sense. I-594 was a joke and still is a joke.
        You can parade gun toting people in front of the camera all day long, you can go to a prison and record prisoners claiming they are for background checks, but the down to earth truth is, expanded background checks are going to accomplish virtually NOTHING.

      • Transfers at shooting ranges are specifically exempted.

        Which leads to things like the legality of meeting someone at a shooting range and letting the firearm go home with them being not entirely clear.

        • and then we’re into what defines a shooting range. Is it the large field behind my friend’s house? Does it have to be a registered, licensed range? The whole thing is stupid and doesn’t increase anyone’s safety

        • Nope. You can transfer a firearm between parties at (a) an approved gun range, (b) if the gum permanently stays at the range.

          a. There is no such thing as an “approved range” legally defined in any WA RCW. It doesn’t exist. And the idea that gun ranges have to be “approved” just means that gun ranges can also be “not approved”. Several counties here in WA have been trying for years to shut down legally operated ranges. If that happens, where do you shoot? You going to drive a few hours to shoot?

          b. I know of 2 ranges in King and Pierce county that have guns that are permanently stored at the range, and they’re both rental ranges. Ever priced what it costs to rent a gun for an afternoon? Which basically leaves the option of storing your firearm/s at a range permanently. Neither of these ranges has this option, even so, would you pay to store your firearms at a range?

        • I’m not transferring any gum that stays permanently at any range.

          (Tip your waitresses and all that ….)

      • Yeah, and we all know how well that works. I’m sure the first thing that happens when a young’un joins a gang is getting his FOID card.

        Not.

    • 594 in WA was sold by lying. They told people, correctly, that handing a weapon to another person is not a transfer under federal law. What they left out was that under 594, if the person you handed the gun to then fires the weapon and it is not at a gun range and the gun was not permanently stored at the range, both people committed a misdemeanor illegal transfer. When the person hands you back the gun, it is now felony illegal because both have committed 2 (or more) illegal transfers.
      I have a liberal ‘friend’ from high school living in Seattle. He owns a gun (or so he claims) and he voted for 594 because like most liberals, he didn’t read 594. He only read the bullet point lies.

  5. @37sec: “Absolutely I believe [CUT] a right to bear arms but…”

    Lel they had to chop the video to make it sound like she supports the second amendment.

    • The full quote was probably something like “I believe wealthy, white, Christians over the age of 45 have the right to bear some arms strictly for killing animals for sport, not for eating”.

  6. Guess they didn’t ask for the opinion of Ol’ Linwood who runs the hunter safety course up in St. Johnsbury…I seem to recall a slightly different message when I did it….

  7. Its crazy. Vermont has like the lowest crime rate in the world. Gun grabbers have nothing to offer Vermont but bureaucracy and enslavement.

  8. Same old “2nd was created for hunting” bs being spewed. Funny I don’t see hunting being mentioned in the text of the 2nd. What I see is “necessary to the security of a free State” which you will not have with universal gun registration. Using the logic of these 4 useful idiots maybe we should require all home sales go through a background check. After all I have rights and I don’t want a violent felon buying a house next door to me.

    • Sadly the “progun” forum on reddit (/r/progun, for you redditors) has recently been masturbating over the idea of forcing background checks on all gun sales / transfers at the federal level. They think that if gun owners willingly enact some gun control, Democrats won’t try to enact any further gun control. I honestly can’t believe that a supposedly pro-gun site would be saying something that stupid.

  10. “The right to own and carry guns n defend yourself or hunt and be able to pursue sportsmanship is uh one of the backbones of why it was put into the eh eh our original Constitution”

    What creature has more than one backbone? Funny, I don’t recall the Constitution mentioning hunting or sportsmanship.

    The woman has a big BUT.

  11. The white sand beach in the picture is a pretty neat place. Valentine National Wildlife Refuge has some great Northern Pike fishing as well as being a great place to go bowfishing. Beautiful in its own way. There aren’t many trees in the sandhills of Western Nebraska, but between Valentine and Lake McConaughy, it is one of my favorite places I’ve ever been. Lake Mac has some great white sand beaches and is one of the nicest, cleanest lakes I’ve been to due to it being in the sandhills. I recommend visiting if you’re ever going through Nebraska on I-80, it’s only about 15 miles off interstate North of Ogallala.

    Oh, and Fudds are found everywhere. I recently was told by a Fudd who owns the gun store in my old hometown (KS town of about 5,000 people) that he refuses to sell AR15s because he doesn’t want to be liable for “those damn idiots” who buy them and “run around killing folks”. Needless to say I would rather drive the half hour to the next town over and spend my money with a true 2A supporter.

    • PPGMD as the president of Gun Owners of Vermont I can tell you that gun nonsense has spent well over $100,000 last year Just on lobbying and campaign contributions. They are being funded by Bloomberg The cost for our Video was nothing. In our organization we have a large and talented membership. Every one is a volunteer and we have been whooping on them at every turn. All it takes is dedication. The good and honest people of Vermont do not like it when someone tries to limit their rights under the 2nd amendment or Article 16th of the Vermont Constitution.
      Check us out at
      http://www.gunownersofvermont.org

  15. Fudds used to run the NRA when it was much loved and admired by gungrabbers. Then came the Cincinnati Revolution of 1977, and the gradual but thorough housecleaning of the Fudds. There are still a few of them left in the NRA hierarchy, but they are unwelcome.

    Hunting should be a respected tradition in American life. Fudds not so much. Let Fudds hunt or shoot trap or skeet all they want. And let them look to England to see what happens when even Fudds are stripped of their gun rights. Maybe then they’ll wake up, bu-bu-bu-but I d-d-d-d-doubt it.

    • They forget that their hunting rifle, is actually a “High powered sniper rifle”
      They forget that their skeet shotgun is a “Multiple person killing device”

  16. The Cognitive Dissonance is strong with these folks. The fact that they can hold completely contradictory beliefs is a testament to the human mind. Joseph Goebbels and Edward Bernays would be proud of this massive propaganda effort.

    • How many generations does it take for those flatlanders — I would guess that they’re mostly from MA — to see the light and become grownups?

    • Some day a Vermonter will get ticked off at me (but not on the subject of gun rights, methinks), and call me a flatlander.

      It’s possible that that will make me die laughing. The highest point in Vermont is over two thousand feet below the bottom of my well, and I’m not even up in the mountains here.

  18. There it is; almost always derps not-from-around-here, who come up and attempt immediately to replicate the creampuff libturd environs they spawned from. They can’t possibly leave well enough alone; physiologically incapable of it.

    They won’t get anywhere with this; it’s been tried over and over up here and that dog won’t hunt.

    I live in a working-class town of regular people in the northwest corner of the state and you’ll never hear this kind of rubbish around here, ever.

  19. Dear god! Can Fudds please read the Federalist papers which explain the 2A. In fact, can any one of these antis read the Federalist and Anti-federalist papers? It drives me up a wall.

  20. In 2012 Vermont had the lowest violent crime rate and murder rate in the United States. And Vermont’s murder rate is on par with most/all countries in Europe. What do the gun grabbers hope to accomplish there?

  22. For me this is a hint of desperation by the gun control movement. They desperately need a victory of any sort in “enemy territory.” What better target than an otherwise quite blue state?

  24. Fudds can be our worst enemy. Yes and I live in Illinois. Enormous hunting population that does nothing for gun rights. I am not a hunter and have no plans at this late stage of my life. When they come for your duck gun and your bolt rifle it will be too late…

  25. Domestic Violence is a problem in Vermont??? Who knew? Doesn’t Vermont have the lowest crime rate of any state? I would have thought there were bigger issues at hand in Vermont than “guns.”

  26. Why can’t we all just come together and find some middle-ground on this? I mean, seriously, we already have background checks on some gun purchases so surely it would be OK to allow this minor expansion. Can’t we just agree that there are good people out there who are just more worried about safety than they are about guns? Don’t their values count for something, too? /Heavy Sarc!/ Sorry, coldn’t resist after seeing this video.

    A standard ploy of gun-control propaganda is to present their ideology in ways that will make it appeal to “undifferentiated middle” demographic that they assume doesn’t have strong opinions about 2nd amendment rights. So they choose (or hire) Real Gun Owner’s, people who look like us!, to make their appeal. Their problem is that their target demographic is proving to be a lot more elusive and a lot more politically savvy than they think. Their dilemma is that that there are substantially more People Of The Gun and people know know POTG out here in flyover country than they’ve realized. Still they may get a cheap win in liberal/progressive voting Vermont. But make no mistake: you can call them by whatever name you want—background checks are nothing less than licenses by the state to own guns. And once the state establishes licensed control over personal property (something that should never exist for personally owned guns) , it ceases to be personal property. Maybe Vermonters will get that, but I kinda doubt it.

    • Garrison The people of Vermont will not accept this kind of legislation The Gun Owners of Vermont is fighting this tooth and nail. Breath easy we are winning this battle.
      Ed Cutler
      President
      G.O.Vt.

  29. Fuddism and Fuddites are global. We have them downunder too. Concentrated in the SSAA at Silverdale where the only gun is a Remchesterby and the only activity is benchrest. Another concentration is with the MDRA at Malabar who openly state if the service rifle shooters are sacrificed, they will be left alone.

    Both groups have severe cranial-rectal inversion syndrome. In the words of Benjamin Franklin on the eve of the American Revolution, “Gentlemen, we must hang together or most assuredly we will hang separately!”

  30. As a citizen of VT — I find these folks to be a disgrace — pretending that G$VT is not a bunch of Gun Prohibitionists. These videos could have been shot in the UK — people with pre-20th century firearms hunting game.

    We have a great organization in VT — with real INTEGRITY.

    GOVT:

    http://www.gunownersofvermont.org/

    If you are here — please join.

  32. Notice how old these people are? Just saying, the dems would have no problem making this about age, and exploiting the “generation gap.”

  33. Wait…let me get this straight.

    A criminal, who doesn’t obey the law, will be stopped by a new law, like UBC??? How does that work again?

    To stop criminals from killing others, why don’t we make it illegal to ki……………oh wait. Murder is illegal.

    Okay, how about not beating your wife. We just need to have a law tha………………well crap. Assault is illegal as well.

    Hmmmmm

  34. Eight subscribers, and does not allow comments. Yup, they are open to debate and critzism from oopposing views.

  35. NOT REAL!!!

    No true outdoorsman would refer to his gun as “hi-powered”. That was a dead giveaway right there.

  36. Well, well, what a shock–the Gun Sense Vermont vid is “comment disabled” !!! And the G.O.V (odd acronym, under the circumstances) vid is not!! Imagine that….

  37. Hmmm, maybe the dems can run another round of fast and fabulous so US gangs and others in the drug trade can buy their firearms from the Mexican cartels along with their other transactions. Yea, gun laws are about as effective as our immigration laws huh? These ignorant hunters are worse than the moms or even the tyranny loving progressives

Comments are closed.