House debates 'Ghost Guns' bill, adds prohibition on firearms at polling places and serialization process

The House heard a lengthy presentation of S.209, described by the presenter as the "Vermont Ghost Guns Act," which would add new criminal and civil prohibitions for unserialized firearms and unfinished frames or receivers, create a voluntary serialization process through federally licensed firearms dealers (FFLs), and prohibit firearms at polling places and related election‑day approaches.

Member from Williston, speaking for the Judiciary Committee, said the bill adds a new subchapter (new section 4082) with definitions, bars possession and transfer of unserialized components and firearms (section 4083), and establishes penalties ranging from civil fines in the Judicial Bureau up to felony terms for repeated or violent‑crime‑related offenses. "Subsection C explicitly includes 3‑D printers," the presenter said. "So a person will still be able to print a firearm at home as long as it has a serial number."

The bill sets out a voluntary process allowing a person to bring an unserialized firearm or component to an FFL for serialization; returning a serialized item to its owner would be treated as a transfer requiring a background check. The presenter also described an extension of an Act 45 gun‑show exemption to the 72‑hour waiting period and added a new prohibition on the possession of firearms at polling places and the walks leading to polling places on election day; the text requires conspicuous posting of the law at public entrances to polling places.

Members questioned how many Vermont crimes involved unserialized firearms and how the polling‑place prohibition would interact with various early‑voting windows. Member from Newberry asked whether the committee had quantified crimes solved or made solvable by serial numbers; the presenter replied that testimony indicated an increase in untraceable firearms used in crimes but that no single definitive case was recalled where a serial number alone would have definitively solved a specific Vermont case. The presenter cited the Supreme Court's "sensitive places" doctrine in support of allowing a polling‑place prohibition.

Members also asked for clarification of the statutory definition of "dangerous and deadly weapon;" the presenter cited 13 VSA §4016 and read the definition aloud. On questions about how the law would apply during extended early‑voting periods, the presenter said the committee had worked with the deputy secretary of state and would double‑check the interplay with local boards of civil authority and the dates they set for early voting.

Next steps: the House divided the bill for consideration of certain sections and took a brief recess for legislative counsel consultation; no final floor action on passage was recorded in the transcript.