# VERMONT --- No hunting license without health insurance ???



## Tim4Trout (Jul 10, 2003)

The danger here is that the bill is in the committee on health care and not fish wildlide and water resources.


Members of committee 

Rep. John Patrick Tracy , Chair 

Rep. Malcolm Severance , Vice-Chair 

Rep. Joseph Baker 

Rep. Harry Chen 

Rep. Sarah Copeland-Hanzas 

Rep. Bill Keogh 

Rep. Lucy Leriche 

Rep. Christopher Louras 

Rep. Steven Maier 

Rep. Francis McFaun 

Rep. Virginia Milkey 

Contact info 

http://www.leg.state.vt.us/legdir/alpha.cfm?Body=H


----------



## vermonster13 (Sep 18, 2004)

Tim4Trout said:


> Sec. 7. 10 App. V.S.A. § 16a is added to read:
> 
> § 16a. ENFORCEMENT OF INDIVIDUAL INSURANCE MANDATE
> 
> ...


This law will not pass. Mandatory health insurance is not going to make it through the legislature.


----------



## Thumper1 (May 17, 2004)

Why are they just asking for health care insurance and not liability ????.
Making hunters have to have liability insurance I think is what they are really after, the health insurance is just the lead in.....


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

Thumper1 said:


> Why are they just asking for health care insurance and not liability ????.
> Making hunters have to have liability insurance I think is what they are really after, the health insurance is just the lead in.....


Yeah, this is a dangerous action here. Speaking of mandatory liability insurance, the National Hunting Lease program, capitalizing on the growing popularity of land leasing for hunting purposes, requires ALL lessees to prove they carry their own prsonal Hunter's Liability Insurance coverage before getting the lease, and all hunters who hunt on the leased land must also carry this liability insurance. 

In my mind, this is a serious anti-hunting movement, where our opponents are attempting to cost hunting right out of existence.

We gotta fight this one big time. Write your congressmen, senators, assemblymen and women etc. Baloney from the word go.


----------



## Jerry/NJ (Jan 17, 2003)

doctariAFC said:


> Yeah, this is a dangerous action here. Speaking of mandatory liability insurance, the National Hunting Lease program, capitalizing on the growing popularity of land leasing for hunting purposes, requires ALL lessees to prove they carry their own prsonal Hunter's Liability Insurance coverage before getting the lease, and all hunters who hunt on the leased land must also carry this liability insurance.
> 
> *In my mind, this is a serious anti-hunting movement, where our opponents are attempting to cost hunting right out of existence.*
> We gotta fight this one big time. Write your congressmen, senators, assemblymen and women etc. Baloney from the word go.


I am in total agreement about them costing hunting out of existence.....this is total BS !


----------



## Skeptic (Dec 11, 2005)

Health care is already something that many cannot afford. Adding a requirement that it would be required to hunt is obviously an ANTI movement.


----------



## vermonster13 (Sep 18, 2004)

It is a play by a faction of our legislature to try to force the governor to pass other healthcare legislation that the state can't afford. The problem with our state is many retire here and have tyhe time and money to run for office then use VT as a test bed for a national agenda. Civil unions ie.


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

vermonster13 said:


> It is a play by a faction of our legislature to try to force the governor to pass other healthcare legislation that the state can't afford. The problem with our state is many retire here and have tyhe time and money to run for office then use VT as a test bed for a national agenda. Civil unions ie.


Good point. Then the MOONBATS in NY and California use those initiatives as a "model" - but only for them wacko liberal "let's socialize everything initiatives" - ramrod their proposals through the process in these two infamously liberal states, which also have size on their side, then these mentally bankrupt "laws" become precedent for other States to follow.

Makes me want to :vom:

This is the nature of the ANti-Hunter, and another major reason why we need to unite all Outdoors Enthusiasts.


----------



## Jerry/NJ (Jan 17, 2003)

Not to change the subject but this reminds me of the bs they are trying to pull with taxidermy and also the so called fenced areas by changing their tax status and they will end up paying more and alot sure as hell cant afford it, they know it ! 
OK :sorry: :focus:


----------



## vermonster13 (Sep 18, 2004)

I have sent copies of this legislation to several outdoors magazines and am in the process of writing an open letter to the governor for a state newspaper editorial. This isn't being taken lightly.


----------



## Jerry/NJ (Jan 17, 2003)

vermonster13 said:


> I have sent copies of this legislation to several outdoors magazines and am in the process of writing an open letter to the governor for a state newspaper editorial. This isn't being taken lightly.


Good job, now you want to use the net to your advantage, starting here. Get the info ready and make a thread with the phone numbers, etc. who to contact and what to say and post it in the Bowhunting Forum and ask for help...maybe make it a sticky for a week or so......the more phone calls they get the moe they'll listen up! I am not fond of sending emails to legislators as they are "easily lost" as I was told. I like to call.


----------



## alwayslookin (May 28, 2003)

*Vt*

Ah yes, 
The socialist Republic of Vermont!!!!!!!
I JUST moved back to NY in Oct., because of the place my wife grew up in (Barre,VT) is going to the dogs.
I may not be a Resident, but my 6 yr old son has a lifetime hunting/fishing license in the State of VT, and my best friend and hunting partner still lives there.
Count me in to fight this one, too.
Incomprehensible how they could justify this.
An abject lack of common sense and reason!


----------



## Dchiefransom (Jan 16, 2006)

doctariAFC said:


> Yeah, this is a dangerous action here. Speaking of mandatory liability insurance, the National Hunting Lease program, capitalizing on the growing popularity of land leasing for hunting purposes, requires ALL lessees to prove they carry their own prsonal Hunter's Liability Insurance coverage before getting the lease, and all hunters who hunt on the leased land must also carry this liability insurance.
> 
> In my mind, this is a serious anti-hunting movement, where our opponents are attempting to cost hunting right out of existence.
> 
> We gotta fight this one big time. Write your congressmen, senators, assemblymen and women etc. Baloney from the word go.


Well, since I'm not a Civil Litigation lawyer, I just have to ask. If someone gets a lease on private property and gets injured there, could they still sue the landowner?


----------



## Skeptic (Dec 11, 2005)

Dchiefransom said:


> Well, since I'm not a Civil Litigation lawyer, I just have to ask. If someone gets a lease on private property and gets injured there, could they still sue the landowner?



I would think that easily could be taken care of within the terms of the lease. Have it wrote in that they can't!


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

Dchiefransom said:


> Well, since I'm not a Civil Litigation lawyer, I just have to ask. If someone gets a lease on private property and gets injured there, could they still sue the landowner?


In NYS, we have a law on the books, which has been there since the 1970's - the Landowner's Protection Act. This absolves property owners of any and all responsibility for any and all incidents on their peropty, including hunting accidents, be they accidental shootings or falls from treestands or down ravines, or stepping in gopher holes and snapping an ankle, etc. The landowner's protection act makes it such that landowners need not have liability insurance to allow hunters on their property, and hunters have ZERO legal recourse as well. This applies to wild lands. If the land owner has erected structures, such as a permanent treestand, or a wood bridge across a ravine or whatnot, well, these would be considere improvements and if a hunter got hurt on one of these improvements, then they do have a legal claim.

All this protection becomes VOID once the lands are leased, requiring the land owner to carry liability insurance to protect against potential litigation. This is part of the game, when you turn your property into a pay to play place. However, individual Hunters carrying insurance is NOT something that is required when leasing. They pay the lease fee, and they are protected under the lease agreement, as well. SO if they fire a shot, it stretches across the property and strikes another person off the property, the landowner is ultimately responsible due to the lease arrangement. The hunter may be held on criminal charges, but no civil course of action is available on the hunters themselves.

Hope that answers the question, at least in NYS context.


----------



## Dchiefransom (Jan 16, 2006)

Thanks, interesting info. 
Gee, if they REALLY are worried about people getting jurt, you'd think they would require proof of health insurance before people renew their driver's license.:wink:


----------



## vermonster13 (Sep 18, 2004)

This legislation is dead. They are now trying to raise the tobacco tax and use the state share of the tobacco settlement to pay for health insurance.


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

vermonster13 said:


> This legislation is dead. They are now trying to raise the tobacco tax and use the state share of the tobacco settlement to pay for health insurance.


SOunds like Sheldon Silver's cousin is in the Vermont Legislature!

NYS is looking to increase the cigarette tax between $1.00 and $1.50 per pack. Not take the tax to $1.00-$1.50/ pack, but an ADDITIONAL $1.00-$1.50/ pack. Of course, those of us who smoke in NYS have it figured out, much to the chagrin of NYS. Indian Reservation smokes  Comparatively, a carton of Marlboro on the Reservation is priced @ $24.50. Cost on white man's land, $50.00! This makes the non-reservation business very uncompetitive for smoke sales. And, to compound this, the State wants to ADD another $10 - $15 per carton to the cost? 

They're also trying to collect tax on cigarette sales on Reservations to non-reservation customers. However, a treaty is in place between Iroquois Nation and NYS which expressly prohibits the collection of ANY state tax on sales on Indian Nation Lands. The last time this was tried, the Seneca Nation shut down the NYS Thruway and Route 17 (now I-86) with massive tire fires. Brought transportation to a halt. Wonder if the State wants to play again? Since these reservations are considered sovereign Nations, NYS Police and other law enforcement agencies have NO jurisdiction there. What a comedy...


----------



## lilblknight (Jan 23, 2006)

*i hunt for my health*

interesting if you are an avid sportman i would love to think you get a lil healthy about this time of year do to we get our buts off the couch and the computer and is not venison and wild game as including fish healthy for ya. good luck guys i lived in vt a few years and have family up their and this concerns me and my family in vt who are avid sportman also


----------

