 So, Michelle, we're a 73. We're going to do a quick walkthrough of it. And. Okay. Sure. Do you want me to share the screen or does everybody want to look on their own? I'm okay looking on my own. Everybody else. Yeah, I'm good on my own. Okay. No screenshare. I think okay. Okay. So, Michelle, if you want to. Sure. So this is an amendment to title 28 in the parole chapter, interestingly, but it's pertaining to field supervision unit. So for correction officers that are working in the field and the probation and parole offices out in the community. And you'll see in section one on page one. It says that a request of a correctional officer who's designed to the field supervision unit, the commissioner of correction shop shall. So I just want to note that it's not discretionary. Shall authorize the officer to train and become certified by the Vermont criminal justice council and the use of firearms for defensive purposes appropriate use of force reporting and record keeping relating to firearms as well as personal liability for actions and conduct related to firearms. The commissioner and the executive director of the council are to develop the curriculum that's required to comply with the subsection. And then once a correctional officer successfully completes the training requirements, then they're permitted to carry a firearm while on duty and to employ it in a defensive capacity. I'm going to show you or talk to you just for a moment about the existing law. In section 551 a. So that you know how it works. Now, excuse me. Is that currently. And I can email this to you if you're interested under the subsection B and B in this section that we're amending. There is a subsection B states that the commissioner can authorize. So it's discretionary and designate any correctional officer. To become certified by the council as a law enforcement officer. And then the commissioner and the executive director of the council established the curriculum for that particular training for that law enforcement officer. And then the commissioner by department policy can prescribe the use of those law enforcement powers. And may direct that the correctional officer not carry any weapon while on duty. And so right now. There's it's discretionary with the, with the corrections commissioner. And, but there is training required. So I just wanted to kind of mention. Yeah. But they would have to be trained as a law enforcement officer. Fully fully. Excuse me. Fully certified. I don't know. Specifically, but I assume I don't know much about the, because I don't work on the, you know, the training, the different training levels, but it does say to become certified by the council as a law enforcement officer. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So I imagine they'll just fit within that existing statutory scheme. So it could be a level two. Certified. Right. Yeah. Okay. And that's it. It's pretty straightforward. Senator columnar. Thank you, Madam chair. I did sponsor this bill, but. So you think I'd know all about it, but. To be fair. In the past two by any names by any. No, it is by any. And it never went anywhere. But so I'm just curious, Michelle. Current law seems to be a little bit more. Expansive. In other words. In order for this to be possible. The parole or probation officer would actually have to go through all of the stages to become a certified law enforcement. And I think that's the case. I mean, This seems to say. That he wouldn't, he or she would not necessarily be. A full law enforcement officer, but they would receive the same training with regard to fire. Am I. I believe that's the case. I don't have any history on this one. I'm not. I'll be honest and not really sure how it wound up in my lap. This year. So I don't have. And it. And it did come from VSEA. So it, you know, I didn't, oftentimes. We learn a lot of the background and trying to craft the legislation, but I really just kind of made it. Work for formatting purposes. So that's my understanding is right now, the commissioner can basically send people through and to go through the training to be law enforcement officers. And as part of being a law enforcement officer, they can carry a weapon, but the commissioner has the discretion to say. I don't want you to carry a weapon. I don't want you to carry a weapon. I don't want you to carry a weapon. I don't want you to carry a weapon. So this is a little different. And that it's just aimed at the firearms training. It would still be the commissioner and the executive director coming up with what that training should look like. And then they'd be authorized to use, or base, basically their firearm while they're on duty. There isn't. A provision in there. To carry one. It's just a, it's that the, the, that basically if they, if they go through the training, the commissioner has to allow them to do that. Okay. Yeah. Yeah, I think that the, and I don't think that currently they have to go through the whole 16 week. That they can be certified as level two, which is like a two week. Training, which includes firearms training. So they could, and it's more discretionary for the commissioner. This, this would say if, if a probation or parole officer. Requests to be able to carry a gun, the commissioner has to have let them go to the training and has to give them the, the right to carry a firearm on duty. So Senator Clarkson. It strikes me that this. Adds a level with an already toxic situation already. I think this just exacerbates our problems in prison. I just, I, I really am concerned about this bill. I don't. I'm very concerned about this bill and I would like to hear from parole officers. I'd like to hear. I'd like to hear from a whole range of people about this because it strikes me that this is just going to elevate violence in our prisons. Well, this isn't in the prisons. This is probation and parole officers. They're not in prison. Right. Sorry. Not in our correctional officers, but in already challenging tense situations. I think it adds a level of. I think it ratchets it all up considerably. And I think there is a value in many ways for people going in to prison. And I think it adds a level of respect. And I think it adds a level of respect. And I think it adds a level of respect and unarmed and other people know they're unarmed. And. I think that that heightens respect. I mean, we'd have to hear from parole officers, obviously. Or not. Well, we have had this bill before us as Senator Colmar said, at least three times. Yeah. I'm not a big fan of it. Sorry. It's okay. Senator. Senator Clarkson. I totally understand your point of view and. And appreciate it. I think at the same time. The work that these folks do. Puts them in situations which are very dangerous at times. And by going in. Without any sort of. Ability to defend themselves. They really do put themselves in a tough situation. So. While I do understand and appreciate your view, I think that there is some merit to the discussion on the other side. I know when it was in Senate institutions, which is where it got referred to originally, by the way. Senator. Testified. His father. Who's also a member of the house. And that family used to worry about him coming home at night. Because he would have to visit. People that had just been released from prison and they were, they were generally worried about. His welfare when he did that. So. He provided some testimony. I believe Vince. Lucy also testified. Because in all transparency, I did introduce this on behalf. Of the VSEA. And I think it's a good thing. I think it's a good thing. I think it's a good thing. I think it's a good thing. I think it's a good thing. I think it's a good thing. At their request and. You know, they look out for their, their folks. And I believe he gave testimony to. So while I understand that. This probably won't have. Enough support on this committee to advance. I thought at least was worth introducing it. I appreciate everybody's time. Yeah. And it is a, it is a huge issue. My fear is that. It's a huge issue. It's a huge issue. It's a huge issue. It's a huge issue. It's a huge issue. It's a huge issue. It's a huge issue. It's a huge issue. Children away from their families and go into bad situations also. And. And it could just begin to escalate. So. Anyway, Senator Polina, did you. No, I was going to say what you just said about the. Department of Children and families and. People having to go out and check on families that are in remote places. Because of this party. I think they started talking about this more after the death of President Trump. I think they started talking about this more after the death of President Trump. I think they started talking about trying to make sure their folks were protected, but I do think it has the potential to. Spread out a lot further than this bill. And I think that would be something that would take a lot of discussion. Before we move in that direction. Well, we can look at it further. It's definitely not meeting crossover. So we have some time. All right. Thank you, Michelle.