Maine right to carry law threatened

Status
Not open for further replies.

jamz

Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
1,772
Location
Seacoast NH
************************
Essentially, this will make it a whole lot more expensive to maintain a CCW in Maine with the increased training requirement.
*************************



Link to the Summary:

http://janus.state.me.us/legis/LawMakerWeb/summary.asp?ID=280023353

Sponsored By: Senator TURNER of Cumberland
Cosponsored By: Representative FLOOD of Winthrop
Senator STRIMLING of Cumberland
Representative WOODBURY of Yarmouth

Text:


An Act To Enhance the Qualifications for a Concealed Firearms Permit
Be it enacted by the People of the State of Maine as follows:

Sec. 1. 25 MRSA §2003, sub-§1, ¶E, as amended by PL 1993, c. 524, §8 and PL 2005, c. 236, §§3 and 4, is further amended to read:
E. Does the following:

(1) At the request of the issuing authority, takes whatever action is required by law to allow the issuing authority to obtain from the Department of Health and Human Services, limited to records of patient committals to Riverview Psychiatric Center and Dorothea Dix Psychiatric Center, the courts, law enforcement agencies and the military information relevant to the following:

(a) The ascertainment of whether the information supplied on the application or any documents made a part of the application is true and correct;

(b) The ascertainment of whether each of the additional requirements of this section has been met; and

(c) Section 2005;

(2) If a photograph is an integral part of the permit to carry concealed firearms adopted by an issuing authority, submits to being photographed for that purpose;

(3) If it becomes necessary to resolve any questions as to identity, submits to having fingerprints taken by the issuing authority;

(4) Submits an application fee along with the written application to the proper issuing authority pursuant to the following schedule:

(a) Resident of a municipality or unorganized territory, $35 for an original application and $20 for a renewal, except that a person who paid $60 for a concealed firearms permit or renewal during 1991 or 1992 is entitled to a credit toward renewal fees in an amount equal to $30 for a person who paid $60 for an original application and $45 for a person who paid $60 for a permit renewal. The credit is valid until fully utilized; and

(b) Nonresident, $60 for an original or renewal application, except that a person who paid $80 for a concealed firearms permit during 1991 or 1992 is entitled to a $20 credit toward permit renewal fees. The credit is valid until fully utilized; and

(5) Demonstrates to the issuing authority a knowledge of handgun minimal firearms safety by completing a firearms safety course. The applicant may fully satisfy this requirement by submitting shall submit to the issuing authority, through documentation in accordance with this subparagraph, proof that the applicant has within 5 years prior to the date of application completed a course that included handgun firearms safety offered by or under the supervision of a federal, state, county or municipal law enforcement agency or a firearms instructor certified by a private firearms association recognized as knowledgeable in matters of firearms safety by the issuing authority or by the state in which the course was taken. The course must be at least 6 hours in length and include relevant state and federal law, basic defensive marksmanship, gun safety, civic responsibility, appropriate conduct while carrying a firearm and the moral and ethical issues surrounding the potential use of firearms as a means of self-defense. A course completion certificate or other document, or a photocopy, is sufficient if it recites or otherwise demonstrates that the course meets all of the requirements of this subparagraph.

As an alternative way of fully satisfying this requirement, an applicant may personally demonstrate knowledge of handgun safety to an issuing authority, if the issuing authority is willing to evaluate an applicant's personal demonstration of such knowledge. The issuing authority is not required to offer this 2nd option.

The demonstration of knowledge of handgun safety to the issuing authority may not be required of any applicant who holds a valid State permit to carry a concealed firearm as of April 15, 1990 or of any applicant who was or is in any of the Armed Forces of the United States and has received at least basic firearms training.

Sec. 2. Concealed firearms permit renewal. Upon the effective date of this Act, a holder of a concealed firearms permit issued under the Maine Revised Statutes, Title 25, chapter 252 must meet the requirements of Title 25, section 2003, subsection 1, paragraph E upon renewal of the holder’s concealed firearms permit.

Sec. 3. Criteria for firearms safety course. The Department of Public Safety shall adopt major substantive rules pursuant to the Maine Revised Statutes, Title 5, chapter 375, subchapter 2-A to establish criteria for a firearms safety course required under Title 25, section 2003, subsection 1, paragraph E, subparagraph 5, that, along with any requirement listed, must include a minimum of 6 hours total of the following instruction:

1. Two hours of basic defensive handgun skills employing real firearms and using either electronic marksmanship targets or live-fire at an established range. Lesson content must include basic defensive marksmanship skills, safe firearms handling and safe firearms storage;

2. One hour of strategies for effectively responding to or avoiding a violent confrontation;

3. One hour of emotional and physiological responses to a confrontation, including understanding and accommodating stress factors when engaged in a confrontational situation;

4. One half hour of firearms selection criteria applicable to firearms commonly employed in self-defense situations, with emphasis on firearms reliability and proper cleaning and maintenance techniques;

5. One hour of state and federal firearms law that must be taught by either a licensed attorney or qualified law enforcement officer concerning the possession and ownership of firearms, the legal parameters governing the use of deadly force and exercising the right of self-defense responsibly; and

6. One half hour discussing area training opportunities where a student may receive continuing education, training and practice in firearms use.

summary

This bill requires all new applicants and renewing holders of a concealed firearms permit to show documentation they have completed a firearms safety course that includes relevant state and federal law, basic defensive marksmanship, gun safety, civic responsibility, appropriate conduct while carrying a firearm and the moral and ethical issues surrounding the potential use of firearms as a means of self-defense. This bill also removes exemptions to current handgun safety course requirements for an applicant or holder of a concealed firearms permit who can personally demonstrate knowledge of the subject matter of the course requirements and a person who received basic firearms training as a member of the Armed Forces of the United States. Finally, this bill directs the Department of Public Safety to adopt rules to establish requirements with specific components for a 6-hour instruction course in firearms safety.
 
I know this is gonna sound bad , but I think it's actually a GOOD idea that people should have some form of training before strapping up . But I also think that if they can show that they are competent and safe with a firearm then they should be able to skip any "required" training. I don't like the idea of people having to pay for the training and would hope that there would be some decent guys out there that would do the traing for free knowing that it's about supporting the cause , not the pocketbook .
 
Last edited:
What part of right to keep and bear arms don't you understand?

Where is training mentioned in the 2nd?

ME is quickly becoming MA north. The parts from Portland down should secede from ME and Join MA Then Maine will be as it should be.
 
I wonder how loudly the leftist extremists would screech and howl if the government were to require training and tests and fees before people could buy books or vote or get abortions or...
 
hmmm ,I think someone may be overreacting a little . If someone has never owned a firearm it just might be a good idea that someone shows them how to use it and be safe with it . 2A rights or not , would YOU want Joe Snuffy packing a gun he has no idea about? In no way does getting some training take away from anyone's 2A rights. What WOULD take away from it is requiring training that would be cost prohibitive to anyone wanting to carry . That's where true 2A supporters should step up and provide training for nothing .

For the record , I have been pursuing taking the courses required to become an instructor so I can teach the classes required for concealed carry here in maine . The catch is , I would teach for FREE . Why? Because it's not about profit , it's about bringing more people into the fold . Just my take on it . I know I'll take flack for it , but i'ts how I feel .
 
I have mixed feelings on training requirements. On the one hand, I don't think the government has the constitutional authority to license people to carry guns. Driving is not a protected right. Bearing arms is. On the other hand, the fact that some yahoo who can't hit the side of a barn is out there with a gun does not give me a warm-fuzzy.
 
For the record, Maine, which has has shall issue CCW for the longest time, has always had pistol familiarization class requirements in order to initially apply for CCW, which is all fine and well.

This bill would make every subsequent renewal show proof, again, of another firearms class.

While I do agree that anyone considering CCW should get as much education as possible, I do not think that it should be mandated, at least not by the government.

That said, I really like the actual layout they described, I think it should be a template for the NRA basic pistol course.
 
hmmm ,I think someone may be overreacting a little . If someone has never owned a firearm it just might be a good idea that someone shows them how to use it and be safe with it . 2A rights or not , would YOU want Joe Snuffy packing a gun he has no idea about? In no way does getting some training take away from anyone's 2A rights. What WOULD take away from it is requiring training that would be cost prohibitive to anyone wanting to carry . That's where true 2A supporters should step up and provide training for nothing .

For the record , I have been pursuing taking the courses required to become an instructor so I can teach the classes required for concealed carry here in maine . The catch is , I would teach for FREE . Why? Because it's not about profit , it's about bringing more people into the fold . Just my take on it . I know I'll take flack for it , but i'ts how I feel QUOTE]

Projecting your "feelings" onto someone's RIGHTS is a bad start. You may take training, you may give training for free. Your prerogative.

When you look to mandate training for others is where you overstep the line.

Please stay out of government. We have enough "public servants" who think they know what is best for us. There are very few endeavors that the government can get involved in and actually make things better. Did I say "very few"? Must be the optomist in me....

Just out of curiosity, has there been a recent plague of untrained "cowboy" CHL holders shooting up the place? Is Joe Snuffy ravaging the state? I missed those headlines....:rolleyes:
 
sounds like they're holding you upside-down by your ankles and shaking the loot out of your pockets.

Maine is full of crafty revenue generators.

I mean, training is a great thing to have... but this sounds excessive. what's the reasoning to justify it? I can count the ppl who are killed by firearms in Maine every year on my fingers.
 
I'd like if a training course was made available and even suggested at time of application, but I don't want it as mandatory.

The Bill of Rights is about freedoms, and with freedoms comes responsibility...personal responsibility. Its personal responsibility to make sure that you are knowledgable enough to operate the firearm you want to carry on your persons. If not, well you obviously get held accountable for whatever harm you cause.

It's very possible that lack of knowledge can cause the maiming or death of someone else due to your ignorance, but we get into slippery slopes when you start mandating this and mandating that. Yes, it's a very good idea to instill basic knowledge of carrying, but I just can't make the huge leap to "government required"

I think in general, people that apply for a concealed carry permit are already familiar with firearms. It'd be nice if there were classes covering all the legal aspects and scenarios of justified shootings or not though because I think that's where most people have questions on their state laws and decisions made in court cases.

I would take a concealed carry training class in a heartbeat if I found something suitably priced and located. I inquired about CHP classes at time of application of my own permit and the lady at the station said there were none :mad: I think any responsible person would want to check out the state laws and situations regarding concealed carry.
 
Lonnie Wilson said:
I don't know why everyone is saying we need training. Washington State has never required training for getting a carry license, at all. Neither has Pennsylvania.

Nor do New Hampshire or Vermont, two of Maine's closest neighbors. And morons trying to unload pistols while driving aside (come to think of it, I don't think that idiot had a CCW in any case), there have been no tragedies induced partly or wholly by lack of training in either state in the past few years, that I can recall.

New Hampshire is facing a similar "adjustment" of its CCW law (SB-44), except in our case it is to prevent members of terrorist or criminal organizations from being issued CCW licenses. I tend to doubt it'll pass, it's too moronic to think that terrorists, mafiosos or gangbangers are going to buy guns and not carry them concealed because they can't get permits. :banghead:
 
Why in blazes don't they let us decent law abiding citizens alone and pick on the criminal element for a change. The percentage of crimes committed by people having a permit is almost nil, but all we hear about is more restrictions, mandates, bans. Maybe everyone needs to make a copy of the 2nd amendment, highlight the sentence that says "not to be infringed" and send it to all of the Senator's, Representative's and Congresspeople. Maybe if they received a few thousand of them, they may take notice. :mad:
 
I know this is gonna sound bad , but I think it's actually a GOOD idea that people should have some form of training before strapping up
Training is a good idea. Required training is a bad idea. If you disagree show me the problem maine (or any other concealed carry state including those with no training requirements at all) is having that justifies more stringent requirements. If there's no problem, I would ask that not support trying to fix it.
 
I'm an NRA Life member, as well as a CHL holder.

Maybe the first time you guys attend a public range, and have a party of 3standing next to that don't speak your language, and taking turns passing a semi auto pistol around while the hammer is cocked.... then maybe you'll will change your mind.

I've seen so many sleezy people show up at the public range with the cheapest piece of crap, and pull a box of ammo out of a brown paper bag, that I can't even count the instances!

I can't regulate ethics, cleanliness, or citizenship, BUT I SURE AS HELL WOULDN'T MIND SOMEBODY REQUIRING THAT THESE PEOPLE AT LEAST SHOULD KNOW THEIR ASS TO THEIR ELBOW WHEN THEY ARE FIRING A GUN NEXT TO ME. And I'm not talking here only about the illegals. I'm taliking about all kinds of incompetents of every race.

When it's your own butt or that of a family member that is compromised by a jackass that knows nothing about the proper handling of a gun, then maybe you'll knock off the "2nd amendment trumps stupidity" arguements I'm hearing here!
 
Well as a former Mainer I guess I should contribute to this post.

I lived in Camden Maine for over 20 years, most of my family still lives there and I think Maine in the summer is the greatest! As far as guns and Maine are concerned the only problem I have is the severe lack of stores and decent shooting ranges (at least in the midcoast region):D

I have mixed feelings about required training of any sort. Personally I'd rather know that people who are carrying guns around have at least some basic skill level. I've talked to far too many people who think that guns just aim themselves and all you have to do is stick out there and the bullet magically goes where you want it. Any avid shooter will agree that to become a confident accurate shooter requires time on the range and training helps. I've known many people who have bought guns for ccw carry and hardly ever practice or have any interest in learning to shoot properly. Having a gun is a good way to feel safe but in a panic situation even an experienced shooter can forget the basics of target acquisition. A little training may not save your life but its better than no training at all.

Also I wouldn't say that a law like this is infringing on our right to carry. There are already plenty of laws out there that prohibit certain people from carrying a gun. As Americans we have a right to be armed but there are plenty of Americans who don't have that right, due to location, criminal history, ect. In order to carry concealed in MOST places requires taking a class and getting a permit, so a state wanting to add a required training course to that rule doesn't sound like a huge surprise to me.

On the other hand in the case of just owning a gun I don't think any training should be required for that, it wouldn't surprise me if it happens at some point in which case it will just be a real inconvenience.

that's my $.02
 
QUOTE:
***When it's your own butt or that of a family member that is compromised by a jackass that knows nothing about the proper handling of a gun, then maybe you'll knock off the "2nd amendment trumps stupidity" arguements I'm hearing here!***


Find that video of the cop that shot himself in front of the class full of kids and then tell us how forcing training on everyone will help you sleep better. Training don't fix stupid.
 
On the other hand in the case of just owning a gun I don't think any training should be required for that

"the right of the people to keep and beararms shall not be infringed" The constitution disagrees with you, it states that owning and carrying are a right that requires no qualifications.
 
In no way does getting some training take away from anyone's 2A rights. What WOULD take away from it is requiring training that would be cost prohibitive to anyone wanting to carry .

This is what I said , but seems to be taken as me saying it should be REQUIRED. I don't want what is proposed to go into effect. Training EACH TIME you get a renewel? No , that puts a burdan financially etc on a right we have. Yes you have a right "to bare arms" and that's why I'm against REQUIRING training , rather , offering it for free (by govt or other gunnies) doesn't infringe on anyone's rights. read into it what you want , but the reason I want to give classes for CCW for free is because I don't think you should have to pay for a right and promoting safe gun handling helps to prevent an incident from happening that the antis could use to push laws like the one proposed.
 
NRA member here (and soon to be JPFO and GOA too) - so don't start trying to bash me as being anti.

Sorry to those of you who don't like this law - but honestly, adding training requirements is a good thing.

When I got my CCW, I had training because I paid extra for a one on one session. After that I paid for even more training.

Personally, I feel that the training I've received (or at least some of it) should be required to get a license.

It's just like getting a driver's license. You have to practice and then prove you can drive.

Carrying a gun is a huge responsibility. I don't think Maine is actually threatening CCW, it's just saying, "We want to make sure that our CCW'ers know what they're doing."

- now the only part of the law I don't like is the added costs to the licensees. I would much prefer to see it done as a government subsidized/run program. For example you take your training course at some city center that would be offered at regular intervals, then take a test, and then bingo... you're in.

Yes, it's technically a minor infringement on the 2A - but since the 2A was written, gun technology and laws have gotten more complex. Back when it was written, you shoved some powder in a tube, put a ball and some wadding in there.... and bingo.... BANG. (or at least that's what my memory tells me from seeing it done in places - I've never muzzleloaded). Also back then violent crime wasn't as much of an issue.

I think Maine in this case is saying, "Ok, you have the right to bear arms, but keep in mind it's a big responsibility - we want to make sure you're totally prepared for it, especially considering the chances of having to use it seem to in the long run moving upwards. So all we want is to know that you know what you're doing, and we're cool with it."

Minor infringement, but one of the few times I'll concede that it might be a good idea.

This actually could help the CCW movement. If states starting adapting this type of thing (but hopefully providing the training at less cost than the private sector would charge if any cost), the whole argument of "CCW'ers aren't trained to use a weapon like police officers" goes totally out the window. It would be an infeasible and erronious argument.

Anyways, that's my take. And I'm sure I'll get flamed. Whatever. :rolleyes:
 
as for training for each renewel - don't officers have to qualify every so often?

This would be the same thing basically.

I think the key here is to contact your state reps to see if instead of this being a privately charged set of trainings, it could be incorporated into a public provision.
 
I wrote a letter to Turner suggesting that to avoid infringing upon people's rights through cost-based-exclusion, that additional training and renewel procedures be provided as a public good.

2A infringement is never a good thing, but I think if done properly, this could actually enhance public safety through having CCW'ers additionally trained and also would help negate any argument that CCW'ers have no real training (by the antis).

Let's see what he says. I don't know enough about him to know if he's an anti or a pro.

The right to bear arms shouldn't be infringed, but this could actually be an enhancement of the right to bear arms by saying, "You can carry a gun, and we'll train you too!" - (that is if he agrees to my proposal). If he doesn't, then it is infringement of the right to bear arms through price-exclusion.

(And if you guys want my TRUE opinion on carrying guns - I actually feel that CCW programs are a great thing. I'm not totally comfortable with the notion of any guy off the street just grabbing a gun and carrying it. I'm not saying that they're a criminal, I'm just saying that they may not know self-defense laws, nor how to properly use a weapon, so CCW programs if they can be refined properly could help us to be a trained, armed, and of course polite society. :)) - I'm not quite as extreme as some of you when it comes to "Anybody should be able to carry a gun whenever, wherever, without any prerequisites. I would love for there to be a day when EVERYBODY is armed..... and EVERYBODY is trained. Can you imagine what crime would be like then? That's right - it wouldn't exist. BG's would have no doubt in their mind that if they mess with the public, they will get burned.
 
Look, guys & gals.

Our central contention is that the normal, prudent man is sufficient to judge for himself whether to carry arms or not, and sufficiently responsible to do so without danger to the public.

Part and parcel of that is his responsibiilty to educate himself in such matters.

Making that conditional upon completion of specific requirements is NOT CONSISTENT with that central contention, nor is erecting yet another gatekeeper to RKBA wise.



Yes, training is good. We should all take training and education in arms proficiency and legalities concerning use of force. It is our responsibility to do so, and also our responsibility to determine what the best way for us to do that is, considering our individual circumstances.

I note that we also bear the responsibility for the outcome of failing to do that.


Sheesh.



Incidentally, others here have noted a trend. When training becomes a mandatory gatekeeper, the quality and value of the training plummets.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top