Maine right to carry law threatened

[deadin]

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.

Ever wonder why the WA and PA permits are not recognized by as many States as some other State permits? WA only recently has managed to get some reciprocity with some others. Before it was only the standard 6 or 7 that will take any permit.

 

[JLStorm]

I am applying for a non res Maine CCW now. And even though the instructions state you do not need training with a valid CCW issued within the last so many years, the state trooper on the phone made it clear that the training was required regardless. I didnt think much about it because I have records of training, but I do get the impression they would deny your app without the proof of training.

 

[Soybomb]

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!

Perhaps you should join a private range that requires proof of training to shoot there. It seems like a solution to your discomfort that doesn't infringe upon the rights of others.

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

Once again I'm asking for a little more proof than your guess on the subject. Just show me where the states with no training requirement have more accidents than states with them. Take the guess work and your emotions out of the subject and look at the facts. The brady group feels like its common sense to ban concealed carry. We look at the facts and can show that at the very least it does no harm to society. Before pro-gun people start supporting gun control I'd love to see them learn a lesson from this and rely on facts and not emotions in this regard too. With 48 states allowing concealed carry and decades of it happening there is no reason to guess. If it truly is a good idea, show the proof. If its not needed, don't fix a non-existant problem with gun control.

 

[DKSuddeth]

maybe we should require a half dozen 'fees' and training to vote, or speak, or own property.

 

[Zoogster]

I get really sick of hearing people say things without proper and sound logic, which can impact opinions and ways of life for all of us and even put some people in danger through false information. Therefore I believe a license should be required to excercise the right of freedom of speech. They may do so in thier homes or in non public places without a license, but if they wish to speak where the general public is subject to thier logic then they should take a class and pay some fees on the effects and proper use of thier opinions.

Such classes would save a lot of grief, and keep a lot of children from being led astray through illogical comments. Therefore as a society where we put children first I propose this mandatory licensing, and annual renewal of such licensing to speak personal opinions in public places. This will promote responsible excercising of first amendment practices, and make our society a safer place. An acompanying fee will be used to help fund the creation and maintaing of a database and overseeing agency. Additional taxes may be levied accordingly.

Finaly I propose a limit of 90 voiced opinions in public per month. Nobody needs to voice more than an average of three potentialy mind altering opinions per day on anything in a public place. Any sane individual can see that there is only enough time to logical discuss in depth a few opinions in public a day. Anyone who would voice more opinions in a month obviously would not discuss them in enough detail to be adequately logical and insightful, and therefore would be willing to pose a risk to our society and the minds of our children. We cannot allows this as Americans.

Now for the second amendment I propose restrictions of...

 

[gezzer]

#1 excuse for an elitist I AM AN NRA MEMBER

I have been a life member since 1971. My thoughts on the NRA is a bunch of freedom sellout, compromising, excuse making elitists and hypocrites. It's ok for me to carry but anyone else I am afraid of..

There is now a term for them ZUMBO"S

 

[.cheese.]

how it is elitist to be a member of the NRA?

It's not like it's an exclusive club.

Newsflash - they accept anybody who sends them a check in the right amount.

Being a member of the NRA is simply a step towards trying to protect the 2A.... there are others that help too.

But "elitist"? Sounds like a dictionary might be in good order.

Furthermore, if you're simply implying that those of us who believe training should be administered more extensively are elitist - get a reality check my friend. Being safety minded, fully aware of all current applicable laws, and responsible, is not elitist. You don't want to train - whatever.... but remember that ignorance of the law is not a legal defense.

with that said, I'm out of this thread because it's spiraling downhill quickly.

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

See What I've Been Tellin' Ya?

Oops!

 

[BlkHawk73]

I too think it's a good idea for training being required. Face it, some people are very ignorant about firearms. Do you want these people being armed out in the state? Not me! We get trained to drive, trained to do our job, why not get training on what could be used in a life saving situation? by reqiring a minimum standard for training and instruction, it'll hopefully weed out those that are serious enough about getting thier permit. I'd rather not have people with 1/2 serious attitudes carrying a gun around the state I live in. I've taken a number of training classes and some had ppl that had ZERO knowledge of firearms. It's these people that this bill is wanting to do something about.

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

See What I've Been Tellin' Ya?

All the underlying law making it "necessary" to get a permit to carry is still on the books and government can screw with your "[strike]right[/strike] privilege to carry" as long as those laws remain on the books. Want to fix the problem? get those underlying unconstitutional laws repealed or stricken. Then, there'll be no "need" to get a permit and no way for the government to screw with your carrying of weapons.

Do the right thing and cut them off at the knees.

Woody

"The Right of the People to move about freely in a secure manner shall not be infringed. Any manner of self defense shall not be restricted, regardless of the mode of travel or where you stop along the way, as it is the right so enumerated at both the beginning and end of any journey." B.E.Wood

 

[RevolvingCylinder]

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!

This may anger some of the elitists, but I'm exempt from the training requirements. In fact, I've never had formal civilian training nor am I required to in order to get a carry permit.

I find it ironic when civilians want to undermine the privilege(used to be a RIGHT but I guess that doesn't matter anymore except in a couple of states where it still remains) of others to carry based on "level of training". This sets the stage for the permits to be just issued to former/current military, civilian police, and private security.

 

[STK]

I've had my permit for 22 years. Now I will have to show that I can carry safely?

 

[dave_pro2a]

Yup, turning a right into a licensed privilege, that's what our .gov seems to do best.

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

.......(used to be a RIGHT but I guess that doesn't matter anymore except in a couple of states where it still remains).........

It's still a right, my good friend, it's just infringed. The Constitution says it shall not be infringed, but if we allow it to be said that it is downgraded to a privilege, we lose the scrutiny of the infringement aspect. Keep the fact that it is infringed out there in the spot light. Infringement is the dastardly deed that has been done, and that is what the Constitution says shall NOT be done!

Don't ever let apathy take away the finger of guilt pointed at the infringers. It's infringed, they did it, we know it, so don't ever stop shouting, "HEY! FIX THIS!"

Woody

The underlying problem concerning the law that "allows" or "requires" us to get a permit is law that makes carrying a gun "unlawful" to begin with. It starts there, then laws are passed that create exceptions to the original law, to allow carry under certain conditions after you jump through a few hoops and pay a fee. It is that original law that is unconstitutional. Eliminate that original law, then there is no opportunity to require permits. B.E.Wood

 

[Trip20]

2A infringement is never a good thing, but...

But?

For those of you who believe a training requirement is a good thing, why don't you provide proof that there is an epidemic of mishaps by uneducated gun-carriers in states that do not require training.

I mean, if this is such an relevant issue; one that would garner +1's from supposed 2A supporters, I would expect there to be undeniable evidence that, A) there's a real problem in states that do not currently require training, and B) mandated training will solve this problem.

Good luck with that. I already know you won't find squat.

Until you can provide proof that there's such a NEED to make everyone safer by mandating CCW training, do the rest of us a favor and think twice about advocating further restrictions on the RKBA based on a non-issue.

 

[TCB in TN]

I too think it's a good idea for training being required. Face it, some people are very ignorant about firearms. Do you want these people being armed out in the state? Not me! We get trained to drive, trained to do our job, why not get training on what could be used in a life saving situation? by reqiring a minimum standard for training and instruction, it'll hopefully weed out those that are serious enough about getting thier permit. I'd rather not have people with 1/2 serious attitudes carrying a gun around the state I live in. I've taken a number of training classes and some had ppl that had ZERO knowledge of firearms. It's these people that this bill is wanting to do something about.

Couple of comments, 1st is the entire slippery slope thing. What men mean for good, Govs oft use for ill. Second, if you see someone ignorant of basic safety, then for God's sake, help them out and educate them. That is one of the problems that to many of us have today is that rather than helping people we want to complain. I would rather educate them than to "WEED THEM OUT". Because right now you feel that YOU are responsible enough to have fire arms, but guess what to many other folks you are just another nut who wants a gun. Someone who can't be trusted and who needs to be weeded out to. The fact you ARE serious about carrying a gun scares them just as much as the fact that some folks are NOT serious scares you. Becareful what you wish for, you just might get it.

 

[sigman4rt]

There is a gentleman in So. Maine who puts on the NRA "personal protection in the home" class. He is now the only person in the entire state certified to teach the NRA "personal protection outside the home" classes. The inside the home class runs about 10 hours and costs $75. to $80. The outside the home class would run two to three days and cost between $150. to $250. He is in tight with the bills sponsors and as the only person certified to teach the class would have a lock on handgun training in Maine. It's strictly a matter of dollars and cents going into his pocket only.

He would be the only instructor for CCW's and for anyone wanting to get an instructors certification.

 

[mmike87]

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

I tend agree. But there are two issues to consider.

1) Who comes up with the training requirements? The requirement SHOULD come from feedback from real, bonified self defense fire training experts, not politicans.
2) Expections - the requirement should not EVER be used as a form of gun control. They should be reasonable requirements that anyone with 1/2 a brain can pass at a minimal cost. Very basic marsmanship and an overall emphasis on gun handling safety.

The problem is that the antis use training requirements in some states as a form of gun control, or worse yet allowing only "select" citizens with a "need" to carry at all. This is why I typcially balk at training requirements. Not because trianing is a bad idea, it's not - but it's because I don't trust the folks deciding what the training is.

ON THE OTHER HAND ... free speech has killed more people on this Earth than any gun ever did. Wars have started because of speeches people have made. An no training requirment exists before engaging in public speaking.

So, I guess I am on the fence.

 

[dave_pro2a]

Yeah but:

Your right to have good ideas is protected under constitution.

My right to 'not have my rights affected' by your good ideas is also protected under the constitution.

Nowhere does it exists that you have a right to force your good ideas upon me.

So in summation, take your good ideas and...

 

[sigman4rt]

This new course of instruction would have written exams, fail them and you fail the course. Why must I pass written exam to exercise a constitutionally guaranteed right? phsycological Exams? For a God given right? 1984 here we are.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

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.

Ever wonder why the WA and PA permits are not recognized by as many States as some other State permits? WA only recently has managed to get some reciprocity with some others. Before it was only the standard 6 or 7 that will take any permit.

I have said many times before, training is a solution. Before you propose a solution, you should have some sort of a problem. And in the ideal world, there should be some relation between the problem and the proposed solution.

You have shown a problem -- because other states have training requirements, states without such requirements cannot easily get reciprocity. But frankly, that's the only problem.

I have heard people say:

"You need training in safety before carrying a gun." Sounds good, but the rate of firearms accidents is going down, even as the numberr of people carrying is going up.

"You need more shooting in your qualifications course." Also sounds good -- but where's the evidence armed citizens are missing too many bad guys?

"You ought at least be able to strip and clean your gun." Hmmmm . . . so the real problem is too many dirty guns out there?​

Guys, the real problem is too many people are willing to accept infringements on the right to keep and bear arms.

Maybe we need training in the Constitution for everyone, not just people with CCW.

 

[sigman4rt]

Amen, Vern. Maine native here, born here, lived here for 53 of my 54 years. In the last 5 years we've had exactly 7 CCW self defence shootings in the whole state. All 7 were investigated by the AG's office, all 7 were deemed justified. It is not the wild west that these people infer. Where is the problem with the current regulatory procedure? It should not be hard to get a CCW permit. In all reality you shouldn't even need one, like VT. or AK. Follow the money, who is going to benefit from this? It's a downright shame.

 

[deadin]

"You need training in safety before carrying a gun." Sounds good, but the rate of firearms accidents is going down, even as the numberr of people carrying is going up.

I can't verify it, but might this have something to do with the number of States that are requiring training is increasing.

 

[gezzer]

I'm out of this thread because it's spiraling downhill quickly.

Yes, madatory training for a right started the spiral, the spiral leading to loss of freedom :banghead:

I feel bad for the real ME people. I am one of them my parents, my wife’s, and all our relatives are from ME. We moved for Freedom and less taxes to the Live Free or Die State for a reason. Lot's of our family have followed.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

I can't verify it, but might this have something to do with the number of States that are requiring training is increasing.

You can't verify it because it isn't true. The decline began long before CCW was common, and continued steadily, unaffected by any CCW training requirement.