AUGUSTA, Maine — Lawmakers are considering a bill that would allow state employees to bring guns to their workplace as long as they have a concealed weapons permit and keep the firearm locked in their vehicle and out of sight.
LD 1603, sponsored by Rep. Dale Crafts, R-Lisbon Falls, was modeled after a contentious bill passed last session that gave similar rights to private sector employees.
The Legislature’s Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee held a public hearing on the new bill Monday, but the committee is not expected to vote on it until next month.
No one spoke in favor of the bill, although the National Rifle Association of America submitted written testimony in support.
“When the state allows employees to park on their property, the property rights of the state should not negate the constitutional right of self-defense for their employees,” the NRA letter read.
Sen. Garrett Mason, R-Lisbon Falls, the Senate chairman of the criminal justice committee and a co-sponsor of the bill, said the bill’s intent is simply to give state employees the same rights as private sector employees.
A handful of people spoke in opposition Monday, including Bill Harwood, representing Maine Citizens Against Handgun Violence.
“It’s unfortunate that this bill is here, coming on the heels of the controversial bill last spring,” he said. “There is no compelling reason for these employees to have guns at work in their car.”
Peter Gore, vice president of government relations for the Maine State Chamber of Commerce, said he has spoken to many employers since last year’s bill, LD 35, passed and all have expressed concerns.
Rep. Gary Plummer, R-Windham, asked Gore if any employees had actually been less safe since the law went into effect instead of just feeling less safe.
Gore replied: “No, but they are waiting.”
Rep. Stephen Hanley, D-Gardiner, told Gore he wasn’t interested in reliving the debate over LD 35.
Last spring, after heated debate, the House and Senate passed the bill that would prohibit employers from banning guns at workplaces.
John Peters, president of Downeast Energy Corp. in Brunswick, also referenced LD 35 during his testimony in opposition to LD 1603.
Peters said his company instituted a no-guns-at-work policy about 16 years ago when one of his employees was shot and killed on site.
“LD 35 took away our ability to control what happens on our property,” he said, adding that the law shouldn’t be expanded so soon.
Sen. Stan Gerzofsky, D-Brunswick, said he worried about passing a one-size-fits-all bill for all state employers. For instance, he said, there are correctional facilities in Maine that have no barriers between parking lots and where inmates are housed.
They already have that right. Anyhow….arent there more pressing problems facing the citizens of Maine??? Another wheel spinning do nothing waste of time.
They do not right now have that “legal” right to have firearms on state property as employees. The bill that passed last year was so private sector company’s could not prevent employees from bringing firearms on company property as long as said employee has a concealed weapons permit and vehicle is locked.
And so much for private property rights. And the Republican’ts talk about intrusive government. “Their” intrusive laws are okay, the other guys’ laws aren’t. HYPOCRITS.
My right to protect myself trumps their right to say I can’t. Come on over to my house uninvited and lets see if my 2nd Amendment trumps your 1st Amendment.
“Peters said his company instituted a no-guns-at-work policy about 16 years ago when one of his employees was shot and killed on site.” Guess what, Mr. Peters? You say “no guns allowed on property.” Do you think that would have actually stopped that person from bringing a gun on your property and killing your employee? I doubt it.
“’It’s unfortunate that this bill is here, coming on the heels of the controversial bill last spring,’ he said. ‘There is no compelling reason for these employees to have guns at work in their car.’” How about self defense when not on the premises? (i.e. too and from work, extracurricular activities)
I seem to have missed all the crime being committed on workers heading to and from work or at ‘extracurricular’ activites.
How about this? Someone could have a gun in his vehicle at work, get mad about something and run out to his car to get his gun and act before he has had a chance to cool down.
Someone could also pick up a lamp and kill someone in a fit of rage instantly.
And you can try to defend yourself from a lamp attack better than a gun attack
Yes because I carry my gun wether its legal or not. Mr lamp would meet Mr 9mm real quick.
Then you would be breaking the law
Luckily for me I’m moderately wealthy and dont have a need to work in businesses that my family does not own, but from what i’ve see, Im only breaking the law if my lawyer can’t bargain me into ”just a fine”. which is never.
Well golly gee, aren’t you extra special-you’re “moderately wealthy.” So that entitles you to special privileges or something? What a horses a**!
Better to be alive and judged than dead and right in this case!
And someone who was trying to kill him wouldn’t be? I’m guessing you don’t comprehend your argument is circular, or even what a circular argument even is… but suffice to say that you don’t have a clue.
LMAO….. you’re ridiculous
A person likely to act in such a rage, would just as likely use another weapon if a firearms was unavailable. You’re trying to rationalize totally irrational acts. Why do we allow cars that exceed the speed limit? Can the rest of us that drive at sane speeds be trusted to drive safely? Why yes, it appears we can. So, can those of us who own legally firearms be trusted not to commit crimes? Or are we all criminals just awaiting the incident that pushes us too far?
And I can reasonably expect to be able to protect myself from someone who is attacking me if that person does not have a gun.
If your gun is locked in your car while you are at work it is not going to save you from someone attacking you inside your place of work. Period. You would have to avoid the initial attack, run to your vehicle and get your gun and then run back into the building to ‘protect’ yourself from the attack. But if you could evade the initial attack and get o your car and get your weapon out of the vehicle you are already safe and may actually be shot by police or other security responding to the initial act(s) of violence if you have a gun in your hand.
The intent of this bill really has nothing to do with having a gun at your workplace. The intent is for those of us who do carry to be able to carry before or after work and then use our vehicle as a place to store our gun safely while we’re putting in our 8,10,12 hours. While you may not find it necessary, according the to the daily news I do, in-fact, feel the need to protect my family and will continue to do so. Law allowing me to store or not I’ve always had one in my vehicle. Tis better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.
Don’t forget … you would have to take time to unlock your car as well!
A gun in your vehicle is for protection to and from work, it has nothing to do with work!
Plus they could go hunting after work without going home to get there gun. Some state employees travel 60 or more mile from home. Never know you might see a deer about anywhere.
How about this, there is a rule that says someone can’t bring their gun to work but they do anyway because they don’t care about the law. They get mad about something and run out to their car and get their gun and act before they have had a chance to cool down. Yup rather take my chances being a law abiding citizen and having my gun on property to protect myself while I’m at work. Hypothetical: I have an abusive ex who is stocking me and I have several restraining orders on them. They come after me because I’m on my way to work and know that I cannot have a gun on state property and abduct/kill me. I think I would rather have my gun in my vehicle thank you very much.
Who knows that someone could also be a republican in the state congress ; )
Oh now you are going to get attacked by everyone on this forum because you are obviously only reacting with emotion not reason :)
Emotion? I’m just having fun ; ) It sounds like you guys need to take it easy.
Haha Last time I checked most of em were at least voting like Republicans.
Of course most liberal tend to ignore the fact that a person intent on committing murder likely could disregard other laws as well. “Oh damn, I’d kill that SOB if I could only bring my gun to work!” Yeah, that law is mighty effective!
I used to think that the anti gun activists really believed the world would be a safer place if guns were illegal. Now I realize they really just support taking away our rights as Americans giving the goverment total control with no means to ever defend ourselves. It wiuld be so much easier to pass a liberal agenda of Marxism or Socialism without a population that can fight back. They have names for people like that, none I will use here.
Even though I’m classified as a liberal. I also have an ounce of common sense to realize that until someone sets up car searches at every employee parking lot, there is absolutely no way of enforcing the ban on firearms in peoples vehicles.
I was taught over 50 years ago that a good rule of thumb while in command is, ‘Never give a command that you doubt will be obeyed.’
They can allow state employees to carry weapons to work, but they can’t beef up security in the district court houses? What good is the gun to those that work for the courts when they aren’t protected while at work?
Everybody has a legal right to carry a gun, the insane war on drugs has made everyone a bit jumpy, End the war and end the desire for protection. State workers are always bothering people usually for money, like revenue collection so the legislatures can waste time talking about issues like this. The government pushes fear and people respond by wanting to protect themselves. This is capitalism at its best, good marketing practices reap excessive returns. It is like a scam and they make the money. I think Peace is the answer for the people but not the best answer for the state workers because they would be out a job. War is their bread and butter.
huh? State workers for war? I have to say that’s definitely a stretch. Most of the state workers I know don’t see war as their bread and butter. Politicians maybe, the worker bees, no way.
90% of the work for cops, courts and corrections comes from the drug war, lawyers would have to find honest work without it. Most of the work in child protective services comes from the drug war; it costs at least $40,000 a year to keep one child in custody. A good portion of the budget for DHHS goes to people caught in the drug war; medicaid, food stamps, general assistance… These are all state workers who make their living serving the drug war. These are the worker bees. What’s not to understand?
So legalize drugs and ban guns?
A totally unnecessary bill that is designed only to push the agenda of the NRA. Please stop wasting our time on this junk and accomplish something that is actually meaningful.
The constitution and self defense it totally unnecessary? Glad I don’t work for the state so that I can have my handgun on me too and from work.
Nope – they’re both fine. This particular bill has nothing to do with either of them.
How? It has everything to do with the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms as well and my right to defend myself to and from work. If I’m not allowed to have my gun in my locked vehicle while at work, than how am I to protect myself in my travels?
You have a perfect right to protect yourself AT work too! But, one step at a time…
Do you live in such a dangerous place that you need protection to go to and from work? If you do, please let me know where it is so I can stay away from your neighborhood.
Can you predict where all crimes are going to happen? Where is this Utopia that no crime will ever take place? One should not have to forfeit their constitutional right because they accept a government job.
I can be reasonably sure that I am not going to be a victim of a crime or need a weapon to protect me on my way to or from work. I know enough to lock my car door to protect me from a car jacking or injury from an accident and I can make a pretty good guess on the safety of any of the places I may have to stop in.
Really? So mall shootings occurring in random shopping malls, schools, colleges, restaurants, and homes doesn’t happen in the area you live? There is no bath salts, prescription drugs, or domestic violence either? Reasonably sure isn’t good enough for some of us.
Please link all of the ramdon mall shootings, school shootings, restaurant shootings and shooting in homes that occur in Maine on a regular basis. And then tell me how allowing people to have weapons in their car while they drive to work and back home will stop these, apparently, common shootings.
On the main page of this very newspaper right now there was a man found guilty for threatening someone with a hatchet. There was a couple threatened with a knife by someone on bath salts in downtown Bangor a couple months ago. There was a teacher and children killed in Dexter this spring. A man went and shot another at work before being killed by police. And these are just a few. And how’s it going to help me to and from work? Because I, like I suspect many people do, run errands many days before and after work. That means I’m going out in public locations where god only knows what can happen. I want to be prepared for ‘what if’.
hey, don’t cloud this issue with real life examples. It will upset the “oh the cops will save us” liberals.
Good man! So, all you have to worry about is home invasions and crazed, strung out druggies, right? Piece of cake.
Have you read the news lately?
You are entitled to and I repect your opinion but you are so wrong.
I REPECT your opinion, but you are wrong.
so jobs is pretty much out the window????????????? Can I sue the governor for false advertising??
“OPEN FOR BUSINESS”
How is your post relevant?
the only thing this congress and governor should be doing is job creation, espically if he’s going to throw 65,000 people off of Maine Care.
Another thing that this Gov. should be doing is throwing out those who are riding the welfare gravy train but that would be off subect wouldn’t it?
Yes how dare the agenda of a majority of americans be pushed in legislature, dam the majority of us.
Good idea. How about a story on “National Right to Carry Law passes U.S. House” (subheadline) “Lawmakers crush Anti-gun Amendments as Gun Owners look toward the Senate”
Why does anybody have to bring ANY gun to the workplace!!! I have a Conceals Weapon permit and not once have I even thought of bringing my handgun to work. Very Interesting!
They aren’t bringing them INTO the workplace, they would bring them TO the workplace and leave them locked in their car while working. As for your question that ends with 3 exclamations points, the obvious answer is the same reason why any other non felon, American citizen might want to have a gun on hand enroute to/from work. They might have an abusive ex-husband/wife or there might be muggers or other criminal elements along their route to get back home or they might just like to have a gun with them for their own personal reasons. You have YOUR own reasons for having a concealed carry permit and may carry whenever YOU feel it’s appropriate and nobody expects you to explain where/when you choose to carry your weapon, and just like you, these state workers have their own reasons which may be the same or may be different from yours.
do you work w/ large amounts of cash?? I do!! Its not IF you get robbed its when you get robbed welcome to the days of prescription abuse.
But if your gun is in your car how is it going to protect you in your workplace?
I guess you could ask the person robbing you to let you go to your car and that you’ll be right back.
When are you going to get it, Its not IN the workplace, its before or after work! TRAVELING!
I think many of us would stipulate that our gun really should be on our person at all times; it is the only way to be personally secure, and not have to depend on exterior factors for our safety.
If that works for you, good! Other people may have different concerns. Say – the gal who has an abusive ex stalking her, or perhaps a man who has pissed off a local thug… The point being that a person’s right to possess a means self defense should not be abrogated by fiat.
Maybe the government is getting scared of the people.
Let’s hope so.
First, I’m an advocate for concealed carry. Every US citizen
should exercise their 2nd amendment right and do so, safely. That
being said, this law will not prevent work-place violence, nor will it create
it. Having the weapon readily accessible (and knowing how to safely use it) is
vital to protecting your loved ones and yourself. An “incident” that would
require you to draw your weapon and proceed, would not include you running out
to your vehicle, retrieving said weapon, and hurrying back into the building to
“protect” others. You would find yourself in a terrible spot with the law. That is fact….. Having the weapon available
to you before and after work makes absolute sense, but your workplace never
needs to know this. You shouldn’t be broadcasting that you have a loaded
firearm in your vehicle to begin with. You aren’t breaking any laws. The public
sector should have these same rights.
It’s not so I can protect myself at work, it’s so that I can protect myself when traveling to and from work. If I can’t have my gun in my locked vehicle on company (or in this case, state) property, than I cannot have it in my travels.
And who are you protecting yourself from?
I’m not saying there is anyone in particular. How about all of the home invasions, kidnappings from vehicles, etc. What if an employee has a restraining order out on an abusive ex-spouse? We obviously know how well those work. (Dexter) I don’t expect the police to be at my side 24/7 and if there is someone that I need protection from, I will take my protection into my own hands. It is unconstitutional for the state to deny me that right.
Yes, I read of all kinds of abductions from cars in Maine. Here is a easy way to avoid being abducted from your car while in it, lock your doors!
I guess all victims of violent crimes are just stupid for letting it happen? Oh yeah, we live in Maine where nothing bad will happen. Guess what if no one breaks into my home or attack me or my loved ones in my presence, likely you’ll never know my name or about my guns. If in the unlikely chance someone does try to make me or mine a victim, you’ll likely hear about it.
I never said victims of violent crimes are stupid but there are ways to lessen the odds of being a victim.
This was about needing a gun in your car to protect yourself while on your way to and from work. I pointed out that car jacking is very rare in Maine and that there is a simple easy way to avoid a car jacking or make it much less of a problem. Simply locking your car doors will make it extremely difficult to get car jacked, no gun needed to protect yourself. If someone jacks you in your car they most likely already have their weapon out and would win the contest to see who could fire their gun first.
Home Invasions are a different matter and if you feel you need a gun to protect you or your loved ones in your home then by all means get one or two or three or however many you need to feel safe.
It’s not always about being car jacked either. I like to take it with me when I run errands after work, when I’m not in my car. I’m not going to drive the 2 hours it takes me to get home to grab my gun then go back to run my errands.
When you hold up a protective order and brandish it at your attacker, it conveys absolute protection… if you are holding a gun in your other hand. Otherwise, well, the record is full of the death notices of people who relied on a PO alone.
Tell that to anybody who has ever been a victim of a crime. Do you not read the news?
I’m sorry but if someone gets the drop on you then it doesn’t matter if you have a gun or not.
You may be right, but things don’t always work out according to the plans of the criminals. I definitely want the edge, if an opening arises to use it. http://hilariousgifs.blogspot.com/2011/04/stupid-criminal-drops-gun.html
You would think different if someone pulled a knife on you and you had a gun… It happened to me! I’m glad I carry!!!
Are we naming names? Is one expected to know ahead of time whom his/her attacker might be? If there’s no crime, then guess what, you’ll never know about the gun on my person. No crime, well, no crime.
It makes no difference, you don’t need a reason to carry!
When I was growing up, one of my high school friend’s mother was killed by her estranged, former husband while she was in her car at her work location (before or just after work, I can’t recall.)
Is that enough of a need for you?
Paranoia. I have traveled alone back and forth over this country multiple times from one coast to another and have been in many sketchy situations. I have never once felt the need to carry a gun.
What you *feel* and what *is* are two different things.
Maybe you aren’t a woman with a crazy, former, husband following you around.
Lucky you!
Good for you. I would never ever suggest to you that you should get a gun.
“Having the weapon available to you before and after work makes absolute sense, but your workplace never needs to know this.” My point exactly. Todd, your employer should never know about this. Your co-workers should never know about this. It may seem unethical to not disclose this information to your employer, but your employer (in this case, the State of Maine) has decided it was their “right” to prohibit you from exercising your Second Amendment right…….
And up until last year, they gave that “right” to prohibit you from exercising your second amendment right to the private sector employers. This bill should pass.
Properly done, concealed carry is just exactly that! Nobody has a clue, but protection is close to hand. The liberals on here would freak if they knew how many of their neighbors carry daily. Citizens carrying concealed serve to protect not only themselves and their families, but a host of other people they happen to be with daily. All of these people, unknowingly, benefit from the additional security of having armed friends and neighbors nearby. Why would we deny this degree of security to our neighbors who work for the state?
just what we need disgruntled employees carrying guns to work.not that state workers should be disgruntled.what with days off without pay and other loss of benefits.
it would be nice to protect yourself against that disgruntled employee instead of being at his mercy or not…..
So you are working at your desk in the office and have a gun in your car. Disgruntled worker comes into the office and starts shooting. You run out of the building to get your gun and you go back in? Talk about stupid.
Well, you do have the option of just running away and ‘screw’ your poor defenseless coworkers. At least you would be safe. You don’t owe then anything, do you? Somebody else can deal with it.
What loss of benefits??? There hasn’t been a furlough day at the state since baldacci was in the blaine house.
they just ended in May 2011 (but yes, they were left over from Baldacci’s “budget”)
“A handful of people spoke in opposition Monday, including Bill Harwood, representing Maine Citizens Against Handgun Violence.
“It’s unfortunate that this bill is here, coming on the heels of the
controversial bill last spring,” he said. “There is no compelling reason
for these employees to have guns at work in their car.”
This clown must not have read the second amendment, or any of our Constitution for that matter, or he’d realize that the burden of proof is on the government to come up with a “compelling reason” why it must deny any citizen any of their constitutionally guaranteed rights. It’s NOT up to each citizen to have a “compelling reason” to exercise ANY of their rights.
No kidding, now we need a “compelling reason” to exercise a right.
I think he said the GOVERNMENT needs a compelling reason to DENY YOU of YOUR rights.
“There is no compelling reason
for these employees to have guns at work in their car.”
that is what I was referring to.
Sorry I hit tthe like button by mistake, anyway. You’re right, we do not need a compelling reason to have guns at work in their car but We must have the right to do so if we choose. I was saying it’s the Government that has to have the compelling reason to DENY you your right.
Says you, but you don’t get to make the rules, thank goodness!
I believe in the right to keep and bear arms. The US Supreme Court has affirmed the right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental right of an individual. Guns don’t kill people, people kill people….just saying
Amended to say people with guns kill more people than people without guns kill people.
Actually unarmed Doctors accidentally kill more people in the US than guns. Maybe we should ban them?
Straw argument that is irrelevent.
Doctor’s save way more lives then they accidently kill whereas guns do not save more lives then they kill.
No less than 278 lives were saved in 2010 in the United States according to the FBI’s justifiable homicide by a private person. That is about 100 less than Justifiable Homicides by law enforcement. That tells me that it is just as important for citizens to have right to protect themselves as it is police.
Also understand that violent crime has been on a very steady decline over the past 20+ years and having more citizens armed either deters crime or has no effect on crime.
Statistically people who are issued a concealed weapon permit are 5 times less likely to commit a crime.
Statistically speaking you are more likely to die from gun violence if you own a gun.
As for the country being safer if all people carry guns we only have to look back at our recent past to see that. The Wild West was called wild for a reason.
Violent crime is also going down in Western European countries, which already have less violent crime then the US does, that do not allow gun ownership. I wonder why that is.
I would like you to find some citations for the “wild west” truly being crime ridden and wild. Fun fact: it wasn’t! But thanks for trying. As far as statistics regarding likelyhood of dying and owning guns, try to find some quality stats on that. Good luck.
You really have no clue about what you are talking about and are arguing based on emotion, not facts and reality.
You are repeating Brady Campaign lies! These statements have all been debunked. Try Googling ‘Brady Campaign Lies’ and see what you get.
Have you ever considered moving there???
because no one can defend themselves
Your statistics are false! When Australia banned guns and made people surrender them, home invasions alone increased 90%. Every state in America that has strict gun control laws sees more violent crime every year than states that allow concealed carry. Why? Because the criminals know people can’t fight back in those states, and they have guns anyway because the don’t care about the law. You are terribly misguided and misinformed, pbmann.
“You are terribly misguided and misinformed, pbmann.” I’d say he’s conveniently misguided and misinformed. Alas, this is one issue that tends to polarize people, we can’t change them, they’ll not convince us, so our best bet is still to educate and promote responsible ownership.
I have no problem with such people being ignorant. Some of them can’t help it. But – when they try to impose their ignorance on the rest of us, it gets to be a bit much, doesn’t it?
Better do some fact checking on that Crime Stat you threw out there. Since Britain banned their subects from owning handguns the violent crime has risin significantly. Same goes to our Aussey friends. I fear only a Govt. that fears my gun.
Actually, they DO. The best estimates are that firearms are used defensively over two and a half million times per year in this country. In many cases, the gun merely has been produced (shown) and the crime has been prevented. Try that with a Tootsie Roll or a telephone book!
That estimate was debunked because they took the largest estimate from several studies and increased it 10 fold to make it look better.
Ok by who was the estimate debunked ?
That is absolutely right! And so do automobiles… excuse me, people using automobiles.
and knives and baseball bats and with their bare hands and with automobiles…just saying…
Naw she said it right and doesn’t need an amendment.
“There is no compelling reason for these employees to have guns at work in their car.” – Bill Harwood, representing Maine Citizens Against Handgun Violence.
OK Bill, why don’t you tell this to the poor lady who was abducted at gunpoint in a Walmart and forced to drive to an ATM to fork over some of her cash. How about all the other folks who are victims of car jackings and the like? With the current economic downturn and the overwhelming liklihood that the situation will remain dismal, if not get worse, there is all the reason in the world to prepare for more violence and crime in the streets as people become more and more desperate.
It is simply unacceptable to discriminate against state workers. All you are saying by opposing this legislation is that you feel ordinary citizens should have more rights than their state-worker counterparts. There is simply no compelling argument to back such a stance, as it is an immoral position that seeks to treat one group of people differntly than another, when no actual difference exists. State workers should have ALL the rights of those that work in the private sector.
Lock your car door and you will most likely never be a victim of a car jacking.
Women in Walmart was abducted at gun point so she had no choice of getting her gun out of her glove compartment, or where ever she might have stored it without getting shot first.
That is EXACTLY why she would have been far better off to have had a gun on her person.
I carry at work everyday!! I dont want to be a victim!
same here. and noone is the wiser.
Never carried a gun and never been a victim not even when I lived in Las Vegas.
And your point is? (Off subject I’m sure)
No, I was replying to Skidoo31 who stated that he carried a gun everyday because he did not want to become a victim and I was just saying that I never carry a gun and havenever been a victim.
Usually a reply to a post has to do with that post and you should read the post to see why something was said in the reply instead of looking foolish or lazy because you walked into the middle of a conversation.
You must not have understood my simple question. I’ll ask again in a way even you can understand. Is your point, Because I have never carried a gun I’ve never been a victim?
Get real Pb and read how foolish and Lazy Your own comments are.
You asked me what my point was and I tried to explain it to you but apparently it went over your head.
Well, there is a saying that a New Conservative is the Liberal that got mugged last night…
So that means there are never any victims??
Does anyone actually think this has ever gone through a murderer’s head: “Nope, can’t kill him there, guns aren’t allowed on their property!”
Why do all of these posters think this is about being able to carry at work? It’s not. It’s about being able to carry to and from work, keeping it in your locked vehicle while you are at work.
Because they can’t read?
Actually, I would really prefer that someone carrying to and from work could carry the firearm while in the workplace, in a locked metal container.
This would keep firearms from being stolen while it is in a “secured” vehicle.
I would prefer that as well, but until they change the law that says “Employers may not prevent permitted concealed carriers from carrying in the work place” than I won’t carry mine in my work place. I guess I’m one of those darned law abiding citizens. I know, if you have a concealed weapons permit and are properly trained to use said weapon, your right to carry it shall not be infringed upon. PERIOD!
Where in either the Federal or Maine Constitutions does it say that in order to keep and bear arms a citizen has to be trained and licenced?
I realize that I am reading what both documents SAY and not what has been interperted by politicians over the last 100 – 125 years but …
It doesn’t say that but I think that education on safe gun practices should be a requirement for all citizens who are mentally capable.
I agree that anyone that owns a firearm should have some kind of training, but it should not be manditated by the government.
I think they mandate it just to keep the delusional Liberals happy.
Most stolen firearms used in crimes are stolen from vehicles. Fact.
Please provide a citation for this alleged fact.
The source is from a story I read a couple years ago. While most guns used in crimes are bought legal, mostly from straw purchase sales, up to 15% of guns used in gun crimes are stolen and of those stolen theft from vehicles were more common than theft from homes.
“Most stolen firearms used in crimes are stolen from vehicles. Fact.” yet, according to you, only %15 of guns used in gun crimes are stolen. Therefore %85 of guns used in gun crimes were brought to the crime by the perpetrator. (According to you. Fact.)
Wrong almost 100% of the guns were brought to the crime by the perpetrator but they up to 15% of the time they got the gun from either stealing it or buying it from someone who stole it.
Are you talking about the thousands of straw purchases made under the “Fast & Furious” project of the BATFE authorized by the US Attorney General Eric Holder?
Hmmm… just lately, the U.S. Government seems to be the biggest promoter of straw purchases. Must be okay, because no authorities seem to be interested in going after Mr. holder, who is in charge of things.
Where did you get your fact ?
Sounds like a great argument for not leaving your gun in the car, when you could be carrying it. Better to have it under your direct control at all times.
After this one gets passed, I think we should have another bill that would allow lawful concealed carriers to carry on a college/university campus.
https://www.facebook.com/ConcealedCampus
http://www.concealedcampus.org/
That sure might of helped a certain Virginia college, I like it.
There could have been potentially more injured and killed because now there would have been a crossfire.
Let’s ask the dead and injured if they would’ve rather been in a crossfire or just shot at point blank.
Would dying in a crossfire be a better way to go? Is that the point of the question?
Nope, Not at all. Point of the question is; Would you rather be at the mercy of a deranged murderer and have no chance of survival like the dead ones or would you like for someone to try to intervene and stop him.
Suzanna Gratia-Hupp can speak to that, and she has a compelling story to tell. Remember the Luby’s Cafeteria Massacre? She was there. Her parents were both murdered there. Here you go: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9xUCI3nJsQ
Excellent I wish some of the nay sayers posting here would watch. Thanx
I’d rather take my chances.
Paranoia.
Realistic.
A concealed weapon permit holder is still bound by the law, they cannot go out and try to find an active shooter, just protect themselves if one is shooting at them. A crossfire would be highly unlikely as long as the law is followed. I’m also gonna go out on a limb and tell you from what I’ know most college aged kids will freeze in place or run away screaming if someone starts opening up in the next room, armed or not.
The greater likelihood is that lives would have been saved.
There is a simple solution to your concern: don’t choose to carry a weapon. My problem arises when I get the idea that you would like to limit MY options to do so.
It might have done; then again it might have made it worse. Who’s to say, given the unpredictability of people?
I’d rather take my chances.
The solution to a whack-job running around with a gun on a college campus is not having a bunch of over-confident, trigger happy whack jobs running around with their toy guns playing tough guy.
I said nothing of the sort. Get real!
I’m sure you see our troops as overconfident, trigger happy whackjobs as well, after all they are the same age.
Well, there is this case of the 24 year old Iraqi vet in Washington who killed 5 people last month.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/01/01/ranger-killed-in-mount-rainier-national-park-shooting/
The Virginia Tech shooter was a student, a senior, all totaled between the two, they killed 38 people plus themselves for a total of 40 people. Cho, at VT also wounded 25. So ya, let’s just let whoever have concealed weapons. And as was said, just because you have a permit doesn’t mean that you are verifiable responsible.
It’s not a constitutional right to bear a concealed weapon.
neither one of those people fit the criteria to get a permit, let alone even own a gun. Virginia tech was a failure of the background check system, not the gun industry. In fact a bipartisan bill was introduced that was sponsored by not only democrats but the NRA as well that modified the system a couple months after VT. Vets coming home are an issue that this country is not dealing with properly, they should in my opinion have to wait a while before buying guns or becoming cops as theyre still on edge from almost being shot everyday.
Maine doesn’t have any mental health investigation requirements.
Really why do they ask on the application then go on to tell you that perjury will result in prosecution, Its also illegal to own a firearm if you were ever admitted to a mental health institution for certain conditions, which the background check run through the fbi has information on. You cannot own a gun or have a permit in this state if you cannot meet even the most basic requirements set fourth by federal law.
Yes, they do.
http://www.pdfdownload.org/pdf2html/pdf2html.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmaine.gov%2Fdps%2Fmsp%2Flicenses%2Fdocuments%2FWeapons%2Fresident%20application%20package.pdf&images=yes
Hit the link above to see online the entire State of Maine Concealed Weapons Permit Application. Go to page 10 of 10 and you’ll see that the whole page is a release you must sign. It gives the state permission to check out your mental health records.
Go here: http://maine.gov/dps/msp/licenses/weapons_permits.html to find permit downloads, plus other relevant stuff.
Actually, having a concealed carry permit does mean that you have been verified as a responsible citizen. The background checks are thorough and we are all proven to be law-abiding. The whack-jobs who have done these mass killings have NEVER been CCW holders. They have been criminals that a CCW holder might have been able to stop if he had been allowed anywhere near the area. Remember, when seconds count, the police are only minutes away!
Maine doesn’t have any mental health investigation requirements, it only asks if you have you a mental health disorder that could cause you to be a danger to yourself or others.
There is no investigation, both of the above had mental health issues. In Cho’s case it was known.
Afraid you are wrong again Rus. Thats why doctors are required to report mental health disorders to the state so when they do the 6 month long investigation on your application it pops right up with a bright red flag.
There is, in fact, a mental health investigation and the police will not issue your permit if you don’t come back clean from AMHI/Riverview. You need to do some better research.
Yep! Part of the permit application is where you have to sign a release to let the authorities query the mental health establishment re: your stability and any past encounters with them.
I’d like to add something else to that: The crazies almost always choose the so-called Gun Free Zones in which to do their handiwork. Why? Well, they are CRAZY, not STUPID. They know a gun free zone gives them the greatest number of soft targets, and allows them the longest “spree time”. In actuality, the gun free zones are more dangerous than many other areas, because (assuming your friends and neighbors obey the law and don’t bring their guns) nobody will be armed and able to shoot back. Food for thought, eh?
Toy guns? Mine certainly don’t look like toys, nor do they act like them.
Tell me, what should citizens do while somebody (the wonderful government, maybe?) comes up with “the solution to whack jobs running around with a gun on a college campus?”
I would rather take my chances ARMED than unarmed. Maybe we should all just hide under the desks and wait for the police to show up. Boy, I feel safer already.
Call the police. I’d prefer that people who have training and recent psychological evaluations be the ones to serve and protect. Not every chuch norris fan with control issues and a handgun.
That’s right, when seconds count, the cops will be there in minutes!
Would you be appalled to hear that the police have NO DUTY to protect your person? Go ahead and call them, but don’t try to sue them if they do not arrive in time to keep bad things from happening to you. The Supreme Court has ruled that the police have no duty to protect individuals. Instead, their mandate is to preserve public order. This is extremely easy to check out; merely Google on the phrase “police duty to protect”. In short, nobody on this green earth has the DUTY to protect you. That is YOUR obligation, and it cannot be delegated. Oh heck, here is an excellent reference: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1976377/posts
How does that “right to carry” sound to you now?
It might be the solution if it was you kid laying there dead. My son has been shooting pistols and rifles since he was 5, he also has a black belt in Karate. If he was allowed to carry a gun in college and something like this happened in his immediate area, I would trust that he could easily eliminate the shooter. I am sure there are many kids of the same caliber.
Would have done wonders at Columbine.
Yep and the list goes on.
Untrained people all having firearms firng in panic mode does not make me feel safer.
And when is the last time this has happend ,pray tell? Where did this OK corral crossfire fight happen? …………………….It didnt, thats what.
I was replying to Todd Foster post saying that students need to be able to carry while on campus and in class.
It hasn’t because most people do not carry a gun with them at all times. As soon as they do you will hear of instances like this.
You would be surprised at how many people are out there,carrying a weapon with them at all times.
Hear, hear!
You know, it’s funny, just tonight a friend from my high school days (I’m 49) posted on her Facebook page an image of the targets she shot with a hand gun at her first ever attempt at a firing range and several other old friends started talking about *their* guns and shooting….. and I grew up in eastern Massachusetts, not Maine. I hadn’t suspected nearly as many of my old friends were now gun owners, again, given where I grew up, I wouldn’t have suspected it.
It was very eye opening comment thread on her photo indeed.
And, somehow, you have missed out on the fact that people like you have made this argument in every single state where debate on the right to bear arms has progressed to the point of voting to have concealed carry permittees? And in every single case, it has not happened. I’m sorry, we’re up to 49 state legislatures who do not agree with you. Maybe Illinois, or Washington, D.C., or New York City will make your case for you, but, if I were you, I wouldn’t be holding my breath.
Oh, pbmann, you’re gonna HATE this!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachian_School_of_Law_shooting
Two students who stopped a crazed killer!
WHere did he say “untrained”. Go ahead and apply for a CCW and you’ll get an idea of the caliber of people who have one.
So in order to get a CWP you have to take and pass rigorous training on how to identify and isolate threats while ensuring the safety of innocent bystanders? Being an outstanding citizen does not make you immune to panic or misidentification of a threat while protecting yourself or your family.
I know that police officers have a rigorous training program to do just that and they still can make a mistake.
The course I took to get my CCP had a live training.
You keep going off on all these wild tangents. Quit trying to read into everything. If you apply for a CCW you will be asked 4 pages of questions all refering to your eligibility for a CCW. Such as questions about your criminal history, your drug use, residence for the last 10 years, and yes training, all of which you have to be documented. You are right about one thing I am an outstanding citizen and I am not immune to panic but 20 years in the army trained me how to handle it.
Thank you for your service.
Welcome!
The right to keep and bear arms is a preexisting natural right to self defense, recognized as such, (but not granted by) in Article 2 of the Constitution. Article 2 does not GIVE us the right to keep and bear arms; it RECOGNIZES and AFFIRMS our right to keep and bear arms. It does not set forth standards of training. The states do that individually. If a person complies with state law in the matter, it does not matter what your FEELINGS are. Forty nine states now grant some form of concealed carry permit. There are more guns in civilian hands than ever before in history, yet the gun crime rate continues to go down. Every state that has had debates on some form of concealed carry has had a shrill minority predicting a ‘bloodbath’ if the legislation passed. It hasn’t happened yet. Despite the often expressed Liberal view that people in general are inherently untrustworthy with firearms, it turns out they are pretty much whistling in the wind.
I got most of my training shooting squirrels that were getting into my shed chewing my belongings, this was a very stressful situation , but I retained my composure and didn’t injure anyone else in the crossfire.
Careful Medway, they’ll call PETA on ya. BTW did ya do the redeye gravy with em? Hahaha
The average police officer is terribly inefficient with his weapon. They don’t practice. Most CCW holders do, in fact, practice and most states require that you demonstrate proficiency. While you are waiting for your unpracticed police protection to arrive, I will be defending my self and my family rather than cowering under a table.
I suppose you think the thugs and meth heads have all been trained to use firearms?? A person needs to protect themselves at all times against these people.
And it shouldn’t but that’s not what we are discussing is it? We are talking about the right for Govt. employees exercising their second ammendment rights are we not?
This should make you feel safer: The police, having no duty to save your bacon individually, will, if called to the gun free zone where you are cowering from a crazed shooter, surround the area to contain the problem. Their mandate is toward public safety. They will then attempt to find out where the crazy is and talk to him. Meanwhile (if he so chooses) the crazy can stroll around shooting people in the head to his heart’s content. After formulating a safe plan of attack and taking all precautions, the SWAT teams MAY be in time to bail you out, but, heck, I wouldn’t count on it. Wouldn’t it be nice if you had a gun in your pocket?
Then don’t choose to carry.
I can see it now. You go into DHHS with a complaint and a worker pulls a gun on you from the break room.
Try reading the story BEFORE commenting.
oh crap, what about the DMV?
If you have gone through the process to get a concealed weapons permit and have been cleared by federal and state authorities you should be able to carry a handgun anywhere in the united states. If every criminal thought that every honest and responsible citizen out there was carrying a weapon there would be a lot less crime. After you shot a few of course.
If every criminal thought that everyone was carrying then they would pull their gun out first and shot you dead if you went for yours or are you going to walk around with your gun in your hand at all times?
If it got to that point I wouldnt worry about my concealed weapon, i would be carrying around one of my assault style shotguns with some good old 000 buck.
You is Bad!
hehe so you would walk around with a loaded assault shotgun ‘just in case’? Best laugh of the night.
I am glad you found it funny, It was a joke.
That would make for one very short criminal career.
If you have a permit, you should be able to carry anywhere. Period!
On a plane? A train? A bus?
Yes.
It would have been handy on united flight 93 against a few towel heads with utility knives.
Would have been REAL nice if they would have had a U.S. Marshall on board to!
If you would go thru the CCW precess you would have recieved training on where you can’t carry. That includes Planes, Court rooms, Federal Buildings, etc, etc, etc. Got it???
Yes, of course. If you think the “security theater” performed by TSA losers at airports is keeping you safe, you need help. TSA has never, ever caught a terrorist. They can only react to terrorist attempts from the past. I wonder how many millions of times people have had to take off their shoes because ONE towelhead tried the shoe bomb deal (and he got it wrong!). Come to think of it – it is a small wonder that we don’t all have to take off our underwear and hand it over, after Mr. Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab tried to set off his hot pants…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7pGt_O1uM8
Thats AWESOME!
Finally. I hope it passes. It shouldn’t be necessary anyway. It should already be legal to carry everywhere since criminals will do it regardless of the law. Join the NRA today!
BEST Post yet.
I’ll argue for 2nd Amendment Rights, but no way I’ll join the NRA. The NRA hides behind silly conspiracy theories to fight off reasonable measures that would practically guarantee our rights as firearms owners for long to come.
You make an excellent point! The criminals and gang bangers ALREADY are carrying everywhere they go! They have taken the right to self defense to its logical conclusion = always be armed. pbmann, and others of his ilk, would deny every law-abiding person the same consideration and, furthermore, they would try to claim the high moral ground for doing so. See – if you CAN carry, and fail to do so, then get shot by some yahoo who DOES carry, you are somehow “better” than they are… Better, but DEAD. No thanks, I don’t want any.
Do you carry a spare tire in your car? Is it always there, ready to be used in an emergency? Do you feel better, knowing that you have it for when you might need it? Is it concealed from the view of the traveling public? Could it possibly serve to assist a friend, neighbor, or even a total stranger, in that you might call upon it to help you help them? Do you think you should be required to take it out of the trunk when you have to go to work? A gun is a tool. It is not inherently good or bad. But, it can save your life!
SHANE! yea
I carry my pistol anywhere I feel like, just had it in boston last month. If someone can fgure out where its hidden in my car then they deserve a prize.
so when a state employee snaps he or she will be able to bring a gun to work and take their co-workers with them?
And if a frog had wings he wouldn’t bump his butt when he jumps. Your post is Not relevant to the article.
They could do that now if they wanted to, I dont think they would wake up one morning and say “Hey I can legally carry a gun to work now, great now I can shoot all those pesky co workers” People really need to get with the program.
Haha, For a second I thought you were talking about my Frog!
Yeah cause a law banning guns from your car at work will stop an unstable person from doing ti anyway, right? I want to know how an employer would know I had a gun in my car? Do I forfeit my right to privacy and allow them to search my car for parking in their lot? So unless you blab it all over, chances are you could have a gun in your car at anytime, thus those who are not stable enough to handle a bad day at work, might already have a gun with them before going off the deep end. I’m betting if we truly knew the whole story 99.9% of people who “snap” had thought of that moment before the final straw was broken. I doubt to many people go from full sanity to rage filled murdered in one day?
The number of crimes commited by law abiding citizens who legally obtain a CCW permit is very,very low. Much less that crimes commited by people carrying a weapon illegally. I would much rather be in a crowded store with a bunch of shoppers who carry,than one where all guns are banned,thereby making it easier for a person who doesnt care about the law,come in with a gun and start shooting people,or commit a robbery, etc. I have been legally carrying for years, and having my firearm with me is no different that carrying my wallet. I hope I never have to use it,but its nice to have handy of I do have to protect my family or some other innocent from some dirtbag on a rampage.
a lot of money aqnd effort for a mean nothing bill. if this is the case then all workeres and non workers should be doing the same thing. this might level the playing field for teh good guys a bit?
Maine state workers should have the same rights as any other state of Maine citizen
Yeah…a few more hand cannons at work should make it easier for disgruntled employees to open fire the next time…
You can’t legislate morality. If someone is going to bring their gun to work and “go postal” the law isn’t going to stand in their way.” Oops, I don’t have my concealed weapons permit, I can’t take my gun to work today. ” Think not!
We may want to consider taking guns away from some local police that behave like Rosco and Enis. Scary allowing certain officers to carry weapons. We might be alot better off if they had tasers or mace.
Here in Florida we have the right as government workers to keep firearms in our locked vehicle as long as we have a concealed carry permit. I don’t give up my rights by working for the government. Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.
A lot of the posts remind of a joke about an older person who was stopped by the law and had declared that he/she had a concealed permit and was carrying. After the officer determined how many weapons the individual had he asked what are you scared of and the individual responded nothing. :)
Just what the state needs, More “Lose Nuts” with guns… For those going to fast foods, watch out for a angry state worker, he’ll pull a gun!!
I’d hope as part of Rep. Dale Crafts, R-Lisbon Falls, brillant idea, would also be the funds to increase State and Local police!
Maybe, as part of the “Maine, Open for Business” we could put a gun store at the toll booths!
Wont need more State & Local police cause all us “Loose Nuts” would have all the loonies under control!
Time for your meds, John.
This is the most ridiculous law I have ever seen under consideration, bar none. This article also contains a statement by the NRA that would be chuckle worthy if it wasn’t so tragically false. There is no constitutional right to self-defense with a firearm. No where does the second amendment suggest or imply such a rationale for the right. The right is based on allowing the people to form a militia to overthrown the government should it become tyrannical. Period. No hunters provision. No self-defense provision. No right to protect property by lethal force. The NRA knows better but wants people to “believe” that they have this right enshrined in the constitution.
As for the law on its merits, I can imagine no circumstance where this would serve to protect anyone. I can imagine a variety of situations where this will make it easy for someone to become the victim of a violent crime. It seems likely that there will never be a story in the paper about a theft or rape or assault that was thwarted by someone having a gun in the car outside a state building. It seems likely that eventually, someone will be the victim of a domestic type attack that was made easier by the permission to possess the weapon on state property. This will make nobody safer that is for sure. If I were an insurer, I would raise the rates on providing group casualty rates to the state and their employees since they are making the workplace less safe with this law. The preponderence of risk is not in the states favor.
As for your rant about the second amendment there have been a whole lot of smarter people than you or me that have recently found in favor of just the opposite. So keep on spouting the Liberal chants and maybe someone will agree. As for the law on it’s own merits, The Supreme Court and several District courts has recently said your claims about No self defense, No right to protect property, No hunting is NOT the way the Amendment is to be interpreted.
You said “It seems likely that eventually, someone will be the victim of a domestic type attack that was made easier by the permission to possess the weapon on state property. This will make nobody safer that is for sure.” This is based on what? A dream, Sara Brady said, or your ability to forsee the future? Certainly not on facts of which I am sure.
Don’t confuse populism with the founders intent. The NRA made up a part of the constitution to meet with their liking. Nowhere in our historic understanding of the second amendment is there a right to self defense with a fire arm. Read your history and it is very clear that the right was to allow the people to overthrown tyrannical government just the way the citizenry won the fight for independence. It was that and that alone that the founders contemplated.
On this issue, the gun fetishists that make up a majority of the population now will win the fight for the foreseeable future. You guys win and we all lose. We lose the hundreds of thousands that will continue to die senseless deaths due to our national preoccupation with guns. It is easy for you, living in a rural state. Try living in a large US city with a family. Every day you have to worry that your child may be shot. Should we start allowing school kids to arm themselves to, so they will be “safer”?
OK Rex, Here is some history for you to read that renders your entire rant Null and VOID.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller,1 the courts had yet to definitively state what right the Second Amendment protected. The opposing theories, perhaps oversimplified, were
(1) an “individual rights” approach, whereby the Amendment protected individuals’ rights to firearm ownership, possession, and transportation; and
(2) a “states’ rights” approach, under which the Amendment only protected the right to keep and bear arms in connection with organized state militia units.
Moreover, it was generally believed that the Amendment was only a bar to federal action, not to state or municipal restraints.
However, the Supreme Court has now definitively held that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that weapon for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Moreover, this right applies not just to the federal government, but to states and municipalities as well.
Notice that self defense “in the home”. The bill under consideration does not deal with anyone’s home, it relates to their cars.
Thank you for emphasizing my point. That was exactly what I was trying to convey. The NRA’s interpretation of the 2nd amend. is a very liberal reading. It goes far beyond even where modern precedent goes. Outside our homes and beyond our property lines, the right to self defense by fire arm is not constitutionally derived. They have been fighting this battle in Texas for decades.
Well. I guess we know where YOU are coming from! Too bad (for you) that the Supreme Court of the U.S. doesn’t happen to agree with you.
Paranoid, delusional, insecure, low self esteem, all reasons why people need to carry a concealed weapon.
I own guns. I believe in gun ownership. My concern would be the crimminals who break into the cars in the parking lots and steal the guns. It will happen……It’s just another request for another stupid, thoughtless, unnecessary law formulated in the mind of a Maine law maker with nothing better to do. Why not create a law that will make it more difficult for crimminals to get guns, not easier.
They keep making them all the time. The problem is, they lock em up and the Justice System keeps turning em loose, ie: suspended sentences, jumping bail etc..
When I say I carry I mean I carry! I carry a .380 in my pocket at all times, in the car, at the store, and especially in my work. I noticed a comment was made about being untrained and I would argue I am just as trained as some police officers I fire at least monthly and have completed several training classes. You need a training class to get your CWP fyi.
If what you say is true then you are at least more proficient than most police who only qualify occasionaly.
Not a damned thing wrong with that! And nobody has a clue! Excellent!
Stop playing politics. We all know the NRA is behind this. How much did the NRA give you this time?
Who’s playing politics? The NRA just wrote a letter of support, Bill Harwood, representing Maine Citizens Against Handgun Violence was up there spewing his paid propaganda ala Sara Brady.
We all know the NRA gives thousands of dollars to the republician party. Instead of trying to get more hand outs. Don’t you think you need to worry about how people are going to pay their bills? You were elected to do a job. Help the ones that elected you then worry about how much you need from the NRA.
I think all Americans need to have a tattoo on their foreheads of gun or gun w/line thru it in bright red, then I will know who I should defend with my concealed handgun in case of an emergency….just saying. I have no desire to protect anyone who thinks they can defend themselves with their voice or hands in a violent situation…..