Maine tries permitless CCW

S

stagpanther

New member
My state has stepped up to the plate and is attempting the permitless CCW. I already have a permit. The state police administers the system--and they are for it--the state police associations are against it. Permits actually need to be approved by local jurisdiction police chiefs where the permit holder resides. Other issues include state and national parks--they usually follow state rules--so there's resistance from the tourist industry to the idea of concealed carry in parks.
 
I didn't have to get my permit approved by anyone other than the state police when I sent in for it.

I thought going the local route was just an alternative.

I'd have to say I'm against permit less carry. We already have a pretty painless permit system, and having people take a basic handgun safety class every 5 years seems like a good idea.

I've seen too many morons handle their firearms like toys to be confidant that people would get training if it wasn't a requirement.

We've already got permit free open carry for the people that don't want to take a safety class. So nobody's rtkba is being infringed, and I don't have to worry quite as much that the lady rummaging through her purse at the park i take my kids has never been told you shouldn't keep an unholstered gun loose in a bag.

There are a lot more unsafe ways to conceal a gun than unsafe ways to carry openly. And if someone is open carrying in an unsafe way, the people around them have the opportunity to leave.
All constitutional carry would do here is mean more people would cc without taking the safety class.
I doubt the $25 fee is holding many people back.
 
On principle,I support no permit carry,but not without some reservations.
The price of Liberty is responsibility.
I do believe concealed carry should be "shall issue".I believe it should be low or no cost.
I do not have the elitist view"I should be able to carry,but not that person"

So far,concealed carry has been a success,from a crime and safety stand point.
We must keep it that way to continue our freedom.If it goes wrong,we will lose.
Two things we are not born with:
Knowledge/skills for safe and proficient gun handling

And a knowledge of the legal aspects of using deadly force.

I suggest folks who carry without those two skills put themselves,others,and the right to carry in jeopardy.

I guess I am a little conflicted between "No Permit" (Shall not be infringed) carry,or something akin to a Hunter Safety Card with a little legal instruction.

Whatever we have,it has to work.
 
As things stand now Maine is a shall issue state with a $25 permit fee. The only other retirement is that you have to have taken a safety course within 5 years of when you send in for your permit.

You can open carry without a permit.

I think it's a pretty effective system as is.
I definitely support everyone's right to carry, but I also support everyone's right to be able to avoid people carrying guns without any training.
Forcing open carry off you don't take a safety cost does both.
 
I'm neutral on the issue myself. I took a class out-of-state with actual police department officers many years ago and the class was all weekend and included several kinds of tests covering knowledge of both law and hang gun operations--and I would say for my level understanding it was barely adequate prior to taking the class.

I've been told--though haven't verified for sure--that as part of the state's background check they will request an informal approval from a local police official--this has been confirmed by a local police chief. As far as I know, the staties are the only authority that can presently handle the permitting system (which might explain why they are for the change--lots of administration overhead possibly) I remember my first permit application took about 2 months to process--they go much quicker now; so maybe they only do the local police check with the first application--I don't know.

Anyways--I have personally participated in referendums to expand hunter's rights and have seen those efforts shot down every time--I seriously doubt this will pass--especially when the tourist dollar (which is what drives Maine's economy now) is conflated into the argument.

PS--Of the states that have approved permitless CCW--which like Maine tend to be rural--I've heard of no conclusive statistics so far on any notable increase in violent crime etc.

PSS--My town has no LE department--it rents partial coverage (40 hours a week) split between the county sheriff's office and state police. My road, and others, are not incorporated by the town (i.e. private) which means they get no maintenence at all--and no LE, even the rental coverage--unless there is a call-in by a resident on that road. Needless to say, robberies drug-dealing vandalism, speeding, DUI etc. has sky-rocketed in areas like this. This almost forces LE into the hands of citizens IMO.
 
Last edited:
dayman said:
I'd have to say I'm against permit less carry. We already have a pretty painless permit system, and having people take a basic handgun safety class every 5 years seems like a good idea.
Click to expand...
Where does the Second Amendment say anything about taking a class every five years?

ANY required permit/license system is an affront to the Second Amendment. A requirement for mandatory training is just another level of infringement.

Is training a good idea? Absolutely. But it should be optional, not mandatory. Compare Maine's statistics with Pennsylvania's. Pennsylvania allows open carry with no permit, and has no training requirement to obtain a concealed carry permit. If training were effective in preventing firearms accidents, Pennsylvania should have a significantly worse record in this regard than Maine.

It doesn't.

dayman said:
I definitely support everyone's right to carry, but I also support everyone's right to be able to avoid people carrying guns without any training.
Click to expand...
Where is this alleged right enunciated in the Bill of Rights?
 
As I said on both posts, Maine already has permit free *open* carry.
You can bear arms to your hearts content.

The question is about removing the requirement for *concealed* carry as well.

I'm all for constitutional carry - which we have - but if you're concealing the fact that you're armed from the people around you, I feel that requiring a safety class is a reasonable societal demand.

Lots of "rights" aren't specified in the bill of rights. Concealed carry for example.
I think it's an extension of our right to bear arms. Just like driving is an extension of our right to use public roads.
I'm also okay with requiring some training and a license before you can drive on public roads.

You certainly don't have to agree, but you're not going to convince me we're treading on anyone's rights with the current system.
 
ANY required permit/license system is an affront to the Second Amendment. A requirement for mandatory training is just another level of infringement.
Click to expand...

I agree with this 100%. That doesn't mean I don't support training and education, it just means I view those requirements as infringements.
 
As I said on both posts, Maine already has permit free *open* carry.
You can bear arms to your hearts content.

The question is about removing the requirement for *concealed* carry as well.

I'm all for constitutional carry - which we have - but if you're concealing the fact that you're armed from the people around you, I feel that requiring a safety class is a reasonable societal demand.
Click to expand...

So an untrained person openly carrying a gun is not a problem but an untrained person carrying concealed is a public menace?
 
Here we are again...

I guess growing up in Vermont where permitless carry has been 'justthe way it is' since before we joined the Union has made me jaded...

I find it humorous when people wring their hands worrying about 'those other people' and their lack of education/training...

Let me know when the streets run red with blood, as it seems to not be happening anywhere 'constitutional carry' is the law...

At least nowhere I can find...
 
I dunno, I understand people wanting training to get CC, we hear stories about toddlers blowing off mom's head, flashbra suicide and the two-year olds in Wendy's reaching in the cop's pocket. but these people had training, at least two of them. my state requires no class/qualification, I nor anyone I know, has ever been in "danger" from other people carrying, and just about everyone I know carries, at least co-workers. despite none f us having "formal" training we aren't accidentally shooting each other. so I would rather the process not be more burdensome with expensive classes and so-called "professionals" teaching me common-sense for 8 hours. and as the poster above said, is grandma going to be able to pass qualification? will she even try? when I got my carry permit, the lady in front of me was using a walker and looked to be about 70 years old, I thought "good for her", but I doubt she was going to pass any tests, and I would hate that to take away her right to protect herself.
 
In AZ we had open carry for decades, but here was the rub, if you were open carrying and put a jacket on, you instantly became a felon for concealing your weapon without a permit. Now AZ has Constitutional Carry, and the streets have not run red with blood, no change other than you no longer can be arrested and charged with a felony just because you were cold and put a jacket on.
 
Boy, I just don't know--there are a whole lot of ignorant knuckleheads out there who don't care about the impact of their actions. I've had loaded weapons pointed at me and a few rounds fired at/around my house. Sorry to say, but I no longer trust that most people do the right thing.
 
I'm a full supporter of the Second Amendment and the right it bestows on us.

When there's restrictions put on the that right it's no longer a right but instead becomes a privilege.

I wish Missouri would drop their privilege mindset and grant us Constitutional carry, I believe Kansas did so maybe it will come across the border.

Driving is a privilege that requires a license, to acquire that license you have to pass both a written and driving test, people are still killed every day in or by vehicles, so much for testing.
 
These are the debates that drive me crazy.

I know I have seen enough Dumb Bunnies running around at the ranges.
If they are carrying they may shoot them selves in the foot or some one else.

We are soo stuck having to defend our selves at every angle.
It also ham strings us from solving some of these issues because it would be used against us.

It is a huge responsibility to carry in public.But so often we have to protect the slappys.

Wish the Gun Grabbers would go away so we can fix our own house.
 
stagpanther said:
Boy, I just don't know--there are a whole lot of ignorant knuckleheads out there who don't care about the impact of their actions. I've had loaded weapons pointed at me and a few rounds fired at/around my house. Sorry to say, but I no longer trust that most people do the right thing.
Click to expand...
But Maine already has permitless open carry. Read the post just above yours, by Dragonflydf. If mandatory training is so necessary that untrained people are a menace to society, where are the statistics to back up that premise? Please explain how it is that a person is perfectly safe open carrying, perhaps for a period of years, but as soon as he puts on a jacket that covers the gun he's a danger to humanity.

Training is good. More training (if it's good training) is better. Mandatory training is contrary to the United States Constitution.
 
I've already said I'm neutral--I see merit to both sides of the argument. I rarely see things as all or nothing/my way or the highway.

In communities where people are generally civil to one another I see no problem with permitless CCW.
 
The only good thing that exists about these debates is, it is still left up to the states to decide. I guess that's how it's supposed to be, the "people" still have power to change things on a state level, with enough will
 
On the one hand, there are some governmental controls over Constitutional Rights. You have to have a business license to run a newspaper or tv station, although not a website... yet.

On the other hand, the "training" mandated by most CCW regulations is superficial. It is a bureaucratic response to a requirement to Do Something.
I once took a Florida class. No shooting was required or even offered; but this was several years ago. Perhaps they have changed.

I took a series of PD supported classes here, encouraged but not required. The first was pretty nominal but at least we got some shooting done. I see it as close to the level of most mandated "training."
The second had more and more demanding shooting; including a pass through the PD Shoot House with threat and non threat targets; then a role play involving a darkened building, dummy gun, flashlight, and an "intruder" who might or might not be "armed" and might or might not be threatening.
The third had more shooting including different positions, a simple "run and gun" like a straightforward USPSA or IDPA stage, concluding with a return to the shoot house, this time with Simunitions, "intruder," and "bystander."
Total cost of $130 plus ammo and three full days. And that cheaply only because it was supported by the city. Comparable private training would run into many hundreds of bucks.

So what do you call training for the purpose?
I have had the above plus training directed toward and shared with military and police, also work on competition techniques.
I am a competitor which means at least my gunhandling is frequently practiced and tested. I have seen people with various degrees of training attending matches. They seem to have seldom practiced what they were taught and results are usually pretty sad.

Who says what is enough and who pays?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top