Maine gun bill would allow concealed weapons without permit

It was on our local news tonight: Gov. Paul LePage said he WILL sign the CC Bill into law.
Maybe on the 4th? How cool would that be?
 
PatMcD said:
It was on our local news tonight: Gov. Paul LePage said he WILL sign the CC Bill into law.
Maybe on the 4th? How cool would that be?
Click to expand...

I'm not up to maine all that often so I won't be directly affected by it much. To you and everyone else, congratulations.
 
[cerberus];4553630 said:
He better sign the damn thing before he gets kicked out for being lousy at picking fights.
Click to expand...

I was thinking the same thing. Also does anyone have an article that states he will sign it? I wanna be able to share that on FB. Some peeps don't believe things unless they got proof.
 
There are some in NH who think the Maine bill is basically spawn of the devil.

Please don't use Maine as a good example. The bill excludes those under 18 from concealed carry but the worst section is the one that mandates a concealed carrier immediately inform LEO if they are carrying. This gives up your rights against search and seizure. If you haven't revealed you are carrying and the LEO suspects you might it gives Leo ability to search without a warrant. If the governor uses Maine as the example she would sign we will never have CC because I and many others will never give up our rights. If I have a gun in my car or on my person and a cop asks me what time it is I am not shouting out I am carrying. In Maine that question would be contact and you would be mandated to tell. Maine sets us back not forward. They gave up a right for the privilege of keeping another. Shame in them. They gave the opposition the argument it my be a right but you have to buy the use
Click to expand...

Giving up a right in order to have another isn't smart. We already have the right to carry and we have a right against search and seizure. Why would you give it up. And why would you eliminate under 18. Saying the Maine bill is good is saying the liberal anti gun groups are right. They win in Maine we didnt
Click to expand...

I don't see how the Maine bill is bad for NH. Sure it has some undesirable parts like the no carry under 21 except for .mil and the duty to inform, but it is still a bill that removes begging for a permit to carry. It still moves the ball forward. And considering the dems control the Maine house I don't see the "compromise" as particularly egregious. The dems wanted to add a private sale ban but that was defeated, that would have been a bad "compromise."

I also don't see how the duty to inform is an automatic search and seizure.

What do you guys think?
 
Last edited:
I live in MA and have LTC in MA and NH. I live on the NH border, so having a LTC there is a must.


I only get to Maine 3 to 4 times a year, so it isn’t really worth the hassle of taking a class and spending the extra cash for the permit. So this is a big win for me.

And this is definitely moving the ball forward. Movement on 2A isn’t usually in leaps and bounds. The left chips away for their side, and we chip away for ours.


If you had asked me if this was possible two years ago, I would have laughed and told you No F-ing Way.
 
soloman02 said:
There are some in NH who think the Maine bill is basically spawn of the devil.





I don't see how the Maine bill is bad for NH. Sure it has some undesirable parts like the no carry under 21 except for .mil and the duty to inform, but it is still a bill that removes begging for a permit to carry. It still moves the ball forward. And considering the dems control the Maine house I don't see the "compromise" as particularly egregious. The dems wanted to add a private sale ban but that was defeated, that would have been a bad "compromise."

I also don't see how the duty to inform is an automatic search and seizure.

What do you guys think?
Click to expand...
I'm with you. I still think the undesirable parts of this Bill can be stripped out at a later date, namely, the duty to inform law enforcement.
I say anybody who thinks the whole Bill is bad and shouldn't be passed because of the imperfect parts is an idiot.

Don't take this the wrong way New Hampshire residents, but I have been hearing the same grumbling from south of our border. It seems like some down there think NH has a monopoly on Liberty, but it stills sounds an awful lot like a case of misery loves company: the NH CC Bill hit a roadblock at the governors desk, so they don't want anybody else to have CC.
 
Last edited:
PatMcD said:
Don't take this the wrong way New Hampshire residents, but I have been hearing the same grumbling from south of our border. It seems like some down there think NH has a monopoly on Liberty, but it stills sounds an awful lot like a case of misery loves company: the NH CC Bill hit a roadblock at the governors desk, so they don't want anybody else to have CC.
Click to expand...

I always assume that even in the most pro-gun states where Constitutional Carry is being debated, at least a little of Bloomturd's $ is being spent on the Dem side in an attempt to thwart the effort. All pro-side infighting does is help out the anti-side, at least when it comes to this particular (Const. Carry) issue.
 
PatMcD said:
I'm with you. I still think the undesirable parts of this Bill can be stepped of at a later date, namely, the duty to inform law enforcement.
I say anybody who thinks the whole Bill is bad and shouldn't be passed because of the imperfect pays is an idiot.

Don't take this the wrong way New Hampshire residents, but I have been hearing the same grumbling from south of our border. It seems like some down there think NH has a monopoly on Liberty, but it stills sounds an awful lot like a case of misery loves company: the NH CC Bill hit a roadblock at the governors desk, so they don't want anybody else to have CC.
Click to expand...

I'm beginning to think the same. I posted in some groups on FB that Maine is getting con carry so call Hassan and tell her to sign it and I received push back from some NH super activists (like what I posted above). I was even told that by referring to Maine's bill I am "confusing the message."

Right. First we said that she should pass the bill because it protects women, and now we are calling Hassan a racist for not passing SB116 and I'm the one confusing the message by pointing out that LePage is gonna sign con carry in Maine? Dafuq?
 
Whutmeworry said:
I always assume that even in the most pro-gun states where Constitutional Carry is being debated, at least a little of Bloomturd's $ is being spent on the Dem side in an attempt to thwart the effort. All pro-side infighting does is help out the anti-side, at least when it comes to this particular (Const. Carry) issue.
Click to expand...

Infighting is why NH did not pass con carry in 2011. The bill wasn't "perfect" so there was infighting over it (as well as fighting over who gets credit), which also allowed the NRA to try and "swoop in" and save the day with their pet amendment (which failed spectacularly).
 
It's a win, just look at the money and effort the anti's spent. When your enemy is against it, it isn't a bad thing.

It mobes the ball, and correct me if I'm wrong but you cannot be searched just for having a gun. So informing a cop doesn't give them the right to search you beyond what they have now.
 
soloman02 said:
I don't see how the Maine bill is bad for NH. Sure it has some undesirable parts like the no carry under 21 except for .mil and the duty to inform, but it is still a bill that removes begging for a permit to carry. It still moves the ball forward. And considering the dems control the Maine house I don't see the "compromise" as particularly egregious. The dems wanted to add a private sale ban but that was defeated, that would have been a bad "compromise."

I also don't see how the duty to inform is an automatic search and seizure.

What do you guys think?
Click to expand...

I think it sucks they had to put that stupidity in the bill but the important thing is it makes it impossible to prosecute most people for simply carrying a firearm concealed. The whiners overall though, just like to ride the hyperbole train...

-Banning under 21s sucks... but how many people under 21 do you know carrying a handgun? I met 2 under-21s in NH in the past decade, that's about it... and the only reason they were able to even do it is because they had 110% pro gun people for parents. Otherwise an under 21 is pretty much ****ed federally for handguns anyways because they can't even buy one at a dealer. They essentially have to be gifted one or they have to buy it on a non-straw, private sale. I guess what I'm getting at is until the federal law is changed (or mangled by legal actions in federal court) the under 21 ban is almost meaningless.

-As far as must notify- this sucks too, but I don't view it as a consent to completely violate someones 4A rights. The only potential problem here is I feel that LE orgs in ME really need to be briefed about how to handle this and what appropriate notification is. A douche anti cop could lay a trap for a gun owner with this clause, but it'd be pretty convoluted one. They'd basically have to get the guy to admit he was carrying a firearm and didn't notify at the beginning of the encounter. It would be interesting to see what folks here think about what appropriate notification is, my guess is the usual lights on hands on the wheel no futzing and something like "Before we proceed any further, I am required by Maine law to disclose that I am carrying concealed under (whatever the chapter and verse is). " Or maybe a printed card that can be handed to the LEO if you are stopped.

The funny thing about all of this is I can't even imagine having to notify while up there. I've driven thousands of miles in Maine and never been stopped. The enforcement density is pretty low and there aren't a ton of extra cops just hanging around with nothing to do, as is often witnessed in many places in MA.

-Mike
 
drgrant said:
I think it sucks they had to put that stupidity in the bill but the important thing is it makes it impossible to prosecute most people for simply carrying a firearm concealed. The whiners overall though, just like to ride the hyperbole train...

-Banning under 21s sucks... but how many people under 21 do you know carrying a handgun? I met 2 under-21s in NH in the past decade, that's about it... and the only reason they were able to even do it is because they had 110% pro gun people for parents. Otherwise an under 21 is pretty much ****ed federally for handguns anyways because they can't even buy one at a dealer. They essentially have to be gifted one or they have to buy it on a non-straw, private sale. I guess what I'm getting at is until the federal law is changed (or mangled by legal actions in federal court) the under 21 ban is almost meaningless.

-As far as must notify- this sucks too, but I don't view it as a consent to completely violate someones 4A rights. The only potential problem here is I feel that LE orgs in ME really need to be briefed about how to handle this and what appropriate notification is. A douche anti cop could lay a trap for a gun owner with this clause, but it'd be pretty convoluted one. They'd basically have to get the guy to admit he was carrying a firearm and didn't notify at the beginning of the encounter. It would be interesting to see what folks here think about what appropriate notification is, my guess is the usual lights on hands on the wheel no futzing and something like "Before we proceed any further, I am required by Maine law to disclose that I am carrying concealed under (whatever the chapter and verse is). " Or maybe a printed card that can be handed to the LEO if you are stopped.

The funny thing about all of this is I can't even imagine having to notify while up there. I've driven thousands of miles in Maine and never been stopped. The enforcement density is pretty low and there aren't a ton of extra cops just hanging around with nothing to do, as is often witnessed in many places in MA.

-Mike
Click to expand...
Try driving around Farmington, Wilton or Rangeley.... It won't be too long before you manage to get pulled over. The first two towns will pull over people going 1mph over the limit where you really want to drive 10+ over since the road is so nice and wide. Rangeley will pull you over for going under the limit with out of state plates (they lie about the speed). I will never go to Rangeley again.

Sent from my LG-H810 using Tapatalk
 
Prepper said:
Try driving around Farmington, Wilton or Rangeley.... It won't be too long before you manage to get pulled over. The first two towns will pull over people going 1mph over the limit where you really want to drive 10+ over since the road is so nice and wide. Rangeley will pull you over for going under the limit with out of state plates (they lie about the speed). I will never go to Rangeley again.

Sent from my LG-H810 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Sounds like a nice opportunity for a reverse sting.
 
Hoover said:
It mobes the ball, and correct me if I'm wrong but you cannot be searched just for having a gun. So informing a cop doesn't give them the right to search you beyond what they have now.
Click to expand...

Yes, but what they have now is enough to search anybody at any time for any reason. A federal court recently ruled singing Hakuna Matata constitutes reasonable suspicion of a crime. Correction. That someone who does that "“may have had mental issues and was about to commit a violent crime”. No joke.

Deffert v. Moe, et al.


PLAINTIFF: Lawful possession of a handgun is not a reason to cite me, or arrest
me, or detain me, Officer.
OFFICER MOE: Yes, it is until I figure out what is going on.
Click to expand...

Lawful possession of a handgun? Check.

Reason to detain someone? You'd think not, but not only was he, but the court ruled that is just fine.

Maybe the worst thing about it, the person who called 911 on him, the dispatcher explained that what he was doing wasn't illegal and actually did an excellent job. However despite the dispatchers correct analysis, still dispatched police to him for a "suspicious person". And the court said it "was sufficiently alarming to a resident to call 911".

Having to inform LEO's you are carrying, might as well open carry. Which you could do without a permit anyways.

So I'm clear, when signed, does this mean everyone who carries concealed must inform? What about if you possess a Maine permit? Or a permit/license that Maine recognizes?
 
Last edited:
soloman02 said:
Infighting is why NH did not pass con carry in 2011. The bill wasn't "perfect" so there was infighting over it (as well as fighting over who gets credit), which also allowed the NRA to try and "swoop in" and save the day with their pet amendment (which failed spectacularly).
Click to expand...

Of course the NRA coming in and ****ing it up didn't help either. So there were numerous "pro gun, but not necessarily gun law savvy" type pols in NH that basically said "**** it" and threw their hands up in the air because they didn't want to pick the choice that would be perceived as being "bad". NH has too many rkba orgs that interfere with one another. Some consolidation is needed otherwise this won't be the last time it happens.

-Mike
 
Whutmeworry said:
I always assume that even in the most pro-gun states where Constitutional Carry is being debated, at least a little of Bloomturd's $ is being spent on the Dem side in an attempt to thwart the effort. All pro-side infighting does is help out the anti-side, at least when it comes to this particular (Const. Carry) issue.
Click to expand...

They threw money at TX to oppose Open Carry and Campus Carry, with 0% chance of it helping. I don't know that we'll see Con Carry in TX, but the two bills that Abbot did sign are steps in the right direction.
 
namedpipes said:
Sounds like a nice opportunity for a reverse sting.
Click to expand...

Like set up 2 cars, with a bunch of speed monitoring equipment (and film crew in the "rear" car) and try to bait them into pulling people over?

Probably be a pain in the ass, they probably profile, too. This is "one of the things I would do if I won powerball" though. I would also dump a few million into
a system which a car could be equipped with that basically is a "4th amendment monitoring" system. It would have cameras all over, sensors lasers and shit, to see if someone actually had committed a "marked lanes violation". DB sensor for exhaust, etc. System which also verifies that all lighting is intact and functional, etc. Would get real fun in court with that stuff, real fast. [rofl] I can see it now...

"So officer, you said his license plate lights were burned out?"

"Yes, there was no illumination on his rear plate."

"But what about..... THIS?"

(shows video/computer monitoring evidence of the lights being illuminated)

"This system shows that John Doe was driving at 53 mph, his car was within the marked lane, and that all his lights were functional... wat say you?"

(Judge interrupts, bangs gavel, hilarity ensues...)

(NSFW)




-Mike
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Does this apply if you have a ME permit or is it just for Con Carry?


drgrant said:
-As far as must notify- this sucks too, but I don't view it as a consent to completely violate someones 4A rights. The only potential problem here is I feel that LE orgs in ME really need to be briefed about how to handle this and what appropriate notification is. A douche anti cop could lay a trap for a gun owner with this clause, but it'd be pretty convoluted one. They'd basically have to get the guy to admit he was carrying a firearm and didn't notify at the beginning of the encounter. It would be interesting to see what folks here think about what appropriate notification is, my guess is the usual lights on hands on the wheel no futzing and something like "Before we proceed any further, I am required by Maine law to disclose that I am carrying concealed under (whatever the chapter and verse is). " Or maybe a printed card that can be handed to the LEO if you are stopped.

-Mike
Click to expand...
 
Another vector of this whole stop thing that is going to be hilarious.... if self driving cars are ever legalized, its going to be pretty tough for cops to justify a stop unless the system ****s up or the car is programmed to exceed the limits (and it probably won't. for liability reasons). Basically, a "perfect" driver. My guess is they will just shovel on more bullshit by morphing a DUI checkpoint into a random "road safety checkpoint" or some BS like that. " Papiere, Bitte."

-Mike

- - - Updated - - -

Garys said:
Does this apply if you have a ME permit or is it just for Con Carry?
Click to expand...

Supposedly ME permit holders are exempt from the notification requirement (from the version of the bill that I read, at least. )

-Mike
 
Horrible said:
Compared to NJ, NY, CT & MA?

I know its like the ugly chick standing next to the fat & ugly chicks, but hey, do what you can.
Click to expand...

Supposedly VT tax burden is way worse than ME is, too... but not 100% sure about that.

NY/NJ/CT are pretty much a full on dumpster fires.

-Mike
 
drgrant said:
Supposedly VT tax burden is way worse than ME is, too... but not 100% sure about that.

NY/NJ/CT are pretty much a full on dumpster fires.

-Mike
Click to expand...

My mom has a place in VT. VT is supposedly the #1 worst in the nation for property taxes. This is probably true since the land of Bernie Sanders does all it can to scare away businesses and the average Vermonter is of retirement age.

My mom is unfortunately going to have to sell her property and move because she cannot afford to live there on a retired income.
 

Similar threads

Nebraska lawmakers pass bill that would allow smaller school districts to arm staff members
Replies
0
Views
53
Reptile
Reptile
Maine gun store hires 'udderly' adorable employee, a baby cow
Replies
10
Views
322
MisterHappy
MisterHappy
Proposed AZ Law Would Allow Ranchers near Border to Shoot Trespassers
Replies
17
Views
452
Uzi2
U
NEW- Gun Grab Bill Six-member conference committee to decide Legislature's gun control proposal
Replies
24
Views
1K
StevieP
StevieP
Bill H.4139
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
Ron Jablonski
R
Back
Top Bottom