Portland, Maine Moving in on Gun Rights

M

MaineCWPtraining

Joined
May 17, 2009
Messages
1,200
Likes
34
Location
Harrison, Maine
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
Court's gun ruling has both sides pondering effect

By David Carkhuff
Staff writer
[email protected]

Dan Skolnik, the chairman of the city's public safety committee, acknowledged that gun rights advocates scored a big win Monday when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment right to bear arms extends to city and state ordinances as well as federal laws.

"Gun rights advocates won a victory today against government overreaching. And advocates of gun restrictions know better how to proceed in that cause," said Skolnik, a Portland City Councilor and chairman of the council's public safety committee, reacting to the 5-4 ruling, the first of its kind to fully extend Second Amendment rights to cities and states.

But Skolnik was not backing away from efforts to curtail open carrying of weapons in Portland, saying he planned to meet with the police chief and other officials about what to do next.

READ MORE
 
Title 25: INTERNAL SECURITY AND PUBLIC SAFETY

Part 5: PUBLIC SAFETY

Chapter 252-A: FIREARMS REGULATION HEADING: PL 1989, C. 359 (NEW)

§2011. State preemption

1. Preemption. The State intends to occupy and preempt the entire field of legislation concerning the regulation of firearms, components, ammunition and supplies. Except as provided in subsection 3, any existing or future order, ordinance, rule or regulation in this field of any political subdivision of the State is void.

[ 1989, c. 359, (NEW) .]

2. Regulation restricted. Except as provided in subsection 3, no political subdivision of the State, including, but not limited to, municipalities, counties, townships and village corporations, may adopt any order, ordinance, rule or regulation concerning the sale, purchase, purchase delay, transfer, ownership, use, possession, bearing, transportation, licensing, permitting, registration, taxation or any other matter pertaining to firearms, components, ammunition or supplies.
 
Portland city councilor won't seek reelection

Portland City Councilor Dan Skolnik announced this afternoon his decision not to seek re-election. Skolnik announced in a press release he would not run because he could not devote himself to the job.
 
MaineCWPtraining said:
Portland city councilor won't seek reelection

Portland City Councilor Dan Skolnik announced this afternoon his decision not to seek re-election. Skolnik announced in a press release he would not run because he could not devote himself to the job.
Click to expand...

Sounds good. He probably needs to spend more time cowering in fear of open carry at home.
 
/\/\ +1

Why do they always have to meet about the "next step"? How about just respecting the Constitution and the Court's ruling?
 
The liberals never give up and that is why they seem to gain so much. Look at Massachusetts, the gun owners and supporters can't get any traction there because they are not as dedicated as the liberals are. Maine is slowly losing traction as well as more and more flatlanders move here for 'the way life should be." They bring their anti gun bias with them and slowly take away the freedoms that have existed for many generations.
If shooters were so dedicated and worked as hard we would be ahead of the game. We don't though, instead we fight among ourselves and bad mouth the NRA. If every gun owner belonged to the NRA you would see many changes in positive direction and the antis would be much quieter. Just as Obama is not the danger to our once great nation, rather it is the people who put him there. The same could be said about the gun issues. It is the people who have no idea what freedom really is or how difficult it is to keep.Shame on us!
 
Not seeking another term, Skolnik eyes agenda

By Curtis Robinson
Editor
[email protected]

Even dedicated city observers have not heard councilor Dan Skolnik's plan for a new City Hall technology directive, likely including transparency initiatives like webcasting committee meetings, but that's not because he's become suddenly shy.

He was just saving that as a likely "second term priority."

But when the son of Maine political icon, and Democratic gubernatorial candidate, Libby Mitchell decided to run for Skolnik's District 3 seat, coupled with another strong candidate, Skolnik explains he did some time-management thinking and nixed a re-election effort.

A lawyer, he expects two civil trial in the coming months and has just launched a fan memorabilia website, where he serves as CEO.

"It really forced me to reassess," said Skolnik in an interview this week. "I think that I could have won, but that opponent would have been tapped into a much larger operation that would have been formidable. It made the race much more difficult, and it called for a deeper time commitment."

Will Mitchell is making his first run for elected office, but his mother is the first woman to be both speaker of Maine House of Representatives and President of the state senate. If she wins in November, she will complete the gender trifecta, becoming the state's first female governor.

Skolnik said in talking to supporters and even some not-so-much supporters, he "saw what was right in front of my face" and decided not to seek re-election. He will complete his first term in December, and is moving up issues that might have remained on the back burner had he sought a second term.

But he's not forgotten that the clock is also ticking on some high-profile issues. Skolnik says he will "quickly" ask for a city resolution calling upon Augusta to pass gun-control enabling legislation. In turn, he hopes to overcome current policy that allows "open carry" of firearms in most Maine locations. "We'll have to nail down details," he said, adding that gun control in Portland enjoys significant council support.

City police and firefighter compensation is also on the Skolnik agenda. He says serving as chairman of the city's public safety committee has made him keenly aware of the impacts that municipal budget cutbacks have had on first responders, leaving him worried. "We're not prepared" for likely crime increases, he said, and dealing with funding is important to getting ready.

He also listed other fairly well-known issues for short-term progress, like the ongoing effort to create a Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial (design finalists are expected to be chosen in September or October) and the Dougherty Field renovation.

But the biggest change in his policy agenda may come with technology, and he expects some push-back.

"There are some forces involved that don't want to open the gates on that issue," he said, adding that "gatekeepers" of information may not want to make that easily accessible.

Skolnik sees a day when virtually every city meeting is available on the Internet in real time, then archived into a searchable archive. To speed that process, he said, he will ask the city council for a set of firm directives to accomplish transparency projects.

He noted that he's not exactly pushed that idea because "I was thinking of it as a second-term priority."
 
I've been out of state too long now but I believe the wording was and is "Shall never be questioned."
Could we just give Portland back to Mass?
 
"I hope to meet with Chief Craig and members of the Patrolman's Association soon to determine any steps they deem suitable," Skolnik said in an email response to questions from the Daily Sun
Click to expand...

Why the hell is he asking the Chief and Patrolman's Association for the steps they deem "suitable?" Do they have some insight anyone else might be lacking?

Jesus wept.
 
MAINE STATUTE: Title 25: INTERNAL SECURITY AND PUBLIC SAFETY

Part 5: PUBLIC SAFETY

Chapter 252-A: FIREARMS REGULATION HEADING: PL 1989, C. 359 (NEW)

§2011. State preemption

1. Preemption. The State intends to occupy and preempt the entire field of legislation concerning the regulation of firearms, components, ammunition and supplies. Except as provided in subsection 3, any existing or future order, ordinance, rule or regulation in this field of any political subdivision of the State is void.

[ 1989, c. 359, (NEW) .]

2. Regulation restricted. Except as provided in subsection 3, no political subdivision of the State, including, but not limited to, municipalities, counties, townships and village corporations, may adopt any order, ordinance, rule or regulation concerning the sale, purchase, purchase delay, transfer, ownership, use, possession, bearing, transportation, licensing, permitting, registration, taxation or any other matter pertaining to firearms, components, ammunition or supplies.
 
They're back at it. Public Hearing September 14th at 5:30 to Prohibit Guns in Certain Public Facilities, contrary to Maine Statute and Constitution.

I have the docs but I can't figure out how to post here. JPEG & PDF.
 
SENT TO THE CITY / CHIEF / NRA...

I would like to speak in opposition to the proposed legislation topic on September 14th having trained hundreds of Portland, Maine residents in the proper use, possession and ownership of firearms. We actually teach 3 hours of law in our NRA certified Personal Protection in the Home Course; Something Councilor Skolnik should revisit and re-read his oath of office upholding Maine's Constitution. Particularly Article 1, Section 16. To keep and bear arms. Every citizen has a right to keep and bear arms and this right shall never be questioned.

We also address active shooter situations in our NRA certified Personal Protection in the Home course where the Chief Deputy Attorney General William R. Stokes addressed the situation of public shooting incidents like the areas you are suggesting law abiding citizens should not have the ability to protect themselves or innocent others.

I suggest you table the agenda subject for 30 days. Many Maine residents and tourists want to address this affront to our liberties and constitution.


Respectfully yours,

Paul J. Mattson
NRA Certified Instructor / RSO
#63731855
Maine CWP Training
101 Main St.
Harrison, ME 04040

(207) 583-4723
CELL 232-7063
 
... Do you really want your name, address,and telephone number listed on this post?

Other than that minor detail, I applaud your efforts.
 
RichM said:
... Do you really want your name, address,and telephone number listed on this post?

Other than that minor detail, I applaud your efforts.
Click to expand...

Uh...this is a gun forum. Anyone stupid enough to roll up on this guys place looking for trouble will get in in spades!!! [rofl][rofl][rofl][rofl]
 
I commend the free staters for trying but the rural Northeast is trending in the wrong direction. Southern and Midwestern states have been relaxing gun laws and embracing states rights while the Northeast goes full speed in the other direction. Move out of MA for freedom but don't expect to find it in New England.
 
Mr. Mattson, thank you for writing. I think your points are good ones and your perspective on this proposal is totally valid. The measure we are looking at, as you know, would apply only to government buildings (or government-based, like the Cumberland County Civic Center and the Portland Expo). It is not a proposal that the the City enact anything, just that the City Council call for the Legislature to add to existing state law.

We have scheduled two meetings on this proposal, one in September and one in October, and there will be plenty of time in both meetings for public comment. I look forward to yours; it will be valuable. Thank you again!


Dan Skolnik
City Council, District 3
City of Portland
389 Congress St.
Portland, Maine 04101
207.831.7343
 
MaineCWPtraining said:
blindfire~ I doubt they would get past the dogs~[wink]
Click to expand...

You mean the ones that wanted to play ball? [smile]

MaineCWPtraining said:
Mr. Mattson, thank you for writing. I think your points are good ones and your perspective on this proposal is totally valid. The measure we are looking at, as you know, would apply only to government buildings (or government-based, like the Cumberland County Civic Center and the Portland Expo). It is not a proposal that the the City enact anything, just that the City Council call for the Legislature to add to existing state law.

We have scheduled two meetings on this proposal, one in September and one in October, and there will be plenty of time in both meetings for public comment. I look forward to yours; it will be valuable. Thank you again!


Dan Skolnik
City Council, District 3
City of Portland
389 Congress St.
Portland, Maine 04101
207.831.7343
Click to expand...


Another words, go screw yourself?
He cites the very part that you oppose as something good!
Arrogant bastages eh?
 
Portland Public Safety Committee
September 14, 2010 Hearing
To whom it may concern.

I urge you to abandon any notion with respect to the City of Portland regulating firearms.

Previously I cited the state preemption:
Title 25: INTERNAL SECURITY AND PUBLIC SAFETY
Part 5: PUBLIC SAFETY
Chapter 252-A: FIREARMS REGULATION HEADING: PL 1989, C. 359 (NEW)
§2011. State preemption
1. Preemption. The State intends to occupy and preempt the entire field of legislation concerning the regulation of firearms, components, ammunition and supplies. Except as provided in subsection 3, any existing or future order, ordinance, rule or regulation in this field of any political subdivision of the State is void.
[ 1989, c. 359, (NEW) .]
2. Regulation restricted. Except as provided in subsection 3, no political subdivision of the State, including, but not limited to, municipalities, counties, townships and village corporations, may adopt any order, ordinance, rule or regulation concerning the sale, purchase, purchase delay, transfer, ownership, use, possession, bearing, transportation, licensing, permitting, registration, taxation or any other matter pertaining to firearms, components, ammunition or supplies.

Contemplated municipal firearm regulations would prevent law abiding citizens from protecting themselves or innocent others in direct conflict with state statutes hereinafter cited for your consumption.

Title 17-A: MAINE CRIMINAL CODE
Chapter 5: DEFENSES AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES; JUSTIFICATION
§101. General rules for defenses and affirmative defenses; justification
1. The State is not required to negate any facts expressly designated as a "defense," or any exception, exclusion or authorization that is set out in the statute defining the crime by proof at trial, unless the existence of the defense, exception, exclusion or authorization is in issue as a result of evidence admitted at the trial that is sufficient to raise a reasonable doubt on the issue, in which case the State must disprove its existence beyond a reasonable doubt. This subsection does not require a trial judge to instruct on an issue that has been waived by the defendant. The subject of waiver is addressed by the Maine Rules of Criminal Procedure.
[ 1997, c. 185, §1 (AMD) .]
2. Where the statute explicitly designates a matter as an "affirmative defense," the matter so designated must be proved by the defendant by a preponderance of the evidence.
[ 1981, c. 324, §24 (RPR) .]
3. Conduct that is justifiable under this chapter constitutes a defense to any crime; except that, if a person is justified in using force against another, but the person recklessly injures or creates a risk of injury to 3rd persons, the justification afforded by this chapter is unavailable in a prosecution for such recklessness. If a defense provided under this chapter is precluded solely because the requirement that the person's belief be reasonable has not been met, the person may be convicted only of a crime for which recklessness or criminal negligence suffices.

Title 17-A: MAINE CRIMINAL CODE
Part 1: GENERAL PRINCIPLES
Chapter 5: DEFENSES AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES; JUSTIFICATION
§108. Physical force in defense of a person
1. A person is justified in using a reasonable degree of nondeadly force upon another person in order to defend the person or a 3rd person from what the person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful, nondeadly force by such other person, and the person may use a degree of such force that the person reasonably believes to be necessary for such purpose. However, such force is not justifiable if:
A. With a purpose to cause physical harm to another person, the person provoked the use of unlawful, nondeadly force by such other person; or [2007, c. 173, §24 (AMD).]
B. The person was the initial aggressor, unless after such aggression the person withdraws from the encounter and effectively communicates to such other person the intent to do so, but the other person notwithstanding continues the use or threat of unlawful, nondeadly force; or [2007, c. 173, §24 (AMD).]
C. The force involved was the product of a combat by agreement not authorized by law. [1975, c. 499, §1 (NEW).]
[ 2007, c. 173, §24 (AMD) .]
1-A. A person is not justified in using nondeadly force against another person who that person knows or reasonably should know is a law enforcement officer attempting to effect an arrest or detention, regardless of whether the arrest or detention is legal. A person is justified in using the degree of nondeadly force the person reasonably believes is necessary to defend the person or a 3rd person against a law enforcement officer who, in effecting an arrest or detention, uses nondeadly force not justified under section 107, subsection 1.
[ 1997, c. 351, §1 (NEW) .]
2. A person is justified in using deadly force upon another person:
A. When the person reasonably believes it necessary and reasonably believes such other person is:
(1) About to use unlawful, deadly force against the person or a 3rd person; or
(2) Committing or about to commit a kidnapping, robbery or a violation of section 253, subsection 1, paragraph A, against the person or a 3rd person; or [1989, c. 878, Pt. B, §15 (AMD).]

Respectfully,

Paul J. Mattson
NRA Certified Instructor / RSO
#63731855
Maine CWP Training
101 Main St.
Harrison, ME 04040
(207) 583-4723
CELL 232-7063

www.MaineCWPtraining.com
 
FROM THE AUTHOR:

Thank you Sir for sending along the statutes.

I encourage you again to recognize the aim here is to act within those guidelines.

It is possible to act within those guidelines.

I am well aware of the guidelines.

I again thank you for sending the guidelines.

These guidelines are central to our discussion.

These guidelines do not prove the point I understand you to be making.

I ask you to participate with us in good faith, not in rancor. That helps no one. Thank you Sir.

Dan Skolnik
City Council, District 3
City of Portland
389 Congress St.
Portland, Maine 04101
207.831.7343
 
Skolnik objects to treatment by council
He believes his colleagues are isolating him, triggering some accusatory e-mails from

PORTLAND - City Councilor Dan Skolnik is criticizing other councilors for what he describes as a coordinated effort to ignore him and isolate him politically.

One councilor says Skolnik is having a personal crisis and needs professional help in managing his anger.

The tension, which has simmered for months, culminated this week in a series of e-mails between Skolnik and two other councilors, copies of which Skolnik provided to the entire City Council and local media outlets.

READ MORE
 
Sounds like Skolnik is an attention whore that acts like a 4 year old when he doesn't get his way.

Someone needs to punch him in the mouth.
 
Jose said:
Sounds like Skolnik is an attention whore that acts like a 4 year old when he doesn't get his way.

Someone needs to punch him in the mouth.
Click to expand...

OH NO! That would be assault and battery! You could loose your LTC and bring the wrath of several NES'ers down on you! [laugh][wink]
 

Similar threads

Gun Rights Group scams
Replies
5
Views
306
Acujeff
Acujeff
3rd Circuit Denies Rehearing In SAF Pennsylvania Gun Rights Victory
Replies
1
Views
156
oldguy68
oldguy68
What's acceptable Secure Storage for gun safes, guns and ammo in MA when in moving transition for an extended period of time?
Replies
24
Views
505
houdini
houdini
Fudds gotta fudd. No AR class in Maine.
Replies
7
Views
551
Mesatchornug
Mesatchornug
Maine gun store hires 'udderly' adorable employee, a baby cow
Replies
10
Views
330
MisterHappy
MisterHappy
Back
Top Bottom