As it currently stands, ~75% of respondents are opposed to the measure. I'm sure a few of you guys are in here.
First, comments opposing the measure:
Comment: NO, because the good guys are not going to use their guns in an ir-responsible fashion, and the bad guys aren't going to follow the rules anyway from Oxford by Dave
Comment: Such a ban will not keep a punk carrying an illegal handgun, but will stop someone carrying a legally concealed handgun for fear of being made into a felon. And we need MORE legal carry by citizens to STOP the punks IN public places! from Dresden, ME. by James
Comment: If a person has been issued a concealed carry permit, they should be able to carry anywhere. from Windham, Me. by Ken
Comment: This is a clear and blatant infringement of my constitutional right to bare arms. I'm prohibited from legally carrying a firearm to protect myself or others that may be in harms way, but whats to stop some nut job from walking in with a ak-47 and shooting the place up? I served in the Army for 5 years. So I can risk my life overseas but I cant protect myself at home. THIS IS WRONG!!! from lewiston by jason
Comment: whats next to ban pea shooters? from AUGUSTA by bj
Comment: Banning guns carried by people with carry permits actually makes it LESS SAFE. Anyone who wants to go in and shoot someone or commit any kind of mayhem with a gun is not going to be deterred by a rule saying they can't bring their gun in. Legally armed citizens would be MORE LIKELY to STOP violence with their legally carried gun than causing any problems. from Hartford, ME by Alan
Comment: It seems to me that Mr. Skolnik has a personal vendetta against Law Abiding Citizens that have the right to carry a weapon, and who do so responsibly and LEGALLY. God forbid Mr. Skolnik ever has to defend himself or his family, I dont think he would fare very well. Mr. Skolnik's term ends this year and I for one will be glad to see him go. from Portland, Maine by Dave
Comment: I am tire of the Portland area liberals imposing the views on Maine. If they do not like Maine for what it is they can move back to whatever liberal State they came from. from Winthrop/ Me by Mark
Comment: If a gun owner has a carry permit, he/she should be able to carry - period! Guns only have two enemies, rust and politicians. from Westbrook by David
Comment: A gun is a tool just like a hammer or crowbar. It is only as dangerous as the person holding. To presume that any person holding a gun shows an ugly prejudice, and for someone to feel "uncomfortable" being in the same room as someone with a firearm shows a lack of education on the subject. from Portland Maine by Wyatt
Comment: I have to agree with Thomas Jefferson and Cesare Beccarea on this one: "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." -- Jefferson's "Commonplace Book," 1774-1776, quoting from On Crimes and Punishment, by criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1764 from Monmouth by John
Comment: I have just as much need for self defense out in public as I do at home. A person with a ccw permit is the same person wherever they are. It doesn't make sense to alow the criminals to steal our cities and state from us. from Berwick, Maine by Jim
Comment: Chief Craig said it best in the Portland Press Herald in June of 2010 He was startled at the number of concealed firearms permits issued in Maine compared with Los Angeles, where he worked previously. Los Angeles had a high crime rate and approved relatively few concealed firearms permits, while Maine has a low crime rate and is fairly liberal in granting the permits, he said. But in Maine, granting concealed firearms permits has not increased crime, he said. END QUOTE from Harrison by Paul
Comment: I live in the us not china! If I want to loose my rights I can move to another country. from Westbrook by Jeff
Comment: Enacting an invisible wall of protection only serves to disarm those who willfully obey the law, and thus turn them into potential victims at the hands of predators who have no such regard for signs and rules. from Wiscasset by Forrest
Comment: Self-defense is a basic human right. by Grape
Comment: If honest people are not allowed to carry guns, who is going to protect the honest people? The criminals are going to have them . We need to be able to protect ourselves and others if neccessary
Comment: the only thing this law would do is to take guns away from law abiding citizens, and leave us at the mercy of criminals, some people would argue that it's the job of police to contol the criminals,and thats true, but i will not become a victim,i will protect myself by all means necessary, and will carry a gun regardless of the outcome!! from sabattus maine by george
Comment: A missed point in this discussion is that any establishment is allowed to place a fixed "NO FIREARMS" sign at the premises but must be shown at every public entrance to it. State law allows the banning on a case by case basis. An example of this would be the signs at every entrance to the Maine Mall in South Portland. If Portland town hall needs these signs then vote to ammend Portland law and place them up. Do not inlcude the rest of the state to suffer for a Portland problem. from Augusta, ME by Scott
Comment: The law abiding citizens are not the people who should have their rights challenged. Its the criminal element that we need to be concerned about. They will carry weapons reguardless of what laws are in place. from Lewiston, ME by John
Comment: It's our right to carry. Remember the women who were killed around Christmas time shopping in a mall??? If just one other person had a gun to take out the shooter, then those women may have lived!!! from Poland, ME by Julie
Comment: why dont people stop trying to change our rights to suit their purposes soon they will have all been taken if people are going to shoot someone they will find a way to do so one way or another this is crap and just another way for us to bend laws and change rights the state of maine is filled with morons my only question is with this all said and done wich avenue of change or rewording the freedom of the right to bear arms will you try to change next? maine sucks and forever will because of the retarded people who live here. from turner by sick of
Comment: people need to learn what the 2nd amendment stands for. from Bristol, Me. by Edward
Comment: The bad guys won't follow those rules. Now you may have some armed citizens in the group who could oppose them but if there were a law prohibiting carrying firearms in public then they would be defenseless. Unless you would like to put armed security and police enforcement in all the areas that citizens are not allowed to carry I wouldn't think that law wise. from Litchfield Maine by Joshua
Comment: NO....The state law is already limiting my right to bear arms as a citizen of this country. As the 2nd amendment clear states "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." from Shapleigh, ME by Joshua
Comment: I dont need a reason, i have the Second Amendment. Unarm the citizens and they become slaves. I go by the Bill of Rights,The Constitution is the Operators Manual for the United States of America, and the Bill of Rights is the Tect support. from Cornish, Me. by Albert
Comment: This will be only the start. At what point does it end. The only people that this law will impact will be the law abiding citizens. from Mcfalls by John
Now, for those supporting the measure. Think I'll take each of these in turn.
Comment: We are hunters, born into a hunting way of life. However, guns have their place, in the woods, not in public places. from Boothbay, ME by Joanne
How convenient for you that in working to preserve all gun rights I will also be protecting your special interest. The 2nd Amendment didn't say "A well regulated group of hunters..."
Comment: Why, would you need a gun in a public place? Town Hall meeting or Schools. What are these people crazy from Boothbay by James
Because there are bad people in public places. I carry everywhere I'm legally allowed to do so. Why should I stop carrying in city hall?
Comment: The Constitution refers to the right to own guns as part of a well regulated militia, not as these "show-offs" do. from So. Portland by Ann
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Those pesky framers just couldn't help themselves when they gave that right to the people, who were also the militia. See USC Title 10, Subtitle A, PART I, CHAPTER 13, Section 311: Militia: Composition and classes.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/10/usc_sec_10_00000311----000-.html
Comment: Most schools have zero tolerance policies against students bringing weapons onto the premises for good reasons. Why should adults be allowed to bring potentially dangerous equipment there. Allowing guns into places like courthouses and jails would be courting potential disaster. The whole idea of guns in public places and in large crowds is frightening to me. from Portland, ME by Susan
1. Because I am an adult, not a child.
2. An unarmed populace is courting potential disaster.
3. I'm sorry you're frightened, but that was your parents' failure when they raised you, not mine.
Comment: There is too much of a risk by allowing them in public buildings.I personally, do not like guns so I also think they should be utlawed altogether! from portland, maine by dorothy
Unfortunately 235 years of legal precedent supersede your personal distaste for firearms.
Comment: carring gums is looking for trouble from sabattus maine by leo
Willingly renouncing your natural right of self defense is looking for trouble.
In a six-word response you managed to misspell two of them. Failing grade school English is also, apparently, looking for trouble.
If I was expecting trouble I wouldn't be out in public with just a handgun.
Comment: Of course. You may have the right to bear arms, but not in a place where you are capable of hurting many others should something happen. I shouldn't have to worry about being shot should someone not agree with something I say at a town meeting. from Westbrook by B
No city councilors or gun control proponents were injured in the production of this horse and pony show. I have the right to bear arms in any public place, at any time, without providing any reason. Should something happen, I will be the one shooting the guy stupid enough to draw a weapon in city hall.
Comment: working in these areas becomes more of a unsafe enviroment when guns are permitted, it will take just one incident to change someones life forever not so much the person that is carrying it as much as the unexperiance one that may grab it in a rage of anger. from Portland,Maine by John
There is not a single documented instance of an open-carrier having his gun taken and used against him or bystanders. As only 25% of active shooters are stopped by law enforcement, and the other 75% by armed or unarmed civilians, the workplace actually becomes safer in the presence of armed citizens.
http://www.spartancops.com/solo-officer-entry-active-shooters-ron-borsch-qa-part-1/
Comment: With all the drug users, alcoholics that live in the state, there should be a state wide ban on all firearms. Hunting under the influence which is wide spread is stupid. by don
I am unaware of a drug and alcohol-fueled shooting epidemic in Maine. Your solution violates the state and federal constitution as discussed above. **** you.
Not sure what to make of this last one:
Comment: I bet the terrorist are loving the no votes. from Monmouth ME by Kelvin
So, on the gun rights side of the house we have the usual calm, reasoned response which cites constitutional precedent and the well-documented case history of an armed population serving as the most effective deterrent AND response to violent crime.
On the "gun control" side we have the usual fear, knee-jerking, and lack of substantive arguments. Also, more spelling and grammatical errors (it's a low blow but I'll take the shot).
