Trio of Gun Bills on the Move in Maine

Though a federal judge has halted enforcement of Maine’s three-day waiting period that was enacted last year, at least for now, anti-gunners in Augusta haven’t taken the hint that their actions are treading all over the rights of gun owners. They’re back at it this session, and a pair of gun control bills are slated to be heard in the Senate Judiciary Committee this week, along with one bill that would help to restore the right to keep and bear arms for some residents. 

As NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action reports:

On Thursday, May 1st, the Joint Standing Committee on Judiciary will be hearing several firearm-related bills. Details about the hearing are below. NRA members are encouraged to attend the hearing and provide testimony. Those who are unable to attend the public hearing in person are urged to contact committee members NOW and request they OPPOSE all anti-gun bills and SUPPORT LD 1009. 

Anti-Gun Bills

LD 1379 requires all firearm dealers and gunsmiths to display anti-gun “public health” warnings at their establishments. This bill attempts to further the farce that firearms are a “public health crisis” and intimidate or dissuade first-time gun buyers.  

LD 411 and LD 1463 seek to prohibit the state from selling forfeited firearms. If passed, these bills would ban the State of Maine from selling firearms and instead direct them to be destroyed. 

Pro-Gun Bills

LD 1009 seeks to create a legal process to restore the Second Amendment rights of non-violent offenders. This bill, sponsored by Rep. Chad Perkins (R- Dover-Foxcroft), establishes a process for non-violent felons to petition the State of Maine to restore their rights. This petition process allows the Maine Department of Public Safety to review these requests on a case-by-case basis and issue a judgment regarding whether or not the individual should have their rights restored. 

Imagine if booksellers were required to post signage at every entrance warning that the products on their shelves could be detrimental to readers’ mental health, or expose them to illegal acts and unsavory ideas. That type of speech mandate would never fly, so why should gun sellers and others who help facilitate the exercise of our Second Amendment rights be forced to post notice that warns customers away from their constitutionally-protected goods? 

LD 411 abd LD 1463, meanwhile, would merely be a piece of political performance art were it not for the fact that, if adopted, local police agencies will be deprived of at least one small source of funding. These bills won’t prevent anyone from obtaining a firearm. The only folks who’ll really be hurt by this are the members of small, rural departments who may not be able to upgrade their own duty weapons or have to make do with less if the revenue from these sales dries up. 

LD 1009, on the other hand, is worthy of support. If someone poses no danger to themselve or others and has served their time, there’s absolutely no reason why they shouldn’t regain their Second Amendment rights. In fact, depriving them of their ability to keep and bear arms is outside the national tradition of firearms, according to some federal courts like the Third Circuit. Democrats are usually supportive of criminal justice reform efforts, but many of them seem to have a blind spot when it comes to restoring Second Amendment rights. I hope that’s not the case, but gun owners and 2A supporters have another day to make their lawmakers see the light and feel the heat over any potential support for these gun control measures and opposition to providing a path to restoring a fundamental civil right after a non-violent conviction or guilty plea.