Background Checks ARE The Best Way

[2aguy]

This editorial was in the paper this morning by one of our police chiefs. Our state will be voting on universal background checks in November. Probably we're not the only one. Universal background checks do help! At least it's better than nothing.


"Background checks are the best way to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people

Commitment to public service is ingrained in my family’s DNA. My grandfather served the city of Portland as a lieutenant in the police force for 30 years, and my father was a captain in the city of Portland Fire Department. He died in the line of duty in 1956.

Their calling to serve the people of Maine was passed on to me when I joined the U.S. Army as a military policeman in 1969 and then the Cape Elizabeth Police Department as a patrolman. Forty-two years later, I’m the chief of the Falmouth Police Department and president of the Maine Chiefs of Police Association, an organization that represents law enforcement officers in our state.

Background checks help to protect police officers and other first responders, and they make our communities safer. For these reasons, I am committed to the expansion of background checks to all gun sales and transfers in Maine.

I wish I could say things were different, but my years of experience have shown me that bad people will do bad things. Exploiting available loopholes to get their hands on a gun is second nature to criminals. We know that background checks on all gun sales are the best, most effective way to make sure felons and other dangerous people can’t get guns easily.

Since 1998, we’ve applied the federal law that requires background checks to be conducted on gun sales at licensed firearms dealers. And it has worked. That law has stopped more than 5,500 gun sales to dangerous people in Maine, whether they be felons, domestic abusers or other prohibited people.

Still, the loophole makes it incredibly easy for them to instead find the firearm they are looking for online or in classified ads from an unlicensed dealer and buy that gun with no questions asked. As Maine Public Broadcasting Network recently reported, the unlicensed gun market in Maine is “ booming.”

Question 3 fixes this.

In the 18 states that already require background checks for all gun sales, 48 percent fewer law enforcement officers are killed with handguns, 48 percent fewer individuals take their own lives with guns and 46 percent fewer women are shot and killed by their intimate partners. What’s more, we’ve also seen a 48 percent reduction in gun trafficking. By comparison, in Missouri, where lawmakers in 2007 repealed a law requiring background checks on all private gun sale, saw a 25 percent spike in firearm-related homicides.

It’s indisputable that background checks work.

This is a measure that enhances public safety while protecting law enforcement officers.

I’ve also heard the anecdotal scenarios that opponents to Question 3 have offered, which, they say, point to shortcomings in the initiative. There are those who say this measure would turn law-abiding Mainers into criminals, but in the 18 states where these laws are already in place, that has not proven true. The initiative allows people to loan guns to their hunting friends and to give or sell guns to family members without a background check.

Unfortunately, as with any campaign, there’s a lot of misinformation out there. Despite those vague and hypothetical scenarios, Question 3 is and should be seen as an extension of Maine’s heritage of responsible gun ownership.

No one wants criminals to have easy access to guns. By ensuring background checks are conducted for all sales and transfers of firearms, Mainers can be assured that when they are selling or transferring their gun, they know that whoever is on the receiving end is not a dangerous person. This is part and parcel of responsible gun ownership.

I’ve spent my career working side by side with the many good men and women of the Maine law enforcement community to protect and serve the people of this state. I want Maine to be safe, and I want to protect and preserve our heritage of responsible gun ownership. Question 3 does just that.

As a lifelong law enforcement officer and a proud Mainer, I urge voters to join me in voting yes on Question 3 in November.

Ed Tolan is chief of the Falmouth Police Department and president of the Maine Chiefs of Police Association, which has endorsed a “yes” vote on Question 3."

Background checks are the best way to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people

Wrong. The best way to protect the people is to lock up violent criminals instead of releasing them into the public.

If a citizen is considered "too dangerous" to own a gun, why isn't he locked up?

Well, do you want every guy who beats his wife or his little brother or whatever to spend the rest of their life in prison? On my dime? Every mentally ill individual who thinks she is Joan of Arc needs to be institutionalized for the rest of her life? On my dime? That's what you're proposing.

again.....the guy shot in Charlotte, North Carolina.......had a domestic violence restraining order against him, meaning he could not legally get a gun....he was also a convicted felon...meaning he could not get a gun legally......and he had an illegal gun on him, which he bought from a burglar....neither one of them having gone through a background check to get that gun....

So again....you have no clue what you are talking about...

 

[M14 Shooter]

What you are forgetting is that 90% of the American populace wants better background checks.

Oh look - an argumentum ad populum fallacy

It's not a fallacy. It is a fact.

The fallacy surfaces when you argue that we should do something because 90% approve of it.

Does the FACT that 90% approve it make you think of anything? Like, ummmm, "majority rules"?

The beautiful part of our system of government is that the majority does not always rule - by design.

 

[2aguy]

This editorial was in the paper this morning by one of our police chiefs. Our state will be voting on universal background checks in November. Probably we're not the only one. Universal background checks do help! At least it's better than nothing.


"Background checks are the best way to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people

Commitment to public service is ingrained in my family’s DNA. My grandfather served the city of Portland as a lieutenant in the police force for 30 years, and my father was a captain in the city of Portland Fire Department. He died in the line of duty in 1956.

Their calling to serve the people of Maine was passed on to me when I joined the U.S. Army as a military policeman in 1969 and then the Cape Elizabeth Police Department as a patrolman. Forty-two years later, I’m the chief of the Falmouth Police Department and president of the Maine Chiefs of Police Association, an organization that represents law enforcement officers in our state.

Background checks help to protect police officers and other first responders, and they make our communities safer. For these reasons, I am committed to the expansion of background checks to all gun sales and transfers in Maine.

I wish I could say things were different, but my years of experience have shown me that bad people will do bad things. Exploiting available loopholes to get their hands on a gun is second nature to criminals. We know that background checks on all gun sales are the best, most effective way to make sure felons and other dangerous people can’t get guns easily.

Since 1998, we’ve applied the federal law that requires background checks to be conducted on gun sales at licensed firearms dealers. And it has worked. That law has stopped more than 5,500 gun sales to dangerous people in Maine, whether they be felons, domestic abusers or other prohibited people.

Still, the loophole makes it incredibly easy for them to instead find the firearm they are looking for online or in classified ads from an unlicensed dealer and buy that gun with no questions asked. As Maine Public Broadcasting Network recently reported, the unlicensed gun market in Maine is “ booming.”

Question 3 fixes this.

In the 18 states that already require background checks for all gun sales, 48 percent fewer law enforcement officers are killed with handguns, 48 percent fewer individuals take their own lives with guns and 46 percent fewer women are shot and killed by their intimate partners. What’s more, we’ve also seen a 48 percent reduction in gun trafficking. By comparison, in Missouri, where lawmakers in 2007 repealed a law requiring background checks on all private gun sale, saw a 25 percent spike in firearm-related homicides.

It’s indisputable that background checks work.

This is a measure that enhances public safety while protecting law enforcement officers.

I’ve also heard the anecdotal scenarios that opponents to Question 3 have offered, which, they say, point to shortcomings in the initiative. There are those who say this measure would turn law-abiding Mainers into criminals, but in the 18 states where these laws are already in place, that has not proven true. The initiative allows people to loan guns to their hunting friends and to give or sell guns to family members without a background check.

Unfortunately, as with any campaign, there’s a lot of misinformation out there. Despite those vague and hypothetical scenarios, Question 3 is and should be seen as an extension of Maine’s heritage of responsible gun ownership.

No one wants criminals to have easy access to guns. By ensuring background checks are conducted for all sales and transfers of firearms, Mainers can be assured that when they are selling or transferring their gun, they know that whoever is on the receiving end is not a dangerous person. This is part and parcel of responsible gun ownership.

I’ve spent my career working side by side with the many good men and women of the Maine law enforcement community to protect and serve the people of this state. I want Maine to be safe, and I want to protect and preserve our heritage of responsible gun ownership. Question 3 does just that.

As a lifelong law enforcement officer and a proud Mainer, I urge voters to join me in voting yes on Question 3 in November.

Ed Tolan is chief of the Falmouth Police Department and president of the Maine Chiefs of Police Association, which has endorsed a “yes” vote on Question 3."

Background checks are the best way to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people

Wrong. The best way to protect the people is to lock up violent criminals instead of releasing them into the public.

If a citizen is considered "too dangerous" to own a gun, why isn't he locked up?

Well, do you want every guy who beats his wife or his little brother or whatever to spend the rest of their life in prison? On my dime? Every mentally ill individual who thinks she is Joan of Arc needs to be institutionalized for the rest of her life? On my dime? That's what you're proposing.

This is how well current background checks work.....this guy got his gun from a burglar...who stole the gun in the first place.....

Man shot dead by Charlotte police threatened wife, carried gun, records show

In the restraining order last fall, Rakeyia Scott sought to keep her husband away because "he hit my 8 year old in the head a total of three times with his fist," she said in the restraining order document.

"He kicked me and threaten to kill us last night with his gun," she said in the order filed in Gaston County, where the couple then lived. "He said he is a 'killer' and we should know that."

------------

Scott has a lengthy criminal record, including convictions in Texas, North Carolina and South Carolina. Texas records showed he was convicted of evading arrest with a vehicle in 2005, and several months later, of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.

-----

The gun recovered by police had been stolen and later sold to Scott,


So...please tell us.........current, federally mandated background checks didn't stop the burglar or this guy from getting that gun.....what exactly would background checks on private sales do to stop this guy?

 

[OldLady]

This editorial was in the paper this morning by one of our police chiefs. Our state will be voting on universal background checks in November. Probably we're not the only one. Universal background checks do help! At least it's better than nothing.


"Background checks are the best way to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people

Commitment to public service is ingrained in my family’s DNA. My grandfather served the city of Portland as a lieutenant in the police force for 30 years, and my father was a captain in the city of Portland Fire Department. He died in the line of duty in 1956.

Their calling to serve the people of Maine was passed on to me when I joined the U.S. Army as a military policeman in 1969 and then the Cape Elizabeth Police Department as a patrolman. Forty-two years later, I’m the chief of the Falmouth Police Department and president of the Maine Chiefs of Police Association, an organization that represents law enforcement officers in our state.

Background checks help to protect police officers and other first responders, and they make our communities safer. For these reasons, I am committed to the expansion of background checks to all gun sales and transfers in Maine.

I wish I could say things were different, but my years of experience have shown me that bad people will do bad things. Exploiting available loopholes to get their hands on a gun is second nature to criminals. We know that background checks on all gun sales are the best, most effective way to make sure felons and other dangerous people can’t get guns easily.

Since 1998, we’ve applied the federal law that requires background checks to be conducted on gun sales at licensed firearms dealers. And it has worked. That law has stopped more than 5,500 gun sales to dangerous people in Maine, whether they be felons, domestic abusers or other prohibited people.

Still, the loophole makes it incredibly easy for them to instead find the firearm they are looking for online or in classified ads from an unlicensed dealer and buy that gun with no questions asked. As Maine Public Broadcasting Network recently reported, the unlicensed gun market in Maine is “ booming.”

Question 3 fixes this.

In the 18 states that already require background checks for all gun sales, 48 percent fewer law enforcement officers are killed with handguns, 48 percent fewer individuals take their own lives with guns and 46 percent fewer women are shot and killed by their intimate partners. What’s more, we’ve also seen a 48 percent reduction in gun trafficking. By comparison, in Missouri, where lawmakers in 2007 repealed a law requiring background checks on all private gun sale, saw a 25 percent spike in firearm-related homicides.

It’s indisputable that background checks work.

This is a measure that enhances public safety while protecting law enforcement officers.

I’ve also heard the anecdotal scenarios that opponents to Question 3 have offered, which, they say, point to shortcomings in the initiative. There are those who say this measure would turn law-abiding Mainers into criminals, but in the 18 states where these laws are already in place, that has not proven true. The initiative allows people to loan guns to their hunting friends and to give or sell guns to family members without a background check.

Unfortunately, as with any campaign, there’s a lot of misinformation out there. Despite those vague and hypothetical scenarios, Question 3 is and should be seen as an extension of Maine’s heritage of responsible gun ownership.

No one wants criminals to have easy access to guns. By ensuring background checks are conducted for all sales and transfers of firearms, Mainers can be assured that when they are selling or transferring their gun, they know that whoever is on the receiving end is not a dangerous person. This is part and parcel of responsible gun ownership.

I’ve spent my career working side by side with the many good men and women of the Maine law enforcement community to protect and serve the people of this state. I want Maine to be safe, and I want to protect and preserve our heritage of responsible gun ownership. Question 3 does just that.

As a lifelong law enforcement officer and a proud Mainer, I urge voters to join me in voting yes on Question 3 in November.

Ed Tolan is chief of the Falmouth Police Department and president of the Maine Chiefs of Police Association, which has endorsed a “yes” vote on Question 3."

Background checks are the best way to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people

Wrong. The best way to protect the people is to lock up violent criminals instead of releasing them into the public.

If a citizen is considered "too dangerous" to own a gun, why isn't he locked up?

Well, do you want every guy who beats his wife or his little brother or whatever to spend the rest of their life in prison? On my dime? Every mentally ill individual who thinks she is Joan of Arc needs to be institutionalized for the rest of her life? On my dime? That's what you're proposing.

again.....the guy shot in Charlotte, North Carolina.......had a domestic violence restraining order against him, meaning he could not legally get a gun....he was also a convicted felon...meaning he could not get a gun legally......and he had an illegal gun on him, which he bought from a burglar....neither one of them having gone through a background check to get that gun....

So again....you have no clue what you are talking about...

Guy, there HAD been a restraining order against him, but it was obviously not in effect if he was waiting to pick up his kids from school and was living with his wife. Those orders do get lifted, you know. As for being an ex-felon, of course that's true. The article didn't even attempt to say it would prevent every act of gun violence. It was specific and modest in the scope of its claims.

 

[OldLady]

What you are forgetting is that 90% of the American populace wants better background checks.

Oh look - an argumentum ad populum fallacy

It's not a fallacy. It is a fact.

The fallacy surfaces when you argue that we should do something because 90% approve of it.

Does the FACT that 90% approve it make you think of anything? Like, ummmm, "majority rules"?

The beautiful part of our system of government is that the majority does not always rule - by design.

Yes. It's beautiful, including the electoral college which will hopefully prevent the Orange Wonder from becoming our leader.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Oh look - an argumentum ad populum fallacy

It's not a fallacy. It is a fact.

The fallacy surfaces when you argue that we should do something because 90% approve of it.

Does the FACT that 90% approve it make you think of anything? Like, ummmm, "majority rules"?

The beautiful part of our system of government is that the majority does not always rule - by design.

Yes. It's beautiful, including the electoral college which will hopefully prevent the Orange Wonder from becoming our leader.

Missed the point, eh?

 

[OldLady]

It's not a fallacy. It is a fact.

The fallacy surfaces when you argue that we should do something because 90% approve of it.

Does the FACT that 90% approve it make you think of anything? Like, ummmm, "majority rules"?

The beautiful part of our system of government is that the majority does not always rule - by design.

Yes. It's beautiful, including the electoral college which will hopefully prevent the Orange Wonder from becoming our leader.

Missed the point, eh?

Not at all.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The fallacy surfaces when you argue that we should do something because 90% approve of it.

Does the FACT that 90% approve it make you think of anything? Like, ummmm, "majority rules"?

The beautiful part of our system of government is that the majority does not always rule - by design.

Yes. It's beautiful, including the electoral college which will hopefully prevent the Orange Wonder from becoming our leader.

Missed the point, eh?

Not at all.

Then why do you think your "fact" regarding "90% of the people" has any meaning?

 

[OldLady]

Does the FACT that 90% approve it make you think of anything? Like, ummmm, "majority rules"?

The beautiful part of our system of government is that the majority does not always rule - by design.

Yes. It's beautiful, including the electoral college which will hopefully prevent the Orange Wonder from becoming our leader.

Missed the point, eh?

Not at all.

Then why do you think your "fact" regarding "90% of the people" has any meaning?

If that's all ya got, pest, you're proving you got nothin....

 

[M14 Shooter]

The beautiful part of our system of government is that the majority does not always rule - by design.

Yes. It's beautiful, including the electoral college which will hopefully prevent the Orange Wonder from becoming our leader.

Missed the point, eh?

Not at all.

Then why do you think your "fact" regarding "90% of the people" has any meaning?

If that's all ya got, pest, you're proving you got nothin....

Good to see you understand your "fact" regarding "90% of the people" has no meaning.

 

[2aguy]

This editorial was in the paper this morning by one of our police chiefs. Our state will be voting on universal background checks in November. Probably we're not the only one. Universal background checks do help! At least it's better than nothing.


"Background checks are the best way to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people

Commitment to public service is ingrained in my family’s DNA. My grandfather served the city of Portland as a lieutenant in the police force for 30 years, and my father was a captain in the city of Portland Fire Department. He died in the line of duty in 1956.

Their calling to serve the people of Maine was passed on to me when I joined the U.S. Army as a military policeman in 1969 and then the Cape Elizabeth Police Department as a patrolman. Forty-two years later, I’m the chief of the Falmouth Police Department and president of the Maine Chiefs of Police Association, an organization that represents law enforcement officers in our state.

Background checks help to protect police officers and other first responders, and they make our communities safer. For these reasons, I am committed to the expansion of background checks to all gun sales and transfers in Maine.

I wish I could say things were different, but my years of experience have shown me that bad people will do bad things. Exploiting available loopholes to get their hands on a gun is second nature to criminals. We know that background checks on all gun sales are the best, most effective way to make sure felons and other dangerous people can’t get guns easily.

Since 1998, we’ve applied the federal law that requires background checks to be conducted on gun sales at licensed firearms dealers. And it has worked. That law has stopped more than 5,500 gun sales to dangerous people in Maine, whether they be felons, domestic abusers or other prohibited people.

Still, the loophole makes it incredibly easy for them to instead find the firearm they are looking for online or in classified ads from an unlicensed dealer and buy that gun with no questions asked. As Maine Public Broadcasting Network recently reported, the unlicensed gun market in Maine is “ booming.”

Question 3 fixes this.

In the 18 states that already require background checks for all gun sales, 48 percent fewer law enforcement officers are killed with handguns, 48 percent fewer individuals take their own lives with guns and 46 percent fewer women are shot and killed by their intimate partners. What’s more, we’ve also seen a 48 percent reduction in gun trafficking. By comparison, in Missouri, where lawmakers in 2007 repealed a law requiring background checks on all private gun sale, saw a 25 percent spike in firearm-related homicides.

It’s indisputable that background checks work.

This is a measure that enhances public safety while protecting law enforcement officers.

I’ve also heard the anecdotal scenarios that opponents to Question 3 have offered, which, they say, point to shortcomings in the initiative. There are those who say this measure would turn law-abiding Mainers into criminals, but in the 18 states where these laws are already in place, that has not proven true. The initiative allows people to loan guns to their hunting friends and to give or sell guns to family members without a background check.

Unfortunately, as with any campaign, there’s a lot of misinformation out there. Despite those vague and hypothetical scenarios, Question 3 is and should be seen as an extension of Maine’s heritage of responsible gun ownership.

No one wants criminals to have easy access to guns. By ensuring background checks are conducted for all sales and transfers of firearms, Mainers can be assured that when they are selling or transferring their gun, they know that whoever is on the receiving end is not a dangerous person. This is part and parcel of responsible gun ownership.

I’ve spent my career working side by side with the many good men and women of the Maine law enforcement community to protect and serve the people of this state. I want Maine to be safe, and I want to protect and preserve our heritage of responsible gun ownership. Question 3 does just that.

As a lifelong law enforcement officer and a proud Mainer, I urge voters to join me in voting yes on Question 3 in November.

Ed Tolan is chief of the Falmouth Police Department and president of the Maine Chiefs of Police Association, which has endorsed a “yes” vote on Question 3."

Background checks are the best way to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people

Wrong. The best way to protect the people is to lock up violent criminals instead of releasing them into the public.

If a citizen is considered "too dangerous" to own a gun, why isn't he locked up?

Well, do you want every guy who beats his wife or his little brother or whatever to spend the rest of their life in prison? On my dime? Every mentally ill individual who thinks she is Joan of Arc needs to be institutionalized for the rest of her life? On my dime? That's what you're proposing.

again.....the guy shot in Charlotte, North Carolina.......had a domestic violence restraining order against him, meaning he could not legally get a gun....he was also a convicted felon...meaning he could not get a gun legally......and he had an illegal gun on him, which he bought from a burglar....neither one of them having gone through a background check to get that gun....

So again....you have no clue what you are talking about...

Guy, there HAD been a restraining order against him, but it was obviously not in effect if he was waiting to pick up his kids from school and was living with his wife. Those orders do get lifted, you know. As for being an ex-felon, of course that's true. The article didn't even attempt to say it would prevent every act of gun violence. It was specific and modest in the scope of its claims.

It doesn't matter.....once you get a domestic violence restraining order you are marked......and again...he had felonies on other crimes....again, he can't legally buy, own or carry a gun....

 

[2aguy]

Guess what....this guy had multiple domestic violence orders on him.......he then stole guns and killed 5 people in Macy's.......

How did your background check stop him?

Washington State Mall Shooter Highlights the Utter Futility of Gun Control - The Truth About Guns

“According to court records, the gunman who killed 5 people in Washington State had been banned from owning a gun several months previously due to several domestic violence claims,” westernjournalism.com reports . . .

 

[2aguy]

This editorial was in the paper this morning by one of our police chiefs. Our state will be voting on universal background checks in November. Probably we're not the only one. Universal background checks do help! At least it's better than nothing.


"Background checks are the best way to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people

Commitment to public service is ingrained in my family’s DNA. My grandfather served the city of Portland as a lieutenant in the police force for 30 years, and my father was a captain in the city of Portland Fire Department. He died in the line of duty in 1956.

Their calling to serve the people of Maine was passed on to me when I joined the U.S. Army as a military policeman in 1969 and then the Cape Elizabeth Police Department as a patrolman. Forty-two years later, I’m the chief of the Falmouth Police Department and president of the Maine Chiefs of Police Association, an organization that represents law enforcement officers in our state.

Background checks help to protect police officers and other first responders, and they make our communities safer. For these reasons, I am committed to the expansion of background checks to all gun sales and transfers in Maine.

I wish I could say things were different, but my years of experience have shown me that bad people will do bad things. Exploiting available loopholes to get their hands on a gun is second nature to criminals. We know that background checks on all gun sales are the best, most effective way to make sure felons and other dangerous people can’t get guns easily.

Since 1998, we’ve applied the federal law that requires background checks to be conducted on gun sales at licensed firearms dealers. And it has worked. That law has stopped more than 5,500 gun sales to dangerous people in Maine, whether they be felons, domestic abusers or other prohibited people.

Still, the loophole makes it incredibly easy for them to instead find the firearm they are looking for online or in classified ads from an unlicensed dealer and buy that gun with no questions asked. As Maine Public Broadcasting Network recently reported, the unlicensed gun market in Maine is “ booming.”

Question 3 fixes this.

In the 18 states that already require background checks for all gun sales, 48 percent fewer law enforcement officers are killed with handguns, 48 percent fewer individuals take their own lives with guns and 46 percent fewer women are shot and killed by their intimate partners. What’s more, we’ve also seen a 48 percent reduction in gun trafficking. By comparison, in Missouri, where lawmakers in 2007 repealed a law requiring background checks on all private gun sale, saw a 25 percent spike in firearm-related homicides.

It’s indisputable that background checks work.

This is a measure that enhances public safety while protecting law enforcement officers.

I’ve also heard the anecdotal scenarios that opponents to Question 3 have offered, which, they say, point to shortcomings in the initiative. There are those who say this measure would turn law-abiding Mainers into criminals, but in the 18 states where these laws are already in place, that has not proven true. The initiative allows people to loan guns to their hunting friends and to give or sell guns to family members without a background check.

Unfortunately, as with any campaign, there’s a lot of misinformation out there. Despite those vague and hypothetical scenarios, Question 3 is and should be seen as an extension of Maine’s heritage of responsible gun ownership.

No one wants criminals to have easy access to guns. By ensuring background checks are conducted for all sales and transfers of firearms, Mainers can be assured that when they are selling or transferring their gun, they know that whoever is on the receiving end is not a dangerous person. This is part and parcel of responsible gun ownership.

I’ve spent my career working side by side with the many good men and women of the Maine law enforcement community to protect and serve the people of this state. I want Maine to be safe, and I want to protect and preserve our heritage of responsible gun ownership. Question 3 does just that.

As a lifelong law enforcement officer and a proud Mainer, I urge voters to join me in voting yes on Question 3 in November.

Ed Tolan is chief of the Falmouth Police Department and president of the Maine Chiefs of Police Association, which has endorsed a “yes” vote on Question 3."

Background checks are the best way to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people

So...12 of your sheriffs say you are wrong.....

12 of 16 sheriffs in Maine oppose background check ballot measure

“The measure will do nothing to stop evil people from getting their hands on guns,” says the open letterposted by Hancock County Sheriff Scott Kane. “In fact all relevant data indicates that criminals acquire firearms through theft and the black market. This initiative will not stop the reoccurring pattern.”

The letter was signed by 11 other sheriffs including Androscoggin County Sheriff Eric Samson, Aroostook County Sheriff Darrell O. Crandall, Knox County Sheriff Donna Dennison, Franklin County Sheriff Scott Nichols, Oxford County Sheriff Wayne Gallant, Penobscot County Sheriff Troy Morton, Piscataquis county Sheriff John Goggin, Somerset County Sheriff Dale Lancaster, Waldo County Sheriff Jeffrey Trafton, Washington county Sheriff Barry Curtis and York County Sheriff William King.

The sheriffs, in their opposition letter, question the need for more gun control in a state that enjoys some of the lowest rates of violent crime in the nation.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Ah, yes. Australia, my dream scape. You think that will actually happen here? If nothing happened after Newtown, it never will. As a matter of fact, instead of being revolted by the gun violence, people went out and bought MORE and MORE guns.
We are one sick bunch of motherfuckers, imo.

wrong.....they can stack the Supreme Court now.....

Moron....there were 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s...there are now 357 million guns in private hands and up to 2015 (the year of Ferguson and black lies matter) the gun murder rate went down 49%......

Milions of Americans use guns and carry guns every day...in fact, Americans are the most responsible gun owners in the world....so please...think before you post....

There is nothing wrong with universal background checks which are the first line of resistance preventing the wrong people from getting a gun. If you advocate law abiding, responsible people owning guns, you should back this law 100%.

Not an enforceable law.

 

[Jarlaxle]

This editorial was in the paper this morning by one of our police chiefs. Our state will be voting on universal background checks in November. Probably we're not the only one. Universal background checks do help! At least it's better than nothing.


"Background checks are the best way to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people

Commitment to public service is ingrained in my family’s DNA. My grandfather served the city of Portland as a lieutenant in the police force for 30 years, and my father was a captain in the city of Portland Fire Department. He died in the line of duty in 1956.

Their calling to serve the people of Maine was passed on to me when I joined the U.S. Army as a military policeman in 1969 and then the Cape Elizabeth Police Department as a patrolman. Forty-two years later, I’m the chief of the Falmouth Police Department and president of the Maine Chiefs of Police Association, an organization that represents law enforcement officers in our state.

Background checks help to protect police officers and other first responders, and they make our communities safer. For these reasons, I am committed to the expansion of background checks to all gun sales and transfers in Maine.

I wish I could say things were different, but my years of experience have shown me that bad people will do bad things. Exploiting available loopholes to get their hands on a gun is second nature to criminals. We know that background checks on all gun sales are the best, most effective way to make sure felons and other dangerous people can’t get guns easily.

Since 1998, we’ve applied the federal law that requires background checks to be conducted on gun sales at licensed firearms dealers. And it has worked. That law has stopped more than 5,500 gun sales to dangerous people in Maine, whether they be felons, domestic abusers or other prohibited people.

Still, the loophole makes it incredibly easy for them to instead find the firearm they are looking for online or in classified ads from an unlicensed dealer and buy that gun with no questions asked. As Maine Public Broadcasting Network recently reported, the unlicensed gun market in Maine is “ booming.”

Question 3 fixes this.

In the 18 states that already require background checks for all gun sales, 48 percent fewer law enforcement officers are killed with handguns, 48 percent fewer individuals take their own lives with guns and 46 percent fewer women are shot and killed by their intimate partners. What’s more, we’ve also seen a 48 percent reduction in gun trafficking. By comparison, in Missouri, where lawmakers in 2007 repealed a law requiring background checks on all private gun sale, saw a 25 percent spike in firearm-related homicides.

It’s indisputable that background checks work.

This is a measure that enhances public safety while protecting law enforcement officers.

I’ve also heard the anecdotal scenarios that opponents to Question 3 have offered, which, they say, point to shortcomings in the initiative. There are those who say this measure would turn law-abiding Mainers into criminals, but in the 18 states where these laws are already in place, that has not proven true. The initiative allows people to loan guns to their hunting friends and to give or sell guns to family members without a background check.

Unfortunately, as with any campaign, there’s a lot of misinformation out there. Despite those vague and hypothetical scenarios, Question 3 is and should be seen as an extension of Maine’s heritage of responsible gun ownership.

No one wants criminals to have easy access to guns. By ensuring background checks are conducted for all sales and transfers of firearms, Mainers can be assured that when they are selling or transferring their gun, they know that whoever is on the receiving end is not a dangerous person. This is part and parcel of responsible gun ownership.

I’ve spent my career working side by side with the many good men and women of the Maine law enforcement community to protect and serve the people of this state. I want Maine to be safe, and I want to protect and preserve our heritage of responsible gun ownership. Question 3 does just that.

As a lifelong law enforcement officer and a proud Mainer, I urge voters to join me in voting yes on Question 3 in November.

Ed Tolan is chief of the Falmouth Police Department and president of the Maine Chiefs of Police Association, which has endorsed a “yes” vote on Question 3."

Background checks are the best way to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people

Wrong. The best way to protect the people is to lock up violent criminals instead of releasing them into the public.

If a citizen is considered "too dangerous" to own a gun, why isn't he locked up?

Well, do you want every guy who beats his wife or his little brother or whatever to spend the rest of their life in prison? On my dime? Every mentally ill individual who thinks she is Joan of Arc needs to be institutionalized for the rest of her life? On my dime? That's what you're proposing.

Fine by me.