The Maine Wire
  • News
  • Commentary
  • Maine Wire TV
  • Podcasts
  • About
  • Contact
Facebook Twitter Instagram
Trending News
  • Two Men Arrested in Sanford Stabbing and Bike Theft Case
  • South Portland High School Locked Down This Morning After Suspicious Individual Spotted Near Entrance
  • Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Longest-Serving Female Senator, Dead At 90
  • Angus King and West Virginia Senator Partner to Designate September as ‘National Recovery Month’ Amid Rise in Overdoses
  • Senate Unanimously Approves Official Business-Appropriate Dress Code
  • ‘Enough is Enough’: Portland Business Owners Speak Out About Crime and Violence in City’s Homeless Encampments [VIDEO]
  • Low Approval Ratings for Congress and Biden Persist as Government Shutdown Looms: Gallup Poll
  • Sanford Man Stabbed Multiple Times After Having His Bike Stolen Near City’s Homeless Hot Spot
Facebook Twitter Instagram
The Maine Wire
Login
Saturday, September 30
  • News
  • Commentary
  • Maine Wire TV
  • Podcasts
  • About
  • Contact
The Maine Wire
Home » News » George Smith: Background Check Initiative Complicated, Unreasonable
Commentary

George Smith: Background Check Initiative Complicated, Unreasonable

GuestBy GuestSeptember 20, 2016No Comments5 Mins Read
Facebook Twitter Email LinkedIn Reddit
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email

The ballot initiative requiring background checks on gun sales and transfers is complicated, unreasonable and unenforceable. You may have expected that opinion from me, the former executive director of the Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine, but please let me tell you the rest of the story.

The only gun problem we have in Maine is the sale of our guns to the bad guys from out of state. We have ample evidence that bad guys come to Maine to buy guns in the private marketplace, sometimes lots of guns, and then use them in crimes. And private sellers are already required, by federal law, to go to a gun dealer to have a background check performed on nonresident buyers. But this law is very difficult to enforce.

When I worked at SAM, we created a kit for our members that explained the gun-sale laws and provided a form that included info on the buyer, encouraging them to use it when selling their guns.

Sales of guns to Maine residents haven’t been much of a problem, ever. And I must give the petitioners some credit for providing exceptions to the background check requirement if the sale is to a member of the family, although they left out some family members, like great-grandparents.

Where the initiative really derails is in the section requiring background checks for transfers of guns that are loaned. Let me give you a few examples of how this would have been a problem for me.

One year, I waited too long to sight my rifle, only to discover it was not working. I took it to Audette’s Hardware store in Winthrop for fixing, and got the call that it was ready to pick up the day before the deer season kicked off. But when I arrived, and they called the feds to do a background check on me, I didn’t pass the background check, so the store was unable to return my gun to me.

The feds don’t have to give any reason for delaying the transaction, but after three days, if they haven’t confirmed the denial, the transaction can be completed. I must tell you I am not, for any reason, unable to purchase firearms. But with a common name like George Smith, this sometimes happens.

With the hunting season starting the next day, I had to borrow a gun from a friend. If the ballot measure had been in place, we would have had to go to Audette’s to do a background check on me before the friend could loan me the gun — and because I had been denied the return of my own gun, I would have been unable to borrow the friend’s gun.

The ballot measure requires background checks for all transfers of guns, including loans, even for the purposes of hunting. Let me give you a couple more examples, just in case you think this requirement is reasonable.

Last year I took outdoor writer Deirdre Fleming of the Portland Press Herald on her first-ever deer hunt. Deirdre showed up the first morning with a very heavy old gun without a scope. I told her to put it back in her vehicle and gave her a much lighter rifle with a scope, which she kept until she shot a deer later that week.

If the ballot measure had been in place, we would have had to drive to Winthrop and pay for a background check on Deirdre. And before she could return the gun to me, we’d have had to repeat that process with a background check on me. Yes, she would have been unable to return my own gun to me until I passed the background check.

One more example. Three years ago, I showed up for opening day of the muzzle-loading deer season to hunt with my friends Ed and Cate Pineau, only to discover my gun was jammed, making it impossible to load. It was my fault, because I hadn’t properly cleaned the gun after the last season. Ed had an extra muzzleloader, so he loaned it to me for the season and our hunt continued. Two trips to Audette’s would have been required under the proposed law before I could take possession of Ed’s gun and before I could give it back to him after our hunt concluded.

The proposed law is also unenforceable. Law enforcement agents would have no way to know who owns the guns we loaned each other. But if they asked, and we hadn’t done the background checks, we would have been put in the position of lying, or getting a summons for violating the law.

I spent a good part of my career clarifying and repealing laws and rules that hunters and anglers commonly ignored because they were unreasonable, confusing, and/or unnecessary. I hate putting people in that position.

So for those reasons I will be voting no on the background check ballot measure. Please join me.

*This article originally appeared on centralmaine.com.

George Smith is a writer and TV talk show host. He can be reached at 34 Blake Hill Road, Mount Vernon 04352, or georgesmithmaine@gmail.com. Read more of Smith’s writings at www.georgesmithmaine.com.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
bloomberg Featured Opinion question 3 Second Amendment UBC universal background checks
Previous ArticleNew Study Shows Expanding Background Checks “Unenforceable Without Firearm Registration Scheme”
Next Article Tax Flight is Real; Question 2 Would Make It Worse
Guest

Related Posts

Pickett Mountain Mine: Unbridled Hypocrisy (Again) on Display in Augusta

September 28, 2023

Troy Jackson’s Lawsuit Reeks of Dirty Politics: Lockman

September 27, 2023

Offshore Wind Making Everything More Expensive, From Lobsters To Electricity: FRANK LASSEE

September 26, 2023

Leave A Reply

Recent News

Two Men Arrested in Sanford Stabbing and Bike Theft Case

September 29, 2023

South Portland High School Locked Down This Morning After Suspicious Individual Spotted Near Entrance

September 29, 2023

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Longest-Serving Female Senator, Dead At 90

September 29, 2023

Angus King and West Virginia Senator Partner to Designate September as ‘National Recovery Month’ Amid Rise in Overdoses

September 29, 2023

Senate Unanimously Approves Official Business-Appropriate Dress Code

September 29, 2023
Newsletter

News

  • News
  • Campaigns & Elections
  • Opinion & Commentary
  • Media Watch
  • Education
  • Media

Maine Wire

  • About the Maine Wire
  • Advertising
  • Contact Us
  • Submit Commentary
  • Complaints
  • Maine Policy Institute

Resources

  • Maine Legislature
  • Legislation Finder
  • Get the Newsletter
  • Maine Wire TV

Facebook Twitter Instagram Steam RSS
  • Post Office Box 7829, Portland, Maine 04112

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

Sign In or Register

Welcome Back!

Login below or Register Now.

Lost password?

Register Now!

Already registered? Login.

A password will be e-mailed to you.