The BDN Opinion section operates independently and does not set news policies or contribute to reporting or editing articles elsewhere in the newspaper or on bangordailynews.com
Paul Potvin of Hampden is a retired emergency medicine physician, member of the Maine Medical Association public health committee, gun owner and an avid Maine hunter for 44 years.
We should all be thankful for the lawmakers and concerned citizens who are carefully considering firearm legislation and scrutinizing it for both adequacy of public safety and preservation of law abiding citizens’ right to have firearms. Denying the problem and refusing to look at the facts and support meaningful solutions will only lead us farther down the path of increasing gun violence.
When organizations such as the National Rifle Association propagate the message that all gun laws are bad, or that lawmakers are just looking to strip you of your Second Amendment rights, it’s not just preposterous, but unethical and socially irresponsible.
Lawmakers must find a way to free themselves from such political pressure, so they can work effectively for everyone’s rights, not for just the small percentage of gun owners who are entrenched in opposition to even the most sensible firearm safety regulations.
Take background checks for example. In Maine, only federally licensed dealers are required to perform them. In 2022, background checks prevented 705 individuals, including convicted felons, fugitives, perpetrators of domestic violence and other prohibited people, from obtaining a firearm in Maine, according to FBI data. Pending state legislation would require the same due diligence for all advertised gun sales including gun shows in Maine. Currently, it is not known how many hundreds of guns are being sold to dangerous individuals, because in addition to no background check, no record keeping is required.
A background check is done at the time of the sale, usually takes just a few minutes and, contrary to false claims by the opposition, is highly reliable, with more than 99 percent accuracy for denied applications. It is at most an inconvenience to law-abiding prospective gun buyers.
The gun lobby refers to such proposals as extreme, brought in by out-of-state interests and recently rejected by Maine voters. Not so. The fact is Mainers throughout the state want improved gun safety legislation. While in 2016, a statewide referendum for background checks failed (unlike that one, the current proposal does not restrict loaning a firearm to a family member), a more recent poll in June of 2023 showed 70 percent of Mainers were in favor of both expanded background checks and a 72-hour waiting period.
The Lewiston shooting has prompted Mainers to take a closer look at our permissive gun laws. These are Mainers looking out for the well-being of their fellow Mainers. Some opponents of stricter gun laws profess that current proposals are unnecessary because they would not have prevented the Lewiston tragedy. I believe that argument is inherently flawed. The merits of proposed legislation cannot be measured by one past incident. That approach to safety regulations would require someone to fall off the cliff before we would consider installing guard rails.
There is consensus on the need to address mental health and invest in mental health services. But even with our best efforts, there will still be violent criminals and people will still get depressed, suicidal, angry and impulsive. Restricting access to firearms for such individuals only makes sense.
In contrast to the conclusion of a recent column published by the Bangor Daily News, I have seen no evidence that a yellow flag law works better than a red one. The references cited as proof in the column don’t reach that conclusion. The proposed extreme risk protection order law does, in fact, provide for notification and multiple opportunities for due process. Also, a judge, after hearing the family’s concerns, would weigh the evidence not merely the opinions of the family. And both red and yellow flag laws are designed to protect not just the person in crisis, but also the family, domestic partners and the community in general.
Anytime anyone, especially public figures, leaders or news outlets disseminate misleading or inaccurate information, whether it be with intention to exploit and manipulate or due to carelessness and lack of understanding, it just adds to the confusion and mayhem. In order for us to meaningfully consider any solutions, we must be dedicated to seeking out the truth, and willing to be open and honest with our discourse.
