Byron aims for mandatory gun possession

BYRON — Town officials say they believe residents will pass a mandatory firearms possession article at the annual town meeting Monday night.

Head Selectman Anne Simmons-Edmunds said Thursday that all three selectmen favor it and expect residents to approve it.

The article asks, "Shall the town of Byron vote to require all households to have firearms and ammunitions to protect the citizens?"

"We're fed up," said Simmons-Edmunds, also a Dixfield police officer. "Unlike Sabattus, we're going to pass it."

Simmons-Edmunds said Byron selectmen — she, Patrick Knapp-Veilleux and David Noyes — approved placing the article on the town meeting warrant long before Sabattus resident David Marsters proposed the ordinance in that town. Selectmen there, however, sided with the police chief and on Tuesday, declined to put it before the people.

While Simmons-Edmunds said Byron's proposed mandate was initially done as a tongue-in-cheek article, they're quite serious about it now. She surmised that just about every household in this community, population 140, north of Rumford probably has at least one firearm.

The town had a resident who sought and received a federal permit to own a machine gun, just because he enjoyed shooting it, she said. But since he passed away, she didn't know whether that weapon was passed down to his son. Another resident legally has a .50-caliber machine gun.

"We're trying to prevent someone from coming into our town and trying to restrict our rights," Simmons-Edmunds said. "It's time to tell the government, 'Enough's enough. Quit micromanaging us.'"

If voters OK'd the article, it wouldn't mean the town would enforce it by checking every household to ensure residents legally have a firearm, she said.

The town meeting will begin at 6:30 p.m. Monday, March 11, in the Coos Canyon Schoolhouse.

What do you think of this story?

Login to post comments

In order to make comments, you must create a subscription.

In order to comment on SunJournal.com, you must hold a valid subscription allowing access to this website. You must use your real name and include the town in which you live in your SunJournal.com profile. To subscribe or link your existing subscription click here.

Login or create an account here.

Our policy prohibits comments that are:

  • Defamatory, abusive, obscene, racist, or otherwise hateful
  • Excessively foul and/or vulgar
  • Inappropriately sexual
  • Baseless personal attacks or otherwise threatening
  • Contain illegal material, or material that infringes on the rights of others
  • Commercial postings attempting to sell a product/item
If you violate this policy, your comment will be removed and your account may be banned from posting comments.

Advertisement

Comments

RONALD RIML's picture

Well - We're going to propose

that all Residents are required to have a Masters' Degree in Liberal Arts!!!

So there!!!!

Dan McKay's picture

Every citizen in Maine could

Every citizen in Maine could learn a lot about how citizens look out for each other by attending a Byron Town Meeting. Their words are as good as any law. Mr. Angus King, for one, can tell you that.

RONALD RIML's picture

(No subject)

JERRY ARIPEZ's picture

The giant is angry all right, blind mad...

I bet you think all those that where killed were all liberals and their families too....

Funny that 80% Conservatives want background checks too....those are NRA members too....

Who said the 2nd amendment was in jeopardy, oh ya, the Right, NRA, Fox terrorists that want to force more guns onto users.

How is your gun stock funds doing on the stock market? Mine are doing great....

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Deliverance; meet Maine.

Deliverance; meet Maine.

Gayle Sirois's picture

Silly

I seriously doubt that Byron, or any town, can implement a mandatory firearm policy. Think about it...

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

It's a law with no teeth.

It's a law with no teeth.

RONALD RIML's picture

For residents with no teeth......

......

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Hahaha.....I've heard that

Hahaha.....I've heard that back in the 90's the number one video rental in that part of the state was "How to Floss Your Tooth".

Steve Bulger's picture

Turnabout?

Sooo....what is the difference between this proposed ordinance and the gun-grabbing federales mandating that you CANNOT own and possess a gun in your home??? At least the people of Byron have the opportunity to decide among themselves whether or not they enact this law - unlike the Feinstein/Pelosi/Obama camp which wants to rescind the Second Amendment and outlaw the possession of a firearm.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Great point.

Great point.

JERRY ARIPEZ's picture

Gun-grabbing federales mandating?

Your words or Fox and the NRA...

Rescind the 2nd Amendment?

Again where is that being said from the those that you just stated? Feinstein/Pelosi/Obama

OH, the Right and NRA and FOX!

Show us where they state you are not allowed to posses a firearm. They are speaking about certain types of weapons, accessories not needed for hunting or recreational use . Just like during the 1930's when machine guns/gangsters were used on the streets, or do you need a cannons or rocket launchers to shoot squirrels.

Common sense prevails, citizens safety prevail, peoples right to own or not own, and not a bunch of political activist that want it their way, because paranoia drives their bus.

Catherine Pressey's picture

Well common sense if you think:

Think about our rights, look deeper, into where one draws the line. First of all it is scary to think radicals own these high powered guns. But my radical is not your radical. Our right to own fire arms is in no way part of the hunting option. Where the gun can be used to obtain food. I for one do not like the thought that if our Government goes against the average man and becomes corrupt, we could not defend ourselves against that same government. That is what the constitution says domestic and foreign. I still believe that back ground checks are in order. However that being said leaves us to look at the possibility that our government if gone haywire, could use those same back ground checks to come and take our guns. Now I was a member once of NRA just let my membership go, I only own one gun a single shot 22, surely not going to be much of a protection however. This is my choice as a citizen I choose not to own another at this time. That ordinance that the town wants to vote on is not enforceable. No more than any other ordinance our towns have on the books. They ordinances are not laws, they are a guide, rule a town wants us to respect. In my town tax payers snub even zoning ordinances, and the town can not afford to take it to court. This is civil and is not going to be prosecuted by the DA. Towns have to hire Attorneys and pay them for court time.
And as far as the Town of Byron and the citizen watching over each other that is great. However is it not our job to tell our neighbors what they can own or have to own by way of protection. Like me I choose the only single shot gun. And really was not my choice was left to me from a former marriage. Never wanted a gun, some can defend the idea of this ordinance if the wish. Like a pipe dream it is not going to fly, no judge in any land will enforce this period. My opinion

Catherine Pressey's picture

Coos Canyon, whose Canyon?

Hey my dad would be just shaking his head, born in Byron Maine in 1910 on the old farm. Though he passed some time ago he would surely be amazed. First of all I am sure that in his day every household owned a gun of some kind. It did not make the ladies of the day happy to have them about. In my opinion dad would be saying “no damn need of wasting the towns time on this.” Each person living anywhere has to choose what is right for them not what you in any part of our government would like. Not smart in any event to mandate what we can have in our homes. Our home is our castle, small or large. Now if this is passed you can offer a real Hatfields and Macoys town. And shoot your neighbor may be just what they do. But truly where on earth did this all come from, we have a fireworks law now, so peace and quiet in its day is gone by the wayside. And whom ever it is that own a machine gun in that town, he may like shooting the same, however I for one would not want to be his neighbor, what a awful noise they make. So 140 residents of that small town will have to worry if what they are hearing is fireworks or a gun battle between neighbors. I am all for owning a gun if that is what you choose, and I am not for restricting said gun or type. But I am in favor strongly for background checks. Maybe the town should think about this lets say you make me get a gun. And someone comes to visit me with kids, now a kid gets hold of the gun and kills his brother or sister. Whose fault is it if I did not want the gun in the first place. The town is taking on something that they just can not control. You canna come into my house and tell me I have to own a frigging gun. And then invade my privacy by a home check. WOW! DROP THIS LIKE A HOT POTATO LIKE IT IS! Now I may be a wee bit wacky myself, now I know it must have been in the water in Byron and it must have altered my genes. LOL Just kidding. In all due respect you just can not believe where these things come from. It is surely amazing for sure. I am embarrassed for my dads memory and the town of Byron is such a nice little place. Would love to live there, but I would have to reconsider that if this is mandated. My OPINION.

FRANK EARLEY's picture

I was afraid of this....

I've been afraid of this for a while. Now it's come true!!! Right Wing Conservatism is contagious, quick someone contact the CDC, and put the children in the cellar, quarantine the whole town. And for Gods Sake, make sure everyone has a GUN.....

David Perry's picture

Sanity

This is what happens when the inmates run the asylum. The whole thing is probably unconstitutional - from the requirement itself to the proposal to search houses without warrants. Evidently whoever runs this ridiculous little town doesn't have enough to do.

ERNEST LABBE's picture

Did anyone read the next to last sentence

If voters OK'd the article, it wouldn't mean the town would enforce it by checking every household to ensure residents legally have a firearm, she said.

Catherine Pressey's picture

legally have a firearm:

That is its self PO's me. how dare they think that they can come into my home in the USA and check what may be inside. Unless I am suspected of a crime or otherwise, with only warrants to search my residence period. That also is in our constitution, this bring me to ask, is this the real reason for the whole thing. Do they want to know where the Machine gun went that the gun had a permit to have. Like in the article was wondering if it was handed down. Now you see we get into everyone private lives. It seems that someone up there thinks this is simplistic in nature. Goes far from that in any regard. WILL BE A COMPLICATED MESS.

JERRY ARIPEZ's picture

Reasoning

So what does it solve? Only a persons personal agenda and creates an argument on what is already law. This guy must want to hunt with a cannon, due to a swelled up head...

Catherine Pressey's picture

HUNTING not

Hunting is not what our right to own firearms is all about, just one use of the same, and this is truly not a law and can not be a law just a big waist of time. This is in the hands of our Federal Gov. and that can be scary, however if the town does in effect make this happen and each of the 140 people and the town make a record of the home checks, and what guns are owned. Think this will make a paper trail right to the doors if our Government decides to take away the banded guns, period or any guns. They will leave the paper trail to be used by the powers that bee.

JERRY ARIPEZ's picture

What does the Selectman want next?

So the selectmen's next issue is everyone has to be of his or her religion sect and wants it mandatory? You have some LBGT or Muslim wants to move there and the selectman want them to convert? Now you have the Hell's Angels and every drug lord and his gang want to live there since guns are what neighbors all now have in common? Now a loony toon that needs guns can borrow them from any house when you are out, or better yet, home invade and use your own guns against you.

Now you have a larger issue and the selectman want to erect a fence around the town to keep in who they want and keep others out. Wow, this was a movie on the reverse approach called the Postman or Glenn Becks hair brain idea of building his own state.

There is the an easier solution to somebody's paranoia. At the next town meeting they should be looking to replace the present selectmen with much more logical, sane, responsible persons. Replace the police who feel they are scared about doing their job, that they are paid for, instead of having the citizens patrol the community.

It appears that the town of Byron might have Barney Fife as a leader and that is where I would focus first. Remove the yahoos with the personal political agenda that want to enforce onto others to keep his play toys. Somebody needs to educate these people that the 2nd amendment is here to stay. It would take over 3 fourths of the states and Federal national legislative to move with of an agreement to amend it, which will never happen.

It's time to tell the government of Byron, 'Enough's enough. Quit micromanaging us with selectmen that have personal agendas and want to infringe on our rights as citizens on how to live in the pursuit of happiness and the right to own or not .

Sad day to say Maine is my home state....

Mark Wrenn's picture

yeah right

"We're trying to prevent someone from coming into our town and trying to restrict our rights," Simmons-Edmunds said. "It's time to tell the government, 'Enough's enough. Quit micromanaging us.'"

But forcing a resident to own a gun does not infringe on any of his rights? And that is not "micromanaging"? Taking away a citizen's right to NOT own a gun is freedom, baby! USA! USA! USA!

RONALD RIML's picture

That's what the Judicial System (Courts) are for, Dummy....

"We're trying to prevent someone from coming into our town and trying to restrict our rights," Simmons-Edmunds said."

Gary Grenier's picture

Un.Freaking.Believable

Un.Freaking.Believable

CLAIRE GAMACHE's picture

Amazing

Passing a law requiring the government to snoop into your home to make sure you own a gun and requiring you to own one even if you don't want one in order to stop the government from micromanaging?? It makes you wonder what the requirements are to be a selectman from Byron Maine. Next thing you know they will be passing a law that requires a woman to have a medical instrument shoved up her vagina against her doctor's orders. And if you consider that "nearly everyone in Byron already owns a gun" and "a couple of folks own machine guns" then you have to wonder how their Second Amendment rights are being infringed. I bet Maine will be making international news again with this.

Noel Foss's picture

an interesting approach, I suppose.

Even though I thoroughly support the right to own firearms (if legally allowed to do so), I don't think you should be making it mandatory. Some people have a genuine dislike of firearms, and if they don't want to own one I don't think it should be forced on them.

Laurel Frost's picture

How is that going to work when they want to sell some property?

No one there is looking to easily sell any property soon, eh?

Carl Kimball's picture

RESTRICT OUR RIGHTS

Excuse me, but your restricting your own rights by passing this law. Your taking away the right of the 140 people to choose gun or no gun in their homes. Your selectmen not dictators, this is not how this works in Maine. If i lived their and you told me i HAD to have a gun in my home, you would have a very legal action coming at you. If someone wants a gun in their home it's not up to you, it's up to them. My suggest is drop the whole idea before you get yourselfs in hot water, and it's not to take a saturday night bath in. (just my opinion and not that of this paper)

James Pare's picture

Every household with firearms??

I hope they do background checks before enforcing that! "You must have a firearm in your house! But officer I'm a felon/criminal/DWI offender the state/federal government says I can't but your telling me I can? Cool! Thanks!" Just maybe there are no felons or DWI offenders in Byron. Maybe. Better do background checks.

Fred Stone's picture

Felons

If there are no felons there yet there will be. All this does is create a safe haven for felons.

JERRY ARIPEZ's picture

Fire the Police

If you have all 140 owning guns, then fire the police, they are a cost to the taxpayers and the town and are no longer needed.....

Your town must have the Keystone Cops if you all need this passed....

GARY SAVARD's picture

Byron doesn't have a police

Byron doesn't have a police department. Very small town with not much of anything in the way of services.

JERRY ARIPEZ's picture

Paranoid, and dangerous

"We're trying to prevent someone from coming into our town and trying to restrict our rights," Simmons-Edmunds said. "It's time to tell the government, 'Enough's enough. Quit micromanaging us.'"

So NOW THEY want to micro manage the citizens and check on them to be enforceable to see if they own a firearm...WOW... Pot meet Kettle...

Is this China or Maine?

Catherine Pressey's picture

Enough is enough:

What they are going to do is aide those wishing to take away those guns, if that is what they are afraid of. A paper trail right to our doors of a 140 tax payers and I sure they want to list what kind of guns each home has. This is great the Government can now come to their doors and take away the guns that are on that hit list. They are managing to make a list that can be used against those that wish to own firearms. NOW LEAVING THEM ALL ON A HIT LIST FOR THOSE TO COME TAKE THEM. YEP!

Catherine Pressey's picture

Enough is enough:

What they are going to do is aide those wishing to take away those guns, if that is what they are afraid of. A paper trail right to our doors of a 140 tax payers and I sure they want to list what kind of guns each home has. This is great the Government can now come to their doors and take away the guns that are on that hit list. They are managing to make a list that can be used against those that wish to own firearms. NOW LEAVING THEM ALL ON A HIT LIST FOR THOSE TO COME TAKE THEM. YEP!

Advertisement

Stay informed — Get the news delivered for free in your inbox.

I'm interested in ...