Gun control advocate Jim Andrews took exception with my Maine Compass on Jan. 22, “Maine Constitution affirms owning firearms is individual right.”

He also accused me of being an alarmist and compared me to the National Rifle Association. I can’t say I was surprised, after a dozen years in politics I have learned when opponents feel they are losing a debate they attack you personally.

Just hours after the Connecticut shooting, gun control advocates seized on the tragedy to promote their agenda. I have stated repeatedly my organization would act responsibly in this debate, yet I have received hateful emails and phone calls and watched as gun control advocates have tried to blame law-abiding gun owners for this tragedy.

I won’t apologize for defending honorable people, and I won’t be intimidated by Andrews.

Andrews challenges me to have a serious debate about gun control. I would if I believed guns were the sole reason the Connecticut shooter massacred 26 people, but I do not.

Terrorists and evildoers look for society’s weakest points to exploit and cause carnage. Evil will always find a way, what we must be very careful not to do is create more places for evil to strike. Taking guns away from potential victims only makes them more vulnerable.

We have countless gun laws now we do not enforce, passing more only makes us feel safe. Again, if the Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine feels a new law or policy will help make our communities safer, we will support it.

In Andrew’s column, he repeatedly states I was right about the Constitution and our personal rights to own firearms. Why does he choose to attack me and does nothing to reject these outrageous tactics of name-calling and hate-mongering?

David Trahan


Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or to participate in the conversation. Here’s why.

Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.