Do you agree with Maines proposed law to grant immunity for self defense to soldiers on Active Duty?

Everybody always has the right to self-defense. I therefore don't understand what they are trying to accomplish with this bill. It's probably well intentioned, but it seems to actually take away people's rights. If somebody leaves the National Guard does that mean they lose their right for self-defense? What does that even mean? "Granting immunity for self-defense" -- that's like "granting immunity for freedom of speech". Really not sure what they are thinking on this one.

They are not referring to AD Soldiers. TN is trying to do the same. When they authorized NG Soldiers to Carry/Conceal at Armories it is at our own "risk" in the event of a Active shooter event. There are no protections.

LTC Yinon Weiss

I'm curious, since when did police officers acquire criminal and civil "IMMUNITY" for their actions? Are they not held to the exact same standards as the rest of the civilian population? We have a great problem in this country when we declare that the police are "immune" from the law and don't have to face consequences for their actions. Now the legislature of Maine wants to place their "National Guard" on that same raised pedestal?
Don't get me wrong EVERYONE should have the "RIGHT" to protect themselves and their families from the evil around us. It's what the Declaration of Independence declared, and the 2nd Amendment codified... However; We all should be guided by the SAME SET OF RULES. There should NEVER be any special dispensation for police or anyone else.
Although I believe this "bill" is intended to do good, it should never pass! In fact if there are laws in Maine that make the police immune from both criminal and civil liability for their actions those laws should, IMHO be repealed.

I'm with Yinon on this-to the extent that it should be a forgone conclusion that self-defense in an intrinsic right of all citizens. However, there are laws and regulations that prevent lawful concealed carry permit holders from exercizing the privileges they've submitted to training, testing and significant cost to hold-and while I don't have statistics or regs to cite...I can imagine the military takes a generally dim view on private firearms on base, in barracks, or on ship.

It seems to me that if we can trust non-"tip of the spear" personnel with an M-4 and an M-9 for twelve months in a combat zone, "just in case"...we should be equally comfortable trusting them, let alone true combat qualified personnel with possessing firearms stateside; particularly if they submit to training and costs to obtain the correct qualifications to do so.

"'They should be held to the same standards as our law enforcement officers and not have additional penalties because they are in the military,' said Matthew Pouliot, R-Augusta, a co-sponsor of the bill. 'That's just a commonsense thing.'

The bill, which seeks to amend existing state military laws, would also ensure that law enforcement agencies have the ability to provide criminal records relating to the enforcement of the Maine Code of Military Justice to the Maine National Guard. It also states that military police have the same rights and immunities as law enforcement if activated for an emergency."

Sounds like a good thing to me.

I personally do, but I think this question is a bit confusing and misleading. Everyone always has the right to self defense, and the law protects anyone including Military members on and off duty from unjust persecution for exercising the right of living using self defense.

I agree with Maj Yinon Weiss that this bill is more of a feel good, or they are trying to open a path to authorizing service members to arm themselves with firearms and take a semi-pro-active role in defending their life. Such as in response to someone opening the door to a recruiting office and shooting up the place, as it stands now, the recruiter does not have a firearm ready to go to defend their life. at best they can try to throw their Gerber/Leatherman or pocket knife or stapler at the person while they either charge them with their Military grade metal ink pen or jump out a window.

Maybe this a path to allowing service members to arm themselves if they so choose to. But from what I read its just re-iterating that people are justified in self-defense.

Does this mean that Guardsmen would be able to have both guns and ammo with them in the performance of their duties? That would be fantastic!

I guess if it self defense.