Maine Gov. Janet Mills

A squabble between the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) and Maine Gov. Janet Mills is growing increasingly strange.

The battle stems from a video in which Gov. Mills told a liberal reporter that she was considering a ban on popular semi-automatic rifles as a response to last October’s mass shooting in Lewiston, Maine, which killed 18 innocent people. FPC, a pro-freedom organization specializing in fighting unjust, unconstitutional laws in the courtroom, responded to the video.

Anybody who has followed FPC closely over the past few years likely knows what the organization’s response to the video was.

“Hey @GovJanetMills, Three words: F*ck you. No,” FPC tweeted concerning the video.

Apparently, someone within the Mills administration didn’t appreciate FPC’s sentiment on the topic and decided to make waves. Mills’ press secretary forwarded a link to the offending X post, noting that the post was “making the rounds.” Another staffer immediately forwarded the post to the Maine State Police employee responsible for protecting the governor, as if it were somehow threatening Mills.

If Mills and her henchmen thought such an intimidation tactic would be enough to shut FPC up, they don’t know the organization well, or its dedication to all freedoms—not just the Second Amendment. On Thursday, FPC President Brandon Combs sent a letter to Gov. Mills and Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows clarifying the situation.

“FPC is a human rights advocacy organization working to create a free world,” Combs wrote. “We understand from a recent news report that State personnel forwarded our online communications to your State Police. Our approach may leave little to wonder. But please know that we take First Amendment-protected rights just as seriously as we do others.”

Combs also explained to Mills and Bellows the not-so-hard-to-understand principle of free speech as protected by the First Amendment.

“You must surely be aware that our X post responding to Governor Mills’ discussion of an immoral ban on protected arms is clearly protected speech as there is absolutely no uncertainty about the law regarding this form of speech,” Combs wrote. “If not, some education is in order. Naked authoritarianism, such as efforts to chill free speech, is not acceptable to FPC and our members. We strongly encourage you to learn more about protected speech and arms.”

In the end, the dust-up between Mills’ staffers and FPC made the governor look worse and FPC look better. I’d call that a win-win for an organization that speaks pointedly with the full understanding that what it says is protected by the U.S. Constitution.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

39 COMMENTS

    • The most grating sound on planet Earth is that of an Asian woman bitching at someone. 🙁

      Deb, are you of Asian decent? 😉

    • “Earning $85 an hour from home sounds like a dream! How do you manage your time effectively between day and evening shifts? It must be a rewarding yet challenging experience! ” Explore the cutting-edge strategies that redefine success”
      For more details click ➜➜➜➜➜ https://mub.me/Ln7s

  5. Many politicians are just as intent on abusing us as violent rapists are intent on raping women. Saying it another way, the fact that a politician wins an election and wears nice dress clothes does not in any way, shape, nor form preclude him/her from being a nasty human being who uses, exploits, abuses, and consumes “others” at every opportunity.

    More to the point of this article, politicians such as Maine’s governor (and their staffers) understand inalienable rights full well–they simply don’t care and will do whatever they want if they think that they can get away with it. Perhaps we should consider more matter-of-fact and forceful responses to politicians and their staffers who announce their intention to deny our rights. Kind of like the way that Firearms Policy Coalition did?

  6. Well, you must admit that the FPC response to the video was rather rude, and not likely to generate a positive response from its intended audience. Of course they had the right to say it, and it was not a threat, but perhaps Brandon might want to tone it down a bit.

    • Mark N.,

      See my comment above. Politicians like Maine’s Governor know full well what they are doing. We would not feel any inclination to “tone it down” when responding to a rapist announcing his intention to rape us or a loved one. Why should we respond any differently to a politician who wants to defile and degrade us?

    • Mark N.,

      On a more pragmatic note, the Far Left elevates and responds to intense emotion above EVERYTHING. When we respond with polite words to Far Left blatant and intentional acts to defile and degrade us, we are telling them that we really are not defiled and degraded. (In their minds, if we were really defiled and degraded, we would respond with crying and yelling.) So, we actually stand a much better chance of the Far Left truly understanding us and, more importantly responding favorably to us, if we respond with words expressing extreme sadness and anger.

      Look at it this way. Suppose that a woman says that a man who she knows came into her apartment and raped her–and she is polite, positive, and upbeat in her report. Would you believe her? Or would you think that she had consensual $ex with the man, is reporting it as rape for who knows what purpose, and walk away without acting on her report? On the other hand, if the woman is visibly upset (crying and yelling in her report), aren’t you far more likely to believe her AND ACT ON HER REPORT?

      So it is with the Far Left.

      At the very least, our longstanding tradition of polite responses and occasional lawsuits is failing in spectacular fashion. Note that the definition of insanity is “Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.” Since our polite responses are not producing a different (positive) result, why not try something different, like impassioned responses such as FPC published?

    • “Of course they had the right to say it, and it was not a threat,…”

      Were they seriously trying to suggest “Fuck You, No.” was a threat of sexual assault?

      Isn’t it a felony crime to make a false police report?

      The FPC needs to press charges of harassment against ‘Princess Governor’ for harassment of filing a false police report…

    • I have zero problems with the FPC speaking as they do. Aren’t you getting sick and tired of the lawfare bullshit? Enough already! These people have shown they don’t want to compromise. Fuck them and the Prius they rode in on.

    • There is nothing wrong with being rude. You have 1st amendment right to be rude.
      The idea the civility should exist died when people supported the kkk calling black people n#ggers. And they supported burning a cross on the private property of a black person.

      Also they supported the american national s0c.ialis.ts, marching in Jewish holocaust neighborhoods. Yelling they were going to finish the job that Hitler started.

      So no, there’s nothing wrong with being rude. Perhaps it’s just that, it’s ok to be rude to some people. But not to others.

      Like it’s “wrong” to burn rubber on a painted rainbow street flag. Because you will be arrested and charged.

      Like I’ve said before. You have a 1st amendment right to block a military recruiting office.

      But you don’t have a 1st amendment right to block an abortion clinic.

      The freedom of speech freaks have never supported the 1st amendment. And they have never supported the 2nd Amendment either.

      It all depends on whose ox is being gored.

  7. The left can’t handle the truth no matter the language contained therein.
    The left should be told loud, clear and often to bug off.
    Of course, those in the V A refusing to accept the law of the land should be fired immediately.

    • Hush – yep words matter. Case in point the part of the article that said (paraphrasing) 18 were killed in a mass shooting. Yes, by any definition it was a ‘mass shooting’ but that was incorrect – the murderer killed them, not the shooting itself. Yes I’m probably being nit picky but anything that deflects the blame away from the killer does a disservice, especially when the attempt is to blame an inanimate object.

  8. “Hey @GovJanetMills, Three words: F*ck you. No,” FPC tweeted

    Was that actually sent by Firearms Policy Coalition?

    This seems like a decades old apocryphal Charlie Brown cartoon (not done by Charles Schultz). He’s sitting on a curb with his head hanging down and he says:
    “doing a good deed is like pissing yourself in dark pants. You get a nice warm feeling at first, but after a little bit everyone around you notices you stink.”
    Saying what you feel can often be like that.

  9. Mainer’s continually elect tyrants who detest the Bill of Rights like this to office. So it’s really hard to have any sympathy. She won the last election by 90,000 votes and only 59% of the people voted in that election so even if you choose to not decide…You still have made a choice.

    • White married women usually vote conservative. That means Democrats have an incentive to make sure that demographic doesn’t get/stay married. What could go wrong?

      • Dude,

        “White married women usually vote conservative.”

        That is not consistent with my experience. And that statement is not consistent with the previous election in 2020. Do you have a reliable source for that?

        • Check pages three and four of the Pew Research report.
          https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2024/04/09/partisanship-by-gender-sexual-orientation-marital-and-parental-status/

          Page 3: Look at the partisan divide among white men and women, Hispanic men and women, and black men and women. Each group, except one, is clearly for one party. That one exception is white women. They have been about evenly split dem/rep for the past 30 years. That’s for all white women.

          Now look at single vs married on page 4:

          Women who have never been married are three times as likely to associate with the Democratic Party as with the Republican Party (72% vs. 24%).

          By a narrower – though still sizable – margin (61% to 37%), never-married men also favor the Democrats.

          Democrats have a substantial advantage among both women and men who live with a partner but are not married, and a narrower edge among those who are divorced or separated.

          Widowed men tilt Republican (55% GOP vs. 44% Democratic, including party leaners), while widowed women are about equally likely to associate with the GOP or Democrats (46% and 47%).

          Also:
          Democrats are always trying to create and recruit a victim class. They tell people that they’re oppressed, a victim, etc. They tell this “victim” class that they have to stick together to overcome their oppressors. Single (not married) women are more likely to identify with “struggles” of other women. They’re likely to band together with this “victim” class. Democrats then tell various victim groups that they have to join other victim groups to overcome their oppressors. Call it an intersectional coalition.

          What sort of identities intersect? Race, gender, sec_ksual orientation/kink, labor/worker, environmental, etc. Greta Thunberg was the face of climate change. So why was she carrying on about Palestinians? Intersection. It’s a way to recruit people into left wing orthodoxy. Once they get someone interested in “women’s rights”, before you know it they’re wearing rainbow and Ukrainian flags, marching with BLM, and kneeling for the anthem.

          What’s a good antidote for intersectional brainwashing? Marriage.

          Only 18% of married white women reported their futures were strongly connected to other women compared to 38% of single and 30% of divorced white women. The patterns are similar for Latina women. This means for these two racial groups, heterosexual marriage leads them to feel less connected to other women. (and less likely to join the intersectional coalition)

          “And that statement is not consistent with the previous election in 2020.”

          According to the data, Trump increased his voter base among minorities in 2020. Women either stayed the same or increased (can’t remember). What changed? White men! Yes, really. I’ll try to find it. Women didn’t throw the 2020 election, even if it wasn’t fraudulent. (It was.)

          • This has been known for decades to the point I’m surprised you were challenged for a source. There’s also a specific psychological reason for the behavior in question.

            As women enter middle age, their instincts which I’ll sum up under the title of “mothering”, require a target. It’s either their own children or it’s the *village*. Democrats actively promote single women because it makes it very much easier to get them to choose *the village*.

            An interesting side note to this is that it’s also known that women who have their first child over the age of ~35 will be significantly more likely to be overprotective of that child where women who had their first child significantly younger are much more likely to be, well, normal.

            The same trait is notable in men, though it’s not as pronounced. Having kids after your brain starts to move past the “willing to take risk” stage means that you generally don’t let your kids take any risks unless you’ve already formed a pattern of allowing this with earlier kids that you had before your brain changed.

            This is where you get snowplow/helicopter parenting. From people who have their first kid in their 30’s or 40’s.

            Which, by the by, we can trace directly back to the degradation of the USD and the downstream effects on the economy pushing people to have kids later and later and therefore having fewer kids and also treating them differently.

            In several ways this is like the question I’ve asked quite a few times, though not recently, “How does international shipping affect your 2A and other Constitutional Rights?”.

            2nd and 3rd (or greater) order effects are a PITA and most people don’t see them even with 20/20 hindsight unless you point it out.

            There are significant consequences to the gaslighting that led to the Boomer/Millennial and now the Boomer/Zoomer divide. These effects are not unexpected or undesired by the people who engaged in the gaslighting. They are a series of well predicted outcomes that the country will NOT fix with dumbfuck sloganeering like “Get a roommate!”.

            I’ve shown the native born employment rate using the government methods of 1993. It’s 1 in 4. How long can you sustain that before something snaps? And when it snaps what’s the target of the backlash?

            They’re hoping it’s the Boomers.

            Ultimately, allowed to run to completion, most Boomers end up in a nursing home being smothered with a pillow that’s held by *Newcomer* who makes $12/hour in an economy where that won’t buy a cup of coffee. Which is the plan. Strip mine them until the resources are gone and then terminate the object driving the costs. Just like a hostile takeover of a company that has unproductive departments. Fire everyone and sell off the equipment for whatever you can get.

            But fuck me for noticing where the arithmetic goes, I guess. It’s offensive or something.

            • There’s a reason for all things. It’s good to understand them. I’m not sure why your comment was moderated, unless I missed it earlier.

              • It was moderated. It’s one of the reasons that I sometimes look at TTAG these days and don’t bother with a comment. Well, that and they seem to check the filter like once a day in the morning.

                It’s kinda like the Notorious B.I.G. said of public school.

                “So school I didn’t show up, it fucked my flow up”

                Wild that you can curse a blue streak but random stuff gets you modded.

  16. You missed the best part of this story. The letter FPC wrote to the governor should be viewed in its native form; many copies of it floating around X. Being master trolls FPC included a subtle coded message for the governor in the text of the letter. Check it out, you’ll laugh yourself silly.

  17. This is an outstanding example of why the 1st amendment was written. It was not written for pornography.

    It was written so that you could tell a h0.m0sex.ual politician to go Fuck themselves. Or any elected leader. Or tell any government employees to go Fuck themselves.

    It was never ever written so you could have your pornography. But you certainly can have your pornography. If you want it.

Comments are closed.