Crime Maine shooting - 18 dead

[spamking]

Maine has pretty lax gun laws.

Meaning what? What makes them lax?

No BGC requirement for a private sale?

 

[spamking]

the firearms laws in Maine are flimsy as fuck.

How so? What makes them so different than surrounding states?

 

[spamking]

Spare us your shitty logic... cars are made for transport, guns are made for nothing other than firing projectiles at living things. Yes, just about anything can kill you but this guys couldn't walk into a bowling alley with a car under his arm and gun down a dozen people. Every time something like this happens, we all have to sit hear and listen to this pathetic, border line mentally ill logic from gun nuts ... "gee - well he could have killed a dozen people with a bus too!!!". No shit but that doesn't refute the simple fact that mass murders via guns are wildly higher than pretty much any other developed nation that has strict gun ownership laws. Maine's gun laws are a joke.

And people wonder why these discussions never go anywhere with ridiculous responses like this it's no wonder. How are Maine's gun laws a joke?

 

[spamking]

This thread is full of the usual disingenuous strawman that gun control = banning guns. .....sigh

And the same ignorant folks completely ignoring where these shootings happen . . .

 

[Seano]

Meaning what? What makes them lax?

No BGC requirement for a private sale?

There's very little in terms of restriction. You don't need a permit to carry a concealed weapon, for example. I believe the only restriction is age (18+).

 

[spamking]

There's very little in terms of restriction. You don't need a permit to carry a concealed weapon, for example. I believe the only restriction is age (18+).

In terms of restriction? Can you clarify that? All Federal laws would still apply.

Not requiring a permit to carry is not a lax law IMO . . . that's following the constitution.

 

[Claude]

Because we have the constitution right to own them and along with that you will have misuse. I think we are one of the few counties with that and free speech.

As with all freedoms you will have misuse
You make laws to punish the misuse of these freedoms as long as it is within the constitution.

We have made plenty of gun laws that would cut down murders and unjustified use of a firearm if they were enforced. However the same people that scream for more gun control don't want to enforce the laws we have.

"we have the constitution"

That's not a good justification. Many rights throughout history have been dumb.

If your right comes along with over 500 mass shootings a year, maybe, just maybe, it's a dumb right to have.

 

[DiddlyDoodly]

Shooting in Florida last night 2 dead 18 inured. One of the dead is a 14 year old.

 

[nhbbear]

you remember back in school, the kid who sat by himself in the corner wearing sweatpants? nhbbear is how they turn out when they grow up.

Well fuck nugget, the joke’s on you because I wore a suit and tie in my private school.

 

[Claude]

Why make it hard when only a very small number are missed used. We haven plenty of laws to control them now.


This is a 22. semi auto used for hunting small game a target shooting.

Because that small number amounts to over 500 mass shootings per year.

You guys have a very silly fixation with guns. I get it, it's cultural, but jeez. How many more innocent people and children have to die?

 

[Claude]

Take guns out of it for a minute and look at all of the other crazy shit happening. How many developed countries have numerous people get randomly thrown onto subway tracks every year?

We have a problem in the US that is deeper than just guns.

If americans are crazier, then that's a very good reason guns shouldn't be easily accesible.

All countries have sick people. In the US, sick people have easy access to guns. That's a huge factor.

 

[SmilinDesperado]

I make the argument that people in a gun free zone need better protection. Either from the business the zone is in or from them carrying their own.



By the other guy with a gun firing back and taking him out before he can do more damage. The crazy guy might not be stopped from hurting or killing someone, but limiting that number is better than letting the guy just have his way.



And there isn't a new law in the world that's going to change that horrible culture. You speak of extensions of their manhood . . . why? Who are you referring to?

That people need to be better protected in a first world country, "the best country on Earth" as many like to say, when they're just going to the bowling alley with their family, or they're children in an elementary school, or they're listening to music in a concert is ridiculous, no?
Your point about better protection and deterrence run into the same issue. You're not addressing the problems that got us to where we are to begin with, you're only telling people what to do to potentially lessen their individual chances of getting killed, or potentially give you the chance to kill the other guy in a fire fight. So instead of 18 people dying, 12 die instead, because a good guy that had a gun was able to take him out.
That's 6 more people alive, that's good, but that doesn't address why these situations happen to begin with.
That isn't a deterrent. It just potentially can make a bad situation not as bad. We're saying that's our best effort at addressing this problem?

Furthermore, in this world where everyone has guns during a mass shooting, we're trusting average Joe to recognize and neutralize threats during chaotic situations? Police with actual training have killed the good guy with a gun a few times.
What happens when the killers just evolve their plans? Even if you had a gun on you, if a guy walked into a McDonalds and just started blasting, it's not like your chances of getting him are good when he gets the jump on you.

There's no laws that can change bad gun culture? How come other countries with guns don't have this issue then? We can't make laws that force people to show their competency in handling dangerous weapons?
We all know the kind of people that make owning a gun/the 2nd amendment as part of their identity. We live in the richest country in the planet, and people act like we live in some Mad Max world of constant violence.
Again, I'm not even saying we need to ban anything. The bigger issue i see is just a lack of accountability and responsibility--people just want to put the responsibility of them wanting to own a gun on everyone else, making it their obligation to own a gun and carry it on them so they maybe, have some small chance of landing a headshot on a would-be mass shooter someday.

 

[Claude]

What a lovely trade off

You didn't get my point.

 

[nhbbear]

I’m more of the opinion that they should spend their days in isolated confinement. Execution is an easy out for them imo. Maybe I'm I bit more cruel.

I was wondering what your thoughts and the thoughts of LEO that you interact with are on 2A and the easy access to firearms along with the amount of firearms in circulation are?

Is it a concern amongst LEO and would they like more restrictions put in place to try and limit the amount of guns on the street?

Do they see more good guys with guns as a deterrent to violent crime?

I am a strong supporter of the second amendment and so were a lot of the guys I worked with, however, I am not against expanded background checks. What I really want, though, is to hammer gun crimes and lock those guys away for a very long time. I have seen way too many shitbags with long criminal records get a pittance of time for shootings, felons with firearms, and I even worked two murders where the shooter served under ten years.

As for this guy, I am not sure what could have been done unless there were red flags. Often, there are precursors and events that should maybe make family and law enforcement aware that the person is not at all stable-but that is real slippery territory.

And sorry for the last part, I started getting tired and decided to finish that post later and I did the equivalent of a butt dial and must have hit post.

 

[SmilinDesperado]

In terms of restriction? Can you clarify that? All Federal laws would still apply.

Not requiring a permit to carry is not a lax law IMO . . . that's following the constitution.

Yeah, see, this is really why these conversations don't move forward.
When people can just say "2nd amendment, baby." as if that ends the debate, what else is there to say?
It's just not a conversation based in reality when you can point to a sentence written a couple hundred years ago by men living in a very different world than what we live in today and say that's the only thing that matters---damn the actual reality that we're all presently living in.

 

[Claude]

You are completely missing the point of everything I've said.

Mass shootings mostly happen in designed GUN FREE ZONES. All of the guns in the world can't defend people in places their not allowed. So yes, allowing folks to carry in them to defend themselves against those who choose to attack them.

And yes, you're wrong.

Eh, that's exactly what you're saying. More guns to defend yourselves from guns. Instead of following what every other developed nation that doesn't have this problem does.

Germany has strict gun laws. They had 5 mass shootings in 2022. If germans could get assault weapons at Wal-Mart this number would diminish, right?

lol

 

[oldshadow]

"we have the constitution"

That's not a good justification. Many rights throughout history have been dumb.

If your right comes along with over 500 mass shootings a year, maybe, just maybe, it's a dumb right to have.

We have laws that are constitutional to regulate those right. Most of those mass shootings cold be reduced

Because that small number amounts to over 500 mass shootings per year.

You guys have a very silly fixation with guns. I get it, it's cultural, but jeez. How many more innocent people and children have to die?

The overwhelming majority of those could be prevented by enforcement of the laws we have.

 

[Claude]

We have laws that are constitutional to regulate those right. Most of those mass shootings cold be reduced


The overwhelming majority of those could be prevented by enforcement of the laws we have.

Again, it's a dumb right and innocent people are suffering it's consequences.

You're looking for a way to keep afloat in a pool of shit, instead of getting out of the pool.

 

[oldshadow]

Again, it's a dumb right and innocent people are suffering it's consequences.

You're looking for a way to keep afloat in a pool of shit, instead of getting out of the pool.

It's no dumber then freedom of speech or the right to vote. But if you think rights are dumb then there is not point in trying to explain anything to you.

 

[spamking]

That people need to be better protected in a first world country, "the best country on Earth" as many like to say, when they're just going to the bowling alley with their family, or they're children in an elementary school, or they're listening to music in a concert is ridiculous, no?

Look, unfortunately there are evil people in this world. Sometimes they attack those very locations you mentioned because they KNOW there won't be any resistance. So yes, anyone who can legally do so should have the means to protect themselves regardless of where they go or what they're doing.

Your point about better protection and deterrence run into the same issue. You're not addressing the problems that got us to where we are to begin with, you're only telling people what to do to potentially lessen their individual chances of getting killed, or potentially give you the chance to kill the other guy in a fire fight. So instead of 18 people dying, 12 die instead, because a good guy that had a gun was able to take him out.

My point about protection and deterrence weren't meant to address the problems that got us here. They were meant to act as compensating controls to help deal with a known risk.

That's 6 more people alive, that's good, but that doesn't address why these situations happen to begin with.
That isn't a deterrent. It just potentially can make a bad situation not as bad. We're saying that's our best effort at addressing this problem?

Knowing that if you as a person who wants to go cause trouble and shoot up a location might run into someone who is armed an will fight back isn't a deterrent? Improved physical security is known to act as a deterrent. Criminals are looking for the easy target. The one with the least amount of resistance. A locked gate. A locked door. An armed guard. Those all deter the vast majority of criminals.

Furthermore, in this world where everyone has guns during a mass shooting, we're trusting average Joe to recognize and neutralize threats during chaotic situations? Police with actual training have killed the good guy with a gun a few times.
What happens when the killers just evolve their plans? Even if you had a gun on you, if a guy walked into a McDonalds and just started blasting, it's not like your chances of getting him are good when he gets the jump on you.

I'm not expecting every patron of a restaurant to pull a firearm if a robbery happens. I'm also not expecting everyone to neutralize a threat. I'd expect them to use their weapon to defend their family or those nearby after finding cover, etc. I'd rather be armed and have a chance than be sitting there without one and have to deal with whatever comes next.

There's no laws that can change bad gun culture?

What gun culture are you talking about? Who? Are you talking about the boys/young men on social media showing off their Glocks with the illegal switch installed? Or are you talking about the guys who collect?

How come other countries with guns don't have this issue then? We can't make laws that force people to show their competency in handling dangerous weapons?

Say we implement a mandatory training class that folks need to take in order to buy a firearm. And shootings/crime don't decrease. Then what?

Do you really want to set the precedence of checking for competency before exercising a right?

We all know the kind of people that make owning a gun/the 2nd amendment as part of their identity.

There are definitely those who go to the extreme.

We live in the richest country in the planet, and people act like we live in some Mad Max world of constant violence.

According to some of the "experts" we've had a bazillion mass shootings this year.

Again, I'm not even saying we need to ban anything. The bigger issue i see is just a lack of accountability and responsibility-

I'm all for accountability. Let's start by properly penalizing those who commit violent acts with a firearm. No bail. No pleas. No parole.

people just want to put the responsibility of them wanting to own a gun on everyone else, making it their obligation to own a gun and carry it on them so they maybe, have some small chance of landing a headshot on a would-be mass shooter someday.

I'd venture the guess that out of all of the people I know who carry, that not a single one of us want to be in a mass shooting and have the chance to shoot another person.