Huge mass shooting incident in Lewiston, ME

[Anonymous]

I’m in Portland - everything is shut down while they look for the shooter. Bit of levity in all the horror:
Mainers have been asked to call police with anything remotely suspicious. Someone called to report screaming in the area- police responded and determined the source of the screaming was goats.

[Anonymous]

Countries change ideologies all the time. Well, maybe not all the time, but it definitely happens. I’m sick of hearing that the US can’t do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maine has one of the laxest gun laws in the country. Amazing this guy could go to mutiiple locations, open fire, and not one "good guy with a gun" could take him out.

Actually seeing as how Maine has a strong gun culture, I am very surprised none of his targets had a gun and shot back.

If you can't beat them, you have to join them.

Uvalde was the end of the good guy with a gun theory. When trained law enforcement financed by tax payer dollars won't even take on theis ridiculous weapons, it is time for them to go. (Again...they were banned before and the world continued to spin)

AR15 rifles were never “banned,” as opposed to having restrictions on new sales.

In Uvalde, the craven, despicable, cowards who swore to uphold the law and protect others hid in fear and refused to allow others who were willing to take up the task to do so.

When Law Enforcement doesn't want to rush a maniac with an AR-15, maybe we should think about not allowing the public to purchase AR-15s?

I think Israel has taught the opposite. In this world of terror and open borders people need the right to defend themselves with power and not be helpless. If you choose to be a gun owner or not it is a right.

Or maybe you can look at Japan where ownership of firearms (and no ownership of weapons like AR-15) is severely limited and there is little crime and no gun massacres. I guess this would be a much better option

Japan and the United States are so completely geographically and culturally dissimilar that any attempt to analogies them is patently fallacious. Japan is a group of islands in the middle of the ocean; the US is an enormous land mass with obviously porous borders. Japan is homogenous and xenophobic; the US is perhaps the most heterogeneous place on earth. The Japanese were disarmed by tyrannical, despotic warlords in 1588 so that they could be controlled, oppressed and exploited; the United States made an affirmative decision in its foundation to protect private arms ownership as a guard against precisely that sort of misgovernment imposed in Japan, and to a lesser extent by the British in the then-colonies. And even Japan has firearm crime, by mobsters and a recent political assassin armed with an improvised but effective firearm.

There are lots of differences - but you cited US as having porous borders. We export arms, we don't worry about importing them. When we decide to disarm, our borders won't be an issue.

You mean like there’s no problem since we made narcotics and other drugs unlawful? Nope. None of that coming over the border. Especially Chinese fentanyl. Nope. None of that.

And you don’t seem to comprehend that nobody “disarms.” The agents of government; powerful people and their cronies and stooges; criminals, always have firearms.

The mass shooters were none of the above. The government needs to make ammunition inaccessible price wise.

I agree that prohibiting the sale of ammo is the way to go.

Then gun nuts can “collect” their phallic symbols to their heart’s content.

Because, god knows, there’s nowhere in the world or domestically that ammunition could be manufactured, smuggled in from, or obtained by diversion from “legitimate” stockpiles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maine has one of the laxest gun laws in the country. Amazing this guy could go to mutiiple locations, open fire, and not one "good guy with a gun" could take him out.

Actually seeing as how Maine has a strong gun culture, I am very surprised none of his targets had a gun and shot back.

If you can't beat them, you have to join them.

Uvalde was the end of the good guy with a gun theory. When trained law enforcement financed by tax payer dollars won't even take on theis ridiculous weapons, it is time for them to go. (Again...they were banned before and the world continued to spin)

AR15 rifles were never “banned,” as opposed to having restrictions on new sales.

In Uvalde, the craven, despicable, cowards who swore to uphold the law and protect others hid in fear and refused to allow others who were willing to take up the task to do so.

When Law Enforcement doesn't want to rush a maniac with an AR-15, maybe we should think about not allowing the public to purchase AR-15s?

I think Israel has taught the opposite. In this world of terror and open borders people need the right to defend themselves with power and not be helpless. If you choose to be a gun owner or not it is a right.

Or maybe you can look at Japan where ownership of firearms (and no ownership of weapons like AR-15) is severely limited and there is little crime and no gun massacres. I guess this would be a much better option

Japan and the United States are so completely geographically and culturally dissimilar that any attempt to analogies them is patently fallacious. Japan is a group of islands in the middle of the ocean; the US is an enormous land mass with obviously porous borders. Japan is homogenous and xenophobic; the US is perhaps the most heterogeneous place on earth. The Japanese were disarmed by tyrannical, despotic warlords in 1588 so that they could be controlled, oppressed and exploited; the United States made an affirmative decision in its foundation to protect private arms ownership as a guard against precisely that sort of misgovernment imposed in Japan, and to a lesser extent by the British in the then-colonies. And even Japan has firearm crime, by mobsters and a recent political assassin armed with an improvised but effective firearm.

There are lots of differences - but you cited US as having porous borders. We export arms, we don't worry about importing them. When we decide to disarm, our borders won't be an issue.

You mean like there’s no problem since we made narcotics and other drugs unlawful? Nope. None of that coming over the border. Especially Chinese fentanyl. Nope. None of that.

And you don’t seem to comprehend that nobody “disarms.” The agents of government; powerful people and their cronies and stooges; criminals, always have firearms.

The mass shooters were none of the above. The government needs to make ammunition inaccessible price wise.

I agree that prohibiting the sale of ammo is the way to go.

Then gun nuts can “collect” their phallic symbols to their heart’s content.

Because, god knows, there’s nowhere in the world or domestically that ammunition could be manufactured, smuggled in from, or obtained by diversion from “legitimate” stockpiles.

It takes a much higher level of effort and will weed out many if not most mass shooters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maine has one of the laxest gun laws in the country. Amazing this guy could go to mutiiple locations, open fire, and not one "good guy with a gun" could take him out.

Actually seeing as how Maine has a strong gun culture, I am very surprised none of his targets had a gun and shot back.

If you can't beat them, you have to join them.

Uvalde was the end of the good guy with a gun theory. When trained law enforcement financed by tax payer dollars won't even take on theis ridiculous weapons, it is time for them to go. (Again...they were banned before and the world continued to spin)

AR15 rifles were never “banned,” as opposed to having restrictions on new sales.

In Uvalde, the craven, despicable, cowards who swore to uphold the law and protect others hid in fear and refused to allow others who were willing to take up the task to do so.

When Law Enforcement doesn't want to rush a maniac with an AR-15, maybe we should think about not allowing the public to purchase AR-15s?

I think Israel has taught the opposite. In this world of terror and open borders people need the right to defend themselves with power and not be helpless. If you choose to be a gun owner or not it is a right.

Or maybe you can look at Japan where ownership of firearms (and no ownership of weapons like AR-15) is severely limited and there is little crime and no gun massacres. I guess this would be a much better option

Japan and the United States are so completely geographically and culturally dissimilar that any attempt to analogies them is patently fallacious. Japan is a group of islands in the middle of the ocean; the US is an enormous land mass with obviously porous borders. Japan is homogenous and xenophobic; the US is perhaps the most heterogeneous place on earth. The Japanese were disarmed by tyrannical, despotic warlords in 1588 so that they could be controlled, oppressed and exploited; the United States made an affirmative decision in its foundation to protect private arms ownership as a guard against precisely that sort of misgovernment imposed in Japan, and to a lesser extent by the British in the then-colonies. And even Japan has firearm crime, by mobsters and a recent political assassin armed with an improvised but effective firearm.

There are lots of differences - but you cited US as having porous borders. We export arms, we don't worry about importing them. When we decide to disarm, our borders won't be an issue.

You mean like there’s no problem since we made narcotics and other drugs unlawful? Nope. None of that coming over the border. Especially Chinese fentanyl. Nope. None of that.

And you don’t seem to comprehend that nobody “disarms.” The agents of government; powerful people and their cronies and stooges; criminals, always have firearms.

The mass shooters were none of the above. The government needs to make ammunition inaccessible price wise.

I agree that prohibiting the sale of ammo is the way to go.

Then gun nuts can “collect” their phallic symbols to their heart’s content.

Because, god knows, there’s nowhere in the world or domestically that ammunition could be manufactured, smuggled in from, or obtained by diversion from “legitimate” stockpiles.

It takes a much higher level of effort and will weed out many if not most mass shooters.

It takes precisely the same effort as obtaining unlawful drugs and will “weed” (no pun intended) out no one with even minimal motivation, least of all a motivated murderer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maine has one of the laxest gun laws in the country. Amazing this guy could go to mutiiple locations, open fire, and not one "good guy with a gun" could take him out.

Actually seeing as how Maine has a strong gun culture, I am very surprised none of his targets had a gun and shot back.

If you can't beat them, you have to join them.

Uvalde was the end of the good guy with a gun theory. When trained law enforcement financed by tax payer dollars won't even take on theis ridiculous weapons, it is time for them to go. (Again...they were banned before and the world continued to spin)

AR15 rifles were never “banned,” as opposed to having restrictions on new sales.

In Uvalde, the craven, despicable, cowards who swore to uphold the law and protect others hid in fear and refused to allow others who were willing to take up the task to do so.

When Law Enforcement doesn't want to rush a maniac with an AR-15, maybe we should think about not allowing the public to purchase AR-15s?

I think Israel has taught the opposite. In this world of terror and open borders people need the right to defend themselves with power and not be helpless. If you choose to be a gun owner or not it is a right.

Or maybe you can look at Japan where ownership of firearms (and no ownership of weapons like AR-15) is severely limited and there is little crime and no gun massacres. I guess this would be a much better option

Japan and the United States are so completely geographically and culturally dissimilar that any attempt to analogies them is patently fallacious. Japan is a group of islands in the middle of the ocean; the US is an enormous land mass with obviously porous borders. Japan is homogenous and xenophobic; the US is perhaps the most heterogeneous place on earth. The Japanese were disarmed by tyrannical, despotic warlords in 1588 so that they could be controlled, oppressed and exploited; the United States made an affirmative decision in its foundation to protect private arms ownership as a guard against precisely that sort of misgovernment imposed in Japan, and to a lesser extent by the British in the then-colonies. And even Japan has firearm crime, by mobsters and a recent political assassin armed with an improvised but effective firearm.

There are lots of differences - but you cited US as having porous borders. We export arms, we don't worry about importing them. When we decide to disarm, our borders won't be an issue.

You mean like there’s no problem since we made narcotics and other drugs unlawful? Nope. None of that coming over the border. Especially Chinese fentanyl. Nope. None of that.

And you don’t seem to comprehend that nobody “disarms.” The agents of government; powerful people and their cronies and stooges; criminals, always have firearms.

The mass shooters were none of the above. The government needs to make ammunition inaccessible price wise.

I agree that prohibiting the sale of ammo is the way to go.

Then gun nuts can “collect” their phallic symbols to their heart’s content.

Because, god knows, there’s nowhere in the world or domestically that ammunition could be manufactured, smuggled in from, or obtained by diversion from “legitimate” stockpiles.

Of course there will be a black market. But supply could still be significantly constrained. It's a win-win because people still get to exercise their 2nd Amendment right to cosplay action hero at home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maine has one of the laxest gun laws in the country. Amazing this guy could go to mutiiple locations, open fire, and not one "good guy with a gun" could take him out.

Actually seeing as how Maine has a strong gun culture, I am very surprised none of his targets had a gun and shot back.

If you can't beat them, you have to join them.

Uvalde was the end of the good guy with a gun theory. When trained law enforcement financed by tax payer dollars won't even take on theis ridiculous weapons, it is time for them to go. (Again...they were banned before and the world continued to spin)

AR15 rifles were never “banned,” as opposed to having restrictions on new sales.

In Uvalde, the craven, despicable, cowards who swore to uphold the law and protect others hid in fear and refused to allow others who were willing to take up the task to do so.

When Law Enforcement doesn't want to rush a maniac with an AR-15, maybe we should think about not allowing the public to purchase AR-15s?

I think Israel has taught the opposite. In this world of terror and open borders people need the right to defend themselves with power and not be helpless. If you choose to be a gun owner or not it is a right.

Or maybe you can look at Japan where ownership of firearms (and no ownership of weapons like AR-15) is severely limited and there is little crime and no gun massacres. I guess this would be a much better option

Japan and the United States are so completely geographically and culturally dissimilar that any attempt to analogies them is patently fallacious. Japan is a group of islands in the middle of the ocean; the US is an enormous land mass with obviously porous borders. Japan is homogenous and xenophobic; the US is perhaps the most heterogeneous place on earth. The Japanese were disarmed by tyrannical, despotic warlords in 1588 so that they could be controlled, oppressed and exploited; the United States made an affirmative decision in its foundation to protect private arms ownership as a guard against precisely that sort of misgovernment imposed in Japan, and to a lesser extent by the British in the then-colonies. And even Japan has firearm crime, by mobsters and a recent political assassin armed with an improvised but effective firearm.

There are lots of differences - but you cited US as having porous borders. We export arms, we don't worry about importing them. When we decide to disarm, our borders won't be an issue.

You mean like there’s no problem since we made narcotics and other drugs unlawful? Nope. None of that coming over the border. Especially Chinese fentanyl. Nope. None of that.

And you don’t seem to comprehend that nobody “disarms.” The agents of government; powerful people and their cronies and stooges; criminals, always have firearms.

The mass shooters were none of the above. The government needs to make ammunition inaccessible price wise.

I agree that prohibiting the sale of ammo is the way to go.

Then gun nuts can “collect” their phallic symbols to their heart’s content.

Because, god knows, there’s nowhere in the world or domestically that ammunition could be manufactured, smuggled in from, or obtained by diversion from “legitimate” stockpiles.

It takes a much higher level of effort and will weed out many if not most mass shooters.

It takes precisely the same effort as obtaining unlawful drugs and will “weed” (no pun intended) out no one with even minimal motivation, least of all a motivated murderer.

That's not true. I doubt that school kids will be able to get access to guns while flying under the radar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maine has one of the laxest gun laws in the country. Amazing this guy could go to mutiiple locations, open fire, and not one "good guy with a gun" could take him out.

Actually seeing as how Maine has a strong gun culture, I am very surprised none of his targets had a gun and shot back.

If you can't beat them, you have to join them.

Uvalde was the end of the good guy with a gun theory. When trained law enforcement financed by tax payer dollars won't even take on theis ridiculous weapons, it is time for them to go. (Again...they were banned before and the world continued to spin)

AR15 rifles were never “banned,” as opposed to having restrictions on new sales.

In Uvalde, the craven, despicable, cowards who swore to uphold the law and protect others hid in fear and refused to allow others who were willing to take up the task to do so.

When Law Enforcement doesn't want to rush a maniac with an AR-15, maybe we should think about not allowing the public to purchase AR-15s?

I think Israel has taught the opposite. In this world of terror and open borders people need the right to defend themselves with power and not be helpless. If you choose to be a gun owner or not it is a right.

Or maybe you can look at Japan where ownership of firearms (and no ownership of weapons like AR-15) is severely limited and there is little crime and no gun massacres. I guess this would be a much better option

Japan and the United States are so completely geographically and culturally dissimilar that any attempt to analogies them is patently fallacious. Japan is a group of islands in the middle of the ocean; the US is an enormous land mass with obviously porous borders. Japan is homogenous and xenophobic; the US is perhaps the most heterogeneous place on earth. The Japanese were disarmed by tyrannical, despotic warlords in 1588 so that they could be controlled, oppressed and exploited; the United States made an affirmative decision in its foundation to protect private arms ownership as a guard against precisely that sort of misgovernment imposed in Japan, and to a lesser extent by the British in the then-colonies. And even Japan has firearm crime, by mobsters and a recent political assassin armed with an improvised but effective firearm.

There are lots of differences - but you cited US as having porous borders. We export arms, we don't worry about importing them. When we decide to disarm, our borders won't be an issue.

You mean like there’s no problem since we made narcotics and other drugs unlawful? Nope. None of that coming over the border. Especially Chinese fentanyl. Nope. None of that.

And you don’t seem to comprehend that nobody “disarms.” The agents of government; powerful people and their cronies and stooges; criminals, always have firearms.

The mass shooters were none of the above. The government needs to make ammunition inaccessible price wise.

I agree that prohibiting the sale of ammo is the way to go.

Then gun nuts can “collect” their phallic symbols to their heart’s content.

Because, god knows, there’s nowhere in the world or domestically that ammunition could be manufactured, smuggled in from, or obtained by diversion from “legitimate” stockpiles.

It takes a much higher level of effort and will weed out many if not most mass shooters.

It takes precisely the same effort as obtaining unlawful drugs and will “weed” (no pun intended) out no one with even minimal motivation, least of all a motivated murderer.

Sandy Hook shooter's mom bought him guns. Doubt she'd be going out of her way to smuggle in ammo for him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maine has one of the laxest gun laws in the country. Amazing this guy could go to mutiiple locations, open fire, and not one "good guy with a gun" could take him out.

Actually seeing as how Maine has a strong gun culture, I am very surprised none of his targets had a gun and shot back.

If you can't beat them, you have to join them.

Uvalde was the end of the good guy with a gun theory. When trained law enforcement financed by tax payer dollars won't even take on theis ridiculous weapons, it is time for them to go. (Again...they were banned before and the world continued to spin)

AR15 rifles were never “banned,” as opposed to having restrictions on new sales.

In Uvalde, the craven, despicable, cowards who swore to uphold the law and protect others hid in fear and refused to allow others who were willing to take up the task to do so.

When Law Enforcement doesn't want to rush a maniac with an AR-15, maybe we should think about not allowing the public to purchase AR-15s?

I think Israel has taught the opposite. In this world of terror and open borders people need the right to defend themselves with power and not be helpless. If you choose to be a gun owner or not it is a right.

Or maybe you can look at Japan where ownership of firearms (and no ownership of weapons like AR-15) is severely limited and there is little crime and no gun massacres. I guess this would be a much better option

Japan and the United States are so completely geographically and culturally dissimilar that any attempt to analogies them is patently fallacious. Japan is a group of islands in the middle of the ocean; the US is an enormous land mass with obviously porous borders. Japan is homogenous and xenophobic; the US is perhaps the most heterogeneous place on earth. The Japanese were disarmed by tyrannical, despotic warlords in 1588 so that they could be controlled, oppressed and exploited; the United States made an affirmative decision in its foundation to protect private arms ownership as a guard against precisely that sort of misgovernment imposed in Japan, and to a lesser extent by the British in the then-colonies. And even Japan has firearm crime, by mobsters and a recent political assassin armed with an improvised but effective firearm.

There are lots of differences - but you cited US as having porous borders. We export arms, we don't worry about importing them. When we decide to disarm, our borders won't be an issue.

You mean like there’s no problem since we made narcotics and other drugs unlawful? Nope. None of that coming over the border. Especially Chinese fentanyl. Nope. None of that.

And you don’t seem to comprehend that nobody “disarms.” The agents of government; powerful people and their cronies and stooges; criminals, always have firearms.

The mass shooters were none of the above. The government needs to make ammunition inaccessible price wise.

I agree that prohibiting the sale of ammo is the way to go.

Then gun nuts can “collect” their phallic symbols to their heart’s content.

Because, god knows, there’s nowhere in the world or domestically that ammunition could be manufactured, smuggled in from, or obtained by diversion from “legitimate” stockpiles.

It takes a much higher level of effort and will weed out many if not most mass shooters.

It takes precisely the same effort as obtaining unlawful drugs and will “weed” (no pun intended) out no one with even minimal motivation, least of all a motivated murderer.

Sandy Hook shooter's mom bought him guns. Doubt she'd be going out of her way to smuggle in ammo for him.

Easier to smuggle/hide a baggie or a few pills vs. boxes of ammo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Countries change ideologies all the time. Well, maybe not all the time, but it definitely happens. I’m sick of hearing that the US can’t do it.

Agree. At one point, this country had enough political will to amend the constitution to outlaw alcohol, not to mention abolish slavery. Anyone who is old enough to recall the stranglehold big tobacco had on advertising dollars can recall being bombarded with smoking ads. Virginia slims sponsored one of the biggest women’s tennis tournaments. I was flipping through back issues of medical journals and was shocked to see so many cigarette ads. In medical journals! In the 1960’s almost half of adults smoked and today it is less than 15%.

Things can change, even though it seems wildly unlikely right now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Countries change ideologies all the time. Well, maybe not all the time, but it definitely happens. I’m sick of hearing that the US can’t do it.

Agree. At one point, this country had enough political will to amend the constitution to outlaw alcohol, not to mention abolish slavery. Anyone who is old enough to recall the stranglehold big tobacco had on advertising dollars can recall being bombarded with smoking ads. Virginia slims sponsored one of the biggest women’s tennis tournaments. I was flipping through back issues of medical journals and was shocked to see so many cigarette ads. In medical journals! In the 1960’s almost half of adults smoked and today it is less than 15%.

Things can change, even though it seems wildly unlikely right now.

It's just not our generation that will make it happen. Our generation (headlined by the selfish 2nd Amendment idiots) is morally corrupt. The one growing up with all this will finally make it happen.

[Anonymous]

Lewiston ME mass murderer Robert Card had severe schizophrenia, was hearing voices, and threatened to shoot up his National Guard unit.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/maine-mass-shooting-suspect-robert-card-reportedly-threatened-to-shoot-up-national-guard-base/ar-AA1iRUzY

But thankfully his God Given 2A Rights weren't infringed on /s


You did this, 2A fanatics. This is on you.

[Anonymous]

Thoughts and Prayers.

[Anonymous]

Robert Card is still at large, with his gun. They are looking for him - he could be anywhere and he could do anything now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thoughts and Prayers.

Way to lead, Mike Johnson. Maybe your wife can spend more time on her knees to help solve this problem.