18 people dead and suspect at large after shootings in area of Lewiston, Maine, authorities say
18 people dead and suspect at large after shootings in area of Lewiston, Maine, authorities say
Authorities in Maine are investigating two active shooter events and a suspect remains at large, the Androscoggin County Sheriff’s Office said
You're viewing a single thread.
He was in an asylum and reported hearing voices. He’s a trained army vet and a gun instructor. And they let him keep his guns.
Fuck every single Republican.
It's okay. The other voice inside his head is a good guy with a gun.
Hah. Fucking gold.
Also worth mentioning he threatened to shoot up the local National Guard base prior to this shooting.
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!
Permanently Deleted
Let's also remember that one of the first things Republicans did in 2017 was remove a check on people with mental health issues from purchasing firearms. Trump Signs Bill Revoking Obama-Era Gun Checks for People With Mental Illnesses (NBC News 27Feb2017)
Permanently Deleted
Insane. This was 200% preventable
More and more Democrats are also gun lovers so fuck all gun people, get rid of all the guns and you get rid of the issue.
Generally, though, the Democrats support and vote for smart gun restrictions. Such as the one you replied to is alluding to; red flag laws would have stopped this guy.
Actually if you're involuntarily committed you already lose your right to firearms (iirc there are steps to regain your rights, but they were not taken here). Red flag laws aren't just bad from a "gun" standpoint, they're bad because "innocent until proven guilty" gets thrown out the window and it becomes "guilty until you can prove you're not crazy," and proving the negative is always a more difficult position. It perverts our whole justice system, and while I have issues with other things doing the same thing (racism for example), adding more is imo not a good idea. I'd rather see them actually enforce the laws we already have which while more stringent than "my roomate seems unstable," also would have prevented this. I mean the guy was commited (making him a prohibited purchaser) and displayed violent ideation to a degree that warrants keeping him for a little while, so they let him out, don't take his current guns, and afaik fail to input his commital to NICs, that's three things that already could and should have been done in this specific case red flag laws withstanding.
Gun restrictions aren't enough though, the problem is people in general having access to guns.
If only we could restrict that somehow
Thing is when people talk about restrictions they mean "These people shouldn't have guns, but these people should be allowed to have them." What I'm saying is they should be banned altogether.
Yeah that is a pipe dream, in a country with more guns than people that is bordered on two sides by 2 foreign governments. It just seems unrealistic to say "Just ban all guns" that seems like a massive oversimplification of the problem. We don't have some magical button that just deletes all guns in the borders of the US. Restrictions seem to be a realistic option but one would hope the left gets a bit of a better understanding of firearms since at the moment they mostly make laws about things they have very little understanding of and typically ban things based on how they appear rather than how they operate.
US guns make their way to Canada and Mexico, not the other way around, because it's so hard to get them in these countries.
Because its the easiest route at the moment yes but you don't think gun smuggling would be a profitable venture? Seriously part of the reason why the opiate epidemic is so bad is China selling off the supplies for it to the cartels in Mexico, this also isn't to offload the responsibility of this mess on Perdue Pharma. They got the ball rolling and are 100% responsible for starting this mess but you have to be blind not to see how an enemy foreign nation is exploiting the issue and only making it worse to further destabilize a geopolitical rival. Same exact thing applies to Russia and their Interference in the election, they didn't make or start the problem, just took advantage of a fire that has been burning for a while and poured more gasoline into it.
Also again you don't really answer the question of how do you get rid of all those guns. There are 120 guns per 100 people in the US. They aren't going to magically disappear the minute you ban them. You can't just do a full ban, hell I would say half this country wouldn't allow it. So restrictions are the only realistic option.
Ban, obligatory buyback, criminal charges for those who don't comply. Just watch as the majority falls in line.
Oh that ain't happening. Sorry but you have to get around the 2nd amendment firstly (That ain't going anywhere unless we rip up the constitution). You would require most law enforcement to be for it while ACAB typically cops are pro guns... I just don't see it happening in a nation where guns are a fundamental part of this country's history and ownership has been written into the fabric that bind this nation together. Restrictions are the only realistic option here. They work as we don't see an abundance of full auto firearms but a full ban would cause quite a bit of unrest.
Oh that ain't happening. Sorry but you have to get around the 2nd amendment firstly (That ain't going anywhere unless we rip up the constitution). You would require most law enforcement to be for it while ACAB typically cops are pro guns... I just don't see it happening in a nation where guns are a fundamental part of this country's history and ownership has been written into the fabric that bind this nation together. Restrictions are the only realistic option here. They work as we don't see an abundance of full auto firearms but a full ban would cause quite a bit of unrest.
Edit: did a double post but deleted it since wasn't sure if the indentation was working correctly and trying to keep the conversation in a single threadline.
That's not how restrictions work.
I don't really buy that. I think it's right-wing astroturfers trying to muddy the waters while gun lobbyists seek to tap into another market.
To be fair, Democrats generally want reasonable restrictions on guns, such as ones that would have prevented this person from owning them and more liberal ones would have supported mental health programs to help this person not reach this point, Republicans want neither.
Even in Florida there are laws that should keep people like this from having guns. A huge problem is that they aren't enforced. It results in situations like this one, but it's also a huge reason why people don't want to see more restrictions. And anyone willing to think about it can at least understand, if not agree with that reluctance.
'Why should someone who is not a threat have restrictions placed on them when the police literally won't confiscate weapons from violent criminals and mental patients who have been officially barred from posessing weapons?'
This seems like a really easy argument to get past too. Just ensure that police are doing one of the very few jobs they actually should be doing, and the argument disappears, along with situations where people are being violent with weapons that should have been confiscated. People are dug in on gun rights, but people who want more restrictions generally don't care to look at the actual progress that could be made, or how to address the concerns of the people who are so dug in.
I’m in favor of mental health checks on an annual basis. Crazy people shouldn’t have access to guns. And you can bipartisan this all you want, the VAST majority of irresponsible gun owners are REPUBLICANS (or whatever center->right bullshit title they choose. LiBeRrRtaRrRiANz