Mass Shootings Maine

[MDC 5,892]

1 minute ago, RogerDodger said:

THE BOSS has weighed in.

 

 

Thoughts and prayers.  

[squistion 897]

2 hours ago, TimHauck said:

No we don’t, assuming you’re referring to Audrey Hale as that was the only trans mass killer in the last 4 years.

Don't try to confuse him with the facts. 

[IGotWorms 3,315]

19 minutes ago, RogerDodger said:

Why not?

But guns!

I didn’t say nothing about guns, bub.

To me, that discussion is largely irrelevant unless we repeal the 2nd Amendment, which will never happen. So why bother imo

[RogerDodger 797]

Just now, GutterBoy said:

Alright let me check my board, "Blame Palestine".  Got it, thanks.

OK Carry on.

Life just keeps throwing out hurdles we have to jump over.  You keep bumping your head.  

[GutterBoy 2,281]

1 minute ago, 5-Points said:

Mebbe. I'm sure that is part of it. I didn't mean to suggest it is a singular factor. 

As a society we are using a lot more pharmaceuticals than we used to. I'm sure that plays a roll as well. 

We've always had access to guns yet mass shootings are a fairly new phenomenon. So it has to be something other than the guns. 

Not a single factor, no, so searching for "what it is" is futile.  So instead of searching for the "silver bullet" (bad euphemism here), maybe we make some changes to make things better.

And yes I'm talking about doing something about guns.  Yes, we've always had guns, but again, we look at the deadliest shootings over the past few years, what's the common theme, the AR-15.  AR-15s have exploded in popularity and sales the past 20 years, and now they are the weapon of choice for random shootings like these.  Maybe we should do something about it, or at least talk about it. instead of just blaming PTO Meetings.

[wiffleball 4,643]

I'm just glad we returned to normal. No more talk  of the Gaza war or who will be 75th speaker to be nominated and fail.

 

....simpler times

 

.

 

[Alias Detective 1,179]

Never ever blame the person.  Blame the implement.
 

 

According to the police document, Card was committed to a mental health facility this summer for two weeks

[KSB2424 3,083]

Most of these shootings the person was illegally owning the firearm.  They were a felon, underage, it was stolen etc.  Point being is just yelling “We need more gun laws!” Sounds virtuous and all but, let’s actually better do a job of ENFORCING the existing laws first.  

[GutterBoy 2,281]

11 minutes ago, KSB2424 said:

Most of these shootings the person was illegally owning the firearm.  They were a felon, underage, it was stolen etc.  Point being is just yelling “We need more gun laws!” Sounds virtuous and all but, let’s actually better do a job of ENFORCING the existing laws first.  

https://www.nbcboston.com/news/local/list-deadliest-mass-shootings-in-modern-us-history/3171007/

Most of these were sold legally.

[porkbutt 861]

11 hours ago, GobbleDog said:

Be ironic if everyone killed was a gun-rights supporter. Sad, but ironic.

quick glance at this thread and this stuck out as most retarded comment so far... and bar was low as can be as is. congrats

[Engorgeous George 1,176]

1 hour ago, Alias Detective said:

Semi-auto shotgun with 00 buck is the best home defense weapon in my judgement.  12 pea size shots should get the job done and perfect accuracy isn’t always needed.

Its like shooting off a 9 millimeter handgun a dozen times at once and it won't go through your walls and into the neighbors with killing force. 

[Strike 3,979]

32 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

Not a single factor, no, so searching for "what it is" is futile.  So instead of searching for the "silver bullet" (bad euphemism here), maybe we make some changes to make things better.

And yes I'm talking about doing something about guns.  Yes, we've always had guns, but again, we look at the deadliest shootings over the past few years, what's the common theme, the AR-15.  AR-15s have exploded in popularity and sales the past 20 years, and now they are the weapon of choice for random shootings like these.  Maybe we should do something about it, or at least talk about it. instead of just blaming PTO Meetings.

Have you reviewed Bruen yet?

[Alias Detective 1,179]

9 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

Its like shooting off a 9 millimerter handgun a dozen times at once and it won't go through your walls and into the neighbors with killing force. 

Yes sir it is.  That’s why it’s my home defense weapon.

[The Real timschochet 2,943]

I want to talk about guns. 
 

I think we can all agree that a mentally ill person should not be allowed to purchase guns. But in order to make that happen, we have to have universal background checks. We can’t allow a private sales loophole in which no background checks need to be performed. And we have to have a single, national database for all firearms. Which means universal registration. 

In addition, if someone is determined to be mentally ill, as this guy apparently was, I believe the police should enter his home and seize all of the firearms he already possesses. Although this is a violation of civil liberties I’m willing to overlook it in the name of public safety. 

Would any of these ideas violate the 2nd Amendment? I don’t think so but I’m willing to defer to experts. I believe that they COULD make a positive difference. 

[squistion 897]

Yes, prayer is the answer here. 

 

[HellToupee 749]

10 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

Its like shooting off a 9 millimerter handgun a dozen times at once and it won't go through your walls and into the neighbors with killing force. 

Different strokes for different folks. It’s whatever you are comfortable with .Maybe I prefer not to damage my trim or crown molding etc

[HellToupee 749]

1 minute ago, squistion said:

Yes, prayer is the answer here. 

 

Christ almighty you can be an insufferable bastard

[Strike 3,979]

2 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

I want to talk about guns. 
 

I think we can all agree that a mentally ill person should not be allowed to purchase guns. But in order to make that happen, we have to have universal background checks. We can’t allow a private sales loophole in which no background checks need to be performed. And we have to have a single, national database for all firearms. Which means universal registration. 

In addition, if someone is determined to be mentally ill, as this guy apparently was, I believe the police should enter his home and seize all of the firearms he already possesses. Although this is a violation of civil liberties I’m willing to overlook it in the name of public safety. 

Would any of these ideas violate the 2nd Amendment? I don’t think so but I’m willing to defer to experts. I believe that they COULD make a positive difference. 

No, we don't.  And you have never supported the notion that private sales are part of this problem.  You want to ban something that has never been a problem.  And you're from the camp that says we don't need voter ID because voter fraud isn't a problem.  Focking hypocrite.

[seafoam1 1,879]

1 minute ago, Strike said:

No, we don't.  And you have never supported the notion that private sales are part of this problem.  You want to ban something that has never been a problem.  And you're from the camp that says we don't need voter ID because voter fraud isn't a problem.  Focking hypocrite.

So true. 

[Tree of Knowledge 836]

5 minutes ago, squistion said:

Yes, prayer is the answer here. 

 

What do you (or Kyle Griffin or Kappy) think is appropriate?

[The Real timschochet 2,943]

1 minute ago, Strike said:

No, we don't.  And you have never supported the notion that private sales are part of this problem.  You want to ban something that has never been a problem.  And you're from the camp that says we don't need voter ID because voter fraud isn't a problem.  Focking hypocrite.

I don’t have a problem with private sales. So long as there’s background checks. I’ve always thought so since I’ve thought about this issue. 
 

Voting ID is a different topic and I don’t see the relevance. Can we put aside my supposed hypocrisy and simply focus on whether or not it makes sense to have universal background checks? I don’t see a good argument why it would not but you’re welcome to offer one. 

[HellToupee 749]

Watching the Lewiston press conference I’m distracted by the ASL interpreter 

[Engorgeous George 1,176]

10 minutes ago, Alias Detective said:

Yes sir it is.  That’s why it’s my home defense weapon.

Mine too.

[The Real timschochet 2,943]

I don’t see any problem with Mike Johnson or anyone else offering prayers. But I also would like to see legislative action taken. 

[HellToupee 749]

Wow LL Bean is closed today 

[Engorgeous George 1,176]

9 minutes ago, HellToupee said:

Different strokes for different folks. It’s whatever you are comfortable with .Maybe I prefer not to damage my trim or crown molding etc

And I defend your right to choose a weapon which is currently legal for your home/self defense. 

[RogerDodger 797]

7 minutes ago, Tree of Knowledge said:

What do you (or Kyle Griffin or Kappy) think is appropriate?

The liberal prayer - whining and crying.  Maybe make some t-shirts for a protest.

[Ultra Max Power 214]

9 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

I want to talk about guns. 
 

I think we can all agree that a mentally ill person should not be allowed to purchase guns. But in order to make that happen, we have to have universal background checks. We can’t allow a private sales loophole in which no background checks need to be performed. And we have to have a single, national database for all firearms. Which means universal registration. 

In addition, if someone is determined to be mentally ill, as this guy apparently was, I believe the police should enter his home and seize all of the firearms he already possesses. Although this is a violation of civil liberties I’m willing to overlook it in the name of public safety. 

Would any of these ideas violate the 2nd Amendment? I don’t think so but I’m willing to defer to experts. I believe that they COULD make a positive difference. 

The Macro view of these ideas make sense.  The micro view and implementation is where these ideas always fall apart and why the pro gun community will never buy in.  

I don't believe this guy was determined to be mentally ill.  He was admitted to mental facility and released.  That whole process falls in the "gray" area and why I personally won't condone violating civil liberties in the name of public safety.  

[Engorgeous George 1,176]

9 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

I don’t have a problem with private sales. So long as there’s background checks. I’ve always thought so since I’ve thought about this issue. 
 

Voting ID is a different topic and I don’t see the relevance. Can we put aside my supposed hypocrisy and simply focus on whether or not it makes sense to have universal background checks? I don’t see a good argument why it would not but you’re welcome to offer one. 

I am not necessarily comfortable with a private citizen having responsibility to enforce federal or stte laws.  If there is immunity for the private citizen so long as they followed a well defined procedure in good faith and acted in reliance on the state determination I have no problem with it.  If the state begins expanding this to questions of what the private seller might have known through further inquiry, then I have difficulty since the state itself does not require that of licensed dealers. 

 

 

[RogerDodger 797]

24 minutes ago, squistion said:

Yes, prayer is the answer here. 

 

You should tell that to the dementia patient then too.

Quote

"Today, Jill and I are praying for the Americans who’ve lost their lives, for those still in critical care, and for the families, survivors, and community members enduring shock and grief."

 

[The Real timschochet 2,943]

9 minutes ago, Ultra Max Power said:

The Macro view of these ideas make sense.  The micro view and implementation is where these ideas always fall apart and why the pro gun community will never buy in.  

I don't believe this guy was determined to be mentally ill.  He was admitted to mental facility and released.  That whole process falls in the "gray" area and why I personally won't condone violating civil liberties in the name of public safety.  

This is a reasonable response. And I admit I don’t know how and when it is proper to determine that someone is mentally ill. But this guy supposedly was talking about shooting up a military base. It seems like something like that should be enough to take his guns away. 

[The Real timschochet 2,943]

10 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

I am not necessarily comfortable with a private citizen having responsibility to enforce federal or stte laws.  If there is immunity for the private citizen so long as they followed a well defined procedure in good faith and acted in reliance on the state determination I have no problem with it.  If the state begins expanding this to questions of what the private seller might have known through further inquiry, then I have difficulty since the state itself does not require that of licensed dealers. 

 

 

This is also a reasonable response.

I don’t want to be knee jerk about this stuff. There’s too much of that already. But I think that there is more that we as a society can and should do about these incidents without infringing on the rights of lawful gun owners. 

[Strike 3,979]

21 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

I don’t have a problem with private sales. So long as there’s background checks. I’ve always thought so since I’ve thought about this issue. 
 

Voting ID is a different topic and I don’t see the relevance. Can we put aside my supposed hypocrisy and simply focus on whether or not it makes sense to have universal background checks? I don’t see a good argument why it would not but you’re welcome to offer one. 

We already have background checks.  And, as one of your lib buddies posted up above, most incidents occur with legally obtained firearms.  I don't see any reason to change the current system regarding that.   Because what you want is a national database of all guns and gun owners.  And that's not somewhere I'm willing to go.  We know how the government abuses any information you give them.  Only an idiot would consent to that level of draconian oversight.

The voter ID issue is relevant because it shows that for the same overall issue your stance changes depending on whether the issue is one of your pet issues or not. 

As I've always said, I form my opinions based on data, evidence, and logic.  You don't. 

[BrahmaBulls 268]

2 hours ago, GutterBoy said:

Well with a balanced rational SC, we are fine.  This one is just destroying everything.

We've ignored this issue for years, it's just something we have to deal with in America.

I'm glad I live in a state with strict gun control 

Like Illinois?

[Strike 3,979]

18 minutes ago, Ultra Max Power said:

I don't believe this guy was determined to be mentally ill.  He was admitted to mental facility and released.  That whole process falls in the "gray" area and why I personally won't condone violating civil liberties in the name of public safety.  

This guy said he was hearing voices and expressed a desire to shoot up a national guard base or something like that.  We don't know the details of why he was released.  What I do know is we have been pulling back our support for mental institutions for at least 30 years.  Would he have been released in, say, 1980?  I don't know.  But maybe we need to do more to identify, detain, and diagnose mentally ill people. 

[BrahmaBulls 268]

33 minutes ago, HellToupee said:

Christ almighty you can be an insufferable bastard

I was thinking miserable pr!ck but this works for him too

[RogerDodger 797]

1 hour ago, GutterBoy said:

Not a single factor, no, so searching for "what it is" is futile.  So instead of searching for the "silver bullet" (bad euphemism here), maybe we make some changes to make things better.

And yes I'm talking about doing something about guns.  Yes, we've always had guns, but again, we look at the deadliest shootings over the past few years, what's the common theme, the AR-15.  AR-15s have exploded in popularity and sales the past 20 years, and now they are the weapon of choice for random shootings like these.  Maybe we should do something about it, or at least talk about it. instead of just blaming PTO Meetings.

Do you know why people sound so dumb when they say that?  Banning AR-15s is like singling out the Big Mac because because fast food makes people fat.  It's just a gun model let alone a gun style. 

Tell MacDonald's no more Big Macs, obesity problem solved!  

[Alias Detective 1,179]

6 minutes ago, Strike said:

We already have background checks.  And, as one of your lib buddies posted up above, most incidents occur with legally obtained firearms.  I don't see any reason to change the current system regarding that.   Because what you want is a national database of all guns and gun owners.  And that's not somewhere I'm willing to go.  We know how the government abuses any information you give them.  Only an idiot would consent to that level of draconian oversight.

The voter ID issue is relevant because it shows that for the same overall issue your stance changes depending on whether the issue is one of your pet issues or not. 

As I've always said, I form my opinions based on data, evidence, and logic.  You don't. 

Scrutinize and require picture identification for an individual to buy a gun but one can NEVER ask someone to identify themselves when voting.  Bwahahaha

Timmy - Not so smart.

[thegeneral 1,414]

8 minutes ago, Strike said:

This guy said he was hearing voices and expressed a desire to shoot up a national guard base or something like that.  We don't know the details of why he was released.  What I do know is we have been pulling back our support for mental institutions for at least 30 years.  Would he have been released in, say, 1980?  I don't know.  But maybe we need to do more to identify, detain, and diagnose mentally ill people. 

I don’t see how anyone can disagree with this.

There is of course a big cost attached to this but this is money well spent. 

[Ultra Max Power 214]

6 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

This is a reasonable response. And I admit I don’t know how and when it is proper to determine that someone is mentally ill. But this guy supposedly was talking about shooting up a military base. It seems like something like that should be enough to take his guns away. 

I'd agree depending on the context used.  Someone who is a serious threat should have their access to a gun reviewed/restricted.  

Our society has developed a bad habit of taking everything literally.  I'd personally never make a statement about shooting someone or something up, however there are people who say dumb things in that context that aren't real threats.  I wouldn't support taking their guns away because they are idiots.  

A kid at my daughter's middle school was just suspended for 3 weeks for "making death threats" after he said he was going to kill one of his friends after they had an altercation in gym class.  These are they type of scenarios that just ruin the whole process for people who would be willing to buy in.  

I'm not trying to make this a liberal vs conservative thing, but I do feel that the liberal crowd needs to pick and choose their battles better.  When everything is a problem, nothing is a problem.  I could actually get behind some forms of gun control and gun reform in theory, but hell no I'm not going to loosen the reigns to an ideology that goes too far with things on the regular.