Robert Card (Maine Mass Shooter) Case Analysis

[Bad Brain]

The funny thing about the 2A, if we were to follow it 100% citizens should be able to own anything the military has.

Just image if your neighbor had a

No one should have nukes! Why should the military have these weapons when they can use them to massacre many more innocent people than this Maine guy? Are you upset about that @Aynirar27 ? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki

 

[Laputan Machine]

It's not about TOTAL gun deaths. It's not about EVERY type of gun. It's about MASS SHOOTINGS and the large majority of them happening with AR type guns. Just like the meme Dan posted that points out how mass shootings have decreased since AR have been banned in other countries.

Definition of a mass shooting is 4 or more people shot IIRC, and the overwhelming majority of those are people being shot in inner cities with handguns.

If you want to define it as a whacko shoots up a school or nightclub then an automatic rifle are more common but not in the overwhelming majority, and those deaths are nothing when compared to violence in innercities, which for some reason your type has no interest in at all.

 

[JTyson]

There are ways to greatly diminish the number of mass shootings without trampling the rights of people who would never do that. It would require profiling people to make it affective and also tying mental health records and juvenile records along with all criminal records to the NCIS background check system. Ive talked to LE guys who I shoot with and they say it could be done in less than 2 years, and would stop over 85%
of not only mass shootings but other types as well where a weapon was legally purchased but used illegally.
If your gonna stomp on someones 2A rights, it should be the people who exhibit the behavior that makes them more likely than not to do those things. Now, Im not saying everyone with a mental diagnosis should be stopped from purchasing a weapon, there are degrees of sickness and some people who have been checked out may have been found to still have their wits about them to a degree that they would likely choose not to do pure evil to innocent people, but anything beyond that, the answer is NO. At this point we depend on people to be honest about their answers on the background check form and that's a fucking joke. Almost all the mass shooters in the last decade lied about their status, why are we still trusting people to tell the truth?? They have proven they won't. Multiple times news networks have spoken of a "legally" purchased weapon used in a mass shooting when the guy lied on the form in at least 1 answer, some of them multiple answers..
Do I have to even say it? That means the weapon was NOT purchased legally you ignorant pile of shit..

Tie the mental health records, juvenile records and criminal records to the NCIS background check system and put the pressure on the person doing the background check and the agency providing the information and stop trusting people to play nice. They won't...
Give stiff penalties to anyone involved in the process that lets the sale go through anyway, including people in the agency that provided it. You should all be willing to hold yourselves accountable before you ever expect to do the same to any of us.. Most of us have done it for our whole lives while we watch you play games and constantly talk like we are the problem.
In addition, nobody talks about the upwards of 250,000 times a year a legally armed individual stops a criminal or at times even a mass shooter, it happened just a few months ago. An armed citizen stopped a mass shooter before he could do much damage at all and the guy was geared up to do some serious damage. The press barely talked about it because it goes against the narrative. If you want tighter gun laws so we have less killing of innocent people, focus on the people who are doing that stupid shit and leave the rest of us alone. People who are not part of that problem have every right to defend themselves or anyone near them if they so choose. The same idiots who are releasing criminals back onto the streets with little or no penalties are the ones who want to punish people who have never broken the law by taking away their right to defend themselves. Those of us who are in the latter category are tired of hearing that we are responsible for the actions of criminals who don't give half a shit about whatever new sweeping "laws" they are gonna pass.
So to them, I would just say kindly go fuck yourself and please be smarter than you appear to be for the last 20 years...
If you are unable to pull that off, then you should be the one forced to go door to door to do what you have wanted to do all along.
We hope you all will wise up and do something that will actually make a difference where it needs to be made..
Your not getting mine. Not now, not later, not ever..
The problem is not me, its you... Do your job. There are ways to get this done but you don't even look outside your political list of shit that you can't see past to even consider it. Meanwhile more people die everyday due to your inability to see reality

 

[Stripped Rights]

If you want to define it as a whacko shoots up a school or nightclub with an automatic rifle

That's how I define a mass shooting.

 

[JTyson]

BTW, the background check system upgrade and reworking has already been proposed to Federal agencies years ago, and they did nothing with it....
Nothing

 

[Laputan Machine]

There are ways to greatly diminish the number of mass shootings without trampling the rights of people who would never do that. It would require profiling people to make it affective and also tying mental health records and juvenile records along with all criminal records to the NCIS background check system. Ive talked to LE guys who I shoot with and they say it could be done in less than 2 years, and would stop over 85%
of not only mass shootings but other types as well where a weapon was legally purchased but used illegally.
If your gonna stomp on someones 2A rights, it should be the people who exhibit the behavior that makes them more likely than not to do those things. Now, Im not saying everyone with a mental diagnosis should be stopped from purchasing a weapon, there are degrees of sickness and some people who have been checked out may have been found to still have their wits about them to a degree that they would likely choose not to do pure evil to innocent people, but anything beyond that, the answer is NO. At this point we depend on people to be honest about their answers on the background check form and that's a fucking joke. Almost all the mass shooters in the last decade lied about their status, why are we still trusting people to tell the truth?? They have proven they won't. Multiple times news networks have spoken of a "legally" purchased weapon used in a mass shooting when the guy lied on the form in at least 1 answer, some of them multiple answers..
Do I have to even say it? That means the weapon was NOT purchased legally you ignorant pile of shit..

Tie the mental health records, juvenile records and criminal records to the NCIS background check system and put the pressure on the person doing the background check and the agency providing the information and stop trusting people to play nice. They won't...
Give stiff penalties to anyone involved in the process that lets the sale go through anyway, including people in the agency that provided it. You should all be willing to hold yourselves accountable before you ever expect to do the same to any of us.. Most of us have done it for our whole lives while we watch you play games and constantly talk like we are the problem.
In addition, nobody talks about the upwards of 250,000 times a year a legally armed individual stops a criminal or at times even a mass shooter, it happened just a few months ago. An armed citizen stopped a mass shooter before he could do much damage at all and the guy was geared up to do some serious damage. The press barely talked about it because it goes against the narrative. If you want tighter gun laws so we have less killing of innocent people, focus on the people who are doing that stupid shit and leave the rest of us alone. People who are not part of that problem have every right to defend themselves or anyone near them if they so choose. The same idiots who are releasing criminals back onto the streets with little or no penalties are the ones who want to punish people who have never broken the law by taking away their right to defend themselves. Those of us who are in the latter category are tired of hearing that we are responsible for the actions of criminals who don't give half a shit about whatever new sweeping "laws" they are gonna pass.
So to them, I would just say kindly go fuck yourself and please be smarter than you appear to be for the last 20 years...
If you are unable to pull that off, then you should be the one forced to go door to door to do what you have wanted to do all along.
We hope you all will wise up and do something that will actually make a difference where it needs to be made..
Your not getting mine. Not now, not later, not ever..
The problem is not me, its you... Do your job. There are ways to get this done but you don't even look outside your political list of shit that you can't see past to even consider it. Meanwhile more people die everyday due to your inability to see reality

Problem with this is if people know you are prohibited from buying firearms if you have some sort of diagnosis, that would most likely increase the number of people who would not seek treatment, and greatly increase the number of people prone to actions like mass murder to not seek treatment.

There is also the issue that psychiatry is a complete quagmire of BS mixed in with attempts at treatment (which has terrible efficacy overall). Mental health as a segment of healthcare is rife with problems, there aren't legitimate tests performed that provide actual data for diagnosis as there are in every other segment of medicine, it's all very subjective to one degree or another.

Add in the legal process/movement (which tends to move glacially) of denying constitutional rights based on something like a medical diagnosis...the idea that this could be done (to the extant that it is actually working/implemented IRL) in 2 years is ridiculous. I mean, I think there are some prohibitions in effect for certain people from obtaining firearms through 'official' regs, but that doesn't seem to actually work.

 

[Bad Brain]

psychiatry is a complete quagmire of BS

100%. There is no such thing as a "mental illness" in the medical sense, with objective, quantifiable testing. It's all subjective and cultural. Don't forget, all you numb-nuts calling for this, that being gay was once considered a mental illness. So too being anti-communist in the USSR.

 

[Stripped Rights]

100%. There is no such thing as a "mental illness" in the medical sense, with objective, quantifiable testing. It's all subjective and cultural. Don't forget, all you numb-nuts calling for this, that being gay was once considered a mental illness. So too being anti-communist in the USSR.

According to some of the members here LGBTQIA2S+ are all mentally ill so

 

[Monkey Man]

What proportion of these crimes is committed using illegally-procured firearms?

IMHO this is the most-important question to ask.

On top of that, the percentage will most-definitely increase with every newly-introduced restriction for the obvious reason that peeps who want to kill couldn't give two hoots about gun laws.

 

[JTyson]

Problem with this is if people know you are prohibited from buying firearms if you have some sort of diagnosis, that would most likely increase the number of people who would not seek treatment, and greatly increase the number of people prone to actions like mass murder to not seek treatment.

There is also the issue that psychiatry is a complete quagmire of BS mixed in with attempts at treatment (which has terrible efficacy overall). Mental health as a segment of healthcare is rife with problems, there aren't legitimate tests performed that provide actual data for diagnosis as there are in every other segment of medicine, it's all very subjective to one degree or another.

Add in the legal process/movement (which tends to move glacially) of denying constitutional rights based on something like a medical diagnosis...the idea that this could be done (to the extant that it is actually working/implemented IRL) in 2 years is ridiculous. I mean, I think there are some prohibitions in effect for certain people from obtaining firearms through 'official' regs, but that doesn't seem to actually work.

Oh I agree its not perfect, but its at least something..
I see a lot of talk in here but no actual solutions that would only affect criminals and crazy people. Denying a constitutional right for a mental diagnosis, felony criminal record or dishonorable discharge is already on the background check form if they honestly answer the question.
This would take away their ability to lie on the form, which they seem to do often.
I would love to hear a better solution

 

[JTyson]

100%. There is no such thing as a "mental illness" in the medical sense, with objective, quantifiable testing. It's all subjective and cultural. Don't forget, all you numb-nuts calling for this, that being gay was once considered a mental illness. So too being anti-communist in the USSR.

People exhibit behavioral patterns all the time. Its disingenuous to act like there is no way to be sure. The vast majority of mass shooters had a history that led people to wonder how they ever got a gun legally. The last dozen of them all had info on their facebook page that should have been taken seriously, but wasn't. Don't you agree that people who literally say they want to go on a killing spree should be treated as someone who said so?

 

[JTyson]

On top of that, the percentage will most-definitely increase with every newly-introduced restriction for the obvious reason that peeps who want to kill couldn't give two hoots about gun laws.

Yep, it happens every day. This is primarily why I am against gun laws that restrict law abiding citizens ability to defend themselves.
Ive had to brandish a weapon twice in my travels on the road for 40 years. Any laws that will hinder me from defending myself out in the wild can be shoved right up the ass of the individual who wants to implement it. Case closed...

 

[Laputan Machine]

Oh I agree its not perfect, but its at least something..
I see a lot of talk in here but no actual solutions that would only affect criminals and crazy people. Denying a constitutional right for a mental diagnosis, felony criminal record or dishonorable discharge is already on the background check form if they honestly answer the question.
This would take away their ability to lie on the form, which they seem to do often.
I would love to hear a better solution

I don't think there is a solution and the problem will get worse and worse.
Of course in the long line of problems with violence/crime in this country, it's very far down the totem pole in terms of total destruction/economic impact.

 

[Bad Brain]

People exhibit behavioral patterns all the time. Its disingenuous to act like there is no way to be sure. The vast majority of mass shooters had a history that led people to wonder how they ever got a gun legally. The last dozen of them all had info on their facebook page that should have been taken seriously, but wasn't. Don't you agree that people who literally say they want to go on a killing spree should be treated as someone who said so?

Yeah, I agree that if a person says they want to go on a killing spree, they should have guns taken and be precluded from purchasing, at least until it could be established that they didn’t really mean it or no longer have the desire. That’s very different from some nebulous “Behavioral pattern.” And yeah, I agree that people can suffer from all kinds of mental problems, but that is different from an “Illness” in the medical sense. And even if it was an illness, that doesn’t necessarily mean they are violent or that they can’t recover.

 

[JTyson]

I don't think there is a solution and the problem will get worse and worse.
Of course in the long line of problems with violence/crime in this country, it's very far down the totem pole in terms of total destruction/economic impact.

Sadly, I agree
But they are going to continually push for more laws, my point was the laws should only affect the people who are actually the problem.
But it would still happen, there is no way to stop all of it

 

[DrewJD82]

What proportion of these crimes is committed using illegally-procured firearms?

IMHO this is the most-important question to ask.

On top of that, the percentage will most-definitely increase with every newly-introduced restriction for the obvious reason that peeps who want to kill couldn't give two hoots about gun laws.

Out of 116, 100 of them. https://www.statista.com/statistics/476461/mass-shootings-in-the-us-by-legality-of-shooters-weapons/

IMO, the access part isn‘t the issue we should be looking at in a country with more guns than people already existin. I mean, I’d be really curious how many murders in Chicago occur with legally obtained firearms and I’d be willing to bet those numbers are VERY different than mass shootings. I also do not believe a mass shooting has been carried about by someone who went and bought a gun that day just to pull off the mass shooting.

I mean, I got my CCW when I was happy as a pig in shit with life, having that CCW allows me to purchase and leave with a pistol the same day in Florida, pre-CCW I had to wait a week. Two years after I got my CCW is when things turned to shit in my life and it wasn’t safe keeping guns in the house anymore, while also having more efficient access, there was nothing preventing me from buying more guns and being an idiot with them.

I have no issue with Red/Yellow flag laws. Like any law, it can be abused and false claims can be made, but if they’re going to do more good than harm, I think most reasonable adults who do not attach their self worth to their firearm collection that straightening out a false report is less of an issue than the loss of life, regardless of the number of casualties. They won’t do shit if they aren’t enforced and someone in Maine is going to have their ass in a sling over this recent shooting.

It’s such a weird contradiction; there’s been reports of sheriffs who say they’ll refuse to enforce these laws because their belief in the 2A, but is that responsible in the context of the greater firearm owner community? I do not believe it is. Because when these laws are not upheld, people die and it’s yet another stain on firearms and those who appreciate owning them. Firearm safety isn’t just about your guns, it’s awareness about firearms whenever they’re in the context/picture. When ya’ll go to the range, are you only looking at your guns, or are you keeping an eye on all the strangers around you who all believe they understand firearm safety?

IMO, the firearm community is better off policing their own, having knowledge of firearms and firearm safety, than the general public that thinks any gun with a long barrel is an AK-47. We all know what legit firearm safety should entail and there should be no ego or pearl clutching when it comes to the safety of innocent lives, bottom line.

 

[JTyson]

Yeah, I agree that if a person says they want to go on a killing spree, they should have guns taken and be precluded from purchasing, at least until it could be established that they didn’t really mean it or no longer have the desire. That’s very different from some nebulous “Behavioral pattern.” And yeah, I agree that people can suffer from all kinds of mental problems, but that is different from an “Illness” in the medical sense. And even if it was an illness, that doesn’t necessarily mean they are violent or that they can’t recover.

Agreed, I do think there are degrees of mental illness, some of which can certainly be lived with and treated without them killing a bunch of innocent people.

 

[Laputan Machine]

I think the 'no enforcement by people who believe in the 2A' are doing so because they know this will become completely twisted to expand gun control and take away rights from people who have no business being banned from firearms and that aspect will just snowball to become more and more powerful of a tool by anti 2Aers.

 

[84superchamp]

The US is uniquely violent IMO, and uniquely depraved. This can be proven in that we’ve had more lenient laws historically, and didn’t seem to have the same problem. Whatever the root cause, the gun didn’t get up and go shoot people.

I don’t feel comfortable in saying this but I will anyway: protected rights to individual freedom means you can be as demented and warped as you want, until you break the law. And that usually means someone has paid the price for that “freedom”. It’s a tragic Catch 22.

 

[Bad Brain]

I don’t feel comfortable in saying this but I will anyway: protected rights to individual freedom means you can be as demented and warped as you want, until you break the law. And that usually means someone has paid the price for that “freedom”. It’s a tragic Catch 22.

I should have said, "Has become uniquely violent and depraved." And as the saying goes, the fish rots from the head down. Of course this doesn't mean all people in the US! As for "demented and warped", what do you mean? Legitimately defensive use of force includes response to a credible threat, although as of late that has become anything people want it to mean, like mean tweets being "Violent" and a whole generation of neurotics not feeling "Safe."