16 more.

Maine towns are locked down and search is on for shooter who killed at least 16 people and escaped
https://apnews.com/article/lewiston-maine-shootings-49da6d06a8b5a15d3b619b3927bc33ff

What other conclusion can be drawn from conservatives refusal to consider enhanced gun control other than indifference to the loss of human life? Not that they want people to be killed, but they see it as an acceptable cost of essentially unfettered access to guns. All justified because of a 18th century allowance for members of a well regulated militia to possess a musket.

 

My bad, it's 18.

 

Perhaps we can take a look at the dems plan. Disarm good people and leave the rest to government. Did this shooter show signs of being dangerous in the past? Did the government know about it? What did the government do about it?


Government fails us time and time again, and still, people want to give them more control while feeding killers with easy victims.

 

From the article:

 

I won't be changing my opinion, lifestyle, or hobbies due to the actions of, or the effect on, others. Hasn't happened yesterday, won't happen today, and will not happen tomorrow.

 

The document, circulated to law enforcement officials, said Card had been committed to a mental health facility for two weeks in the summer of 2023. It did not provide details about his treatment or condition but said Card had reported “hearing voices and threats to shoot up” the military base.

Perhaps it would not have happened if Maine had a "red flag" law.

 

It's impossible to have a rational debate on the subject when you begin with a factually inaccurate premise.

 

If it was factually dishonest you wouldn't be able to examine Australia, New Zealand, and the UK for the outcome of a disarmed society by authoritarian anti-gun politicians. Police still wearing militarized gear and the people having no recourse for tyranny when that police force is wielded as a club against them.

 

Are you referring to a specific bill that has been brought forth to committee that outlines a plan to disarm all law abiding citizens? I ask only because I'm unfamiliar with such a bill. I for one would be vehemently against such a bill.

 

If only laws meant something to insane murderers. Laws only work the moment law enforcement arrives on scene.

 

What gun control law would have stopped this exactly?

All because a law that states the citizens rights to own the best equipment available when it comes to firearms.

 

I wish it were inaccurate. Democrats work to disarm good people when they have the power to do so. I live in Los Angeles and for years, ordinary citizens could not get a CCW permit. Only cops, judges, and criminals carried guns here. Their "may issue" policy was recently overturned so now, ordinary people can get a permit. (After a 6-8 month process)

The CA gun roster rule infringes on the rights of Californians to own common firearms. For every new firearm added to the list, 3 must be removed.

Firearms that allow the webbing between the thumb and forefinger to be below the the level of the top of the trigger are banned.

Your party is absolutely infringing on second amendment rights and is taking guns away from good people.

 

If guns are taken away that makes it more difficult for the insane.

If only innocent lives meant something to gun fanatics.

 

We had a poor GI who suffered from PFSD who was not properly treated by our own US government. Don't blame the republicans. Blame our own government.

The government put him in this condition and then walked away.

 

So no actual plan to disarm everyone? Got it.

 

Your post is part of the problem. Protecting innocent lives is common ground for both sides. Instead of working with good people to prevent violence, you attack their rights. You even used an affirming the consequent fallacy to attack their character.

When you make claims as to what something means to someone, you do so at the expense of your own credibility.

Saying "If guns are taken away" is vague. Do you mean taken from all citizens?

 

When have guns prevented govt tyranny in this country?

 

What comprises "enhanced gun control"?

 

Good point. Laws are only as good as the people choose to respect and obey them.

 

The assumption that controlling guns with laws will stop mass shootings is unproven and certainly faulty.

Our constitution promises the right to own guns will not be abridged. To violate that promise "for our own good" is faulty on its face.

Control thise who would kill or maim, not the means.

 

That's the great thing about guns, you don't necessarily have to use them to be effective.

 

So they haven't.

 

How about you agreeing that felons, gang members, the mentally ill, children, and those with dementia should not have firearms?

Yes, yes, don't know.

This guy spent two weeks in hospital getting mental health care.

Why not have government enforcing legislation against people with mental problems possessing firearms? Ditto felons, gang members, and people with dementia?

 

well we know they don't mean much at all to gun banners because the schemes gun banners push are both worthless and misplaced when it comes to saving innocent life

 

well the NRA has pushed programs designed to send felons etc caught with guns to federal courts where the sentences usually are much tougher than state sentences for felons possessing firearms but left wing organizations opposed that plan. Most gun banners want more laws -laws that only impact honest gun owners versus enforcing laws that punish actual malum per se crimes and actual criminals