My state just had one of its most deadly shootings ever

[MEmama]

Not my communities, but nearby.

We have 3 schools in our immediate neighborhood so I often think through the steps to take should there be a school shooting and/or a gunman is on the loose. Just this morning I was wondering where the safest place in the house might be, before seeing the headline (which was not a school shooting, but still too close to home and overwhelming given the never ending rash of shootings lately).

My anxiety is through the roof.

WHEN IS THIS GOING TO STOP?!?

[wisdomandtreasures]

"One of" 💔

[Kassia]

I saw this and thought of you right away.  Absolutely horrifying.  😞 

[Starr]

Sending hugs. It really is too much. My dd was just going through this after the shooting in NY. It was in an area near where she spent a lot of time. Over the years here on this site more and more of us have been in or familiar with, the wider vicinity of a shooting. 😞

[Murphy101]

None of the last few shootings have even made it to my news feeds. If WTM didn’t discuss them, I wouldn’t have even known about them. Listening to Fm news radio on the way to a dental appt this morning and no mention of any shootings for the entire 20 minute drive.

Granted I don’t listen to much of anything anymore. But it’s just not even unusual enough to be news anymore. The weather gets more news air time than shootings. 

[MEmama]

8 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

None of the last few shootings have even made it to my news feeds. If WTM didn’t discuss them, I wouldn’t have even known about them. Listening to Fm news radio on the way to a dental appt this morning and no mention of any shootings for the entire 20 minute drive.

Granted I don’t listen to much of anything anymore. But it’s just not even unusual enough to be news anymore. The weather gets more news air time than shootings. 

I think I'm of the mind now that they ought be treating this like they (finally) did the Vietnam war--plaster the gruesome images all over the news. Show these psychopaths who put their guns over people the cold truths of their fetish. Show the blood, make us listen to the screams, write follow up stories about how damaged the children are growing up without parents (or with the knowledge they shot a sibling with moms handgun). Hell, show the insurance bills for the lucky who survive. MAKE THEM SEE IT AND HAVE NIGHTMARES.

This is NOT OKAY and we shouldn't be treating it like it's ho hum, nothing can be done. 

[happi duck]

Many (hugs)

It's impossible not to be anxious in these times.  It's all so overwhelming.  Close to home makes it even more so. 

 

 

[Vintage81]

Is this the correct incident?

https://www.newscentermaine.com/article/news/crime/maine-shooting-bowdoin-suspect-guns-joseph-eaton-yarmouth-maine-shooting/97-5ba19156-2cc8-45b5-8805-15dddbf97575

In this article it mentions the shooter had previously been convicted of a felony, therefore should not have been legally able to own firearms. Hopefully the police can figure out how he obtained them....not that it brings back those who have passed, but perhaps it will identify another problem or person who helped him. 

[Murphy101]

42 minutes ago, MEmama said:

I think I'm of the mind now that they ought be treating this like they (finally) did the Vietnam war--plaster the gruesome images all over the news. Show these psychopaths who put their guns over people the cold truths of their fetish. Show the blood, make us listen to the screams, write follow up stories about how damaged the children are growing up without parents (or with the knowledge they shot a sibling with moms handgun). Hell, show the insurance bills for the lucky who survive. MAKE THEM SEE IT AND HAVE NIGHTMARES.

This is NOT OKAY and we shouldn't be treating it like it's ho hum, nothing can be done. 

I’m not adverse to that. As long as there’s a warning to viewers. 

[MEmama]

5 minutes ago, Vintage81 said:

Is this the correct incident?

https://www.newscentermaine.com/article/news/crime/maine-shooting-bowdoin-suspect-guns-joseph-eaton-yarmouth-maine-shooting/97-5ba19156-2cc8-45b5-8805-15dddbf97575

In this article it mentions the shooter had previously been convicted of a felony, therefore should not have been legally able to own firearms. Hopefully the police can figure out how he obtained them....not that it brings back those who have passed, but perhaps it will identify another problem or person who helped him. 

Yes.

And apparently he had reached out for help on social media beforehand. 😞 

[Pam in CT]

re "the weather gets more air time"

40 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

None of the last few shootings have even made it to my news feeds. If WTM didn’t discuss them, I wouldn’t have even known about them. Listening to Fm news radio on the way to a dental appt this morning and no mention of any shootings for the entire 20 minute drive.

Granted I don’t listen to much of anything anymore. But it’s just not even unusual enough to be news anymore. The weather gets more news air time than shootings. 

This is a critical insight.

Our local-ish news may presume their local-ish audience cares more about looming thunderclouds nearby than dead kids / churchgoers / mall shoppers / concertgoers in another state.

Here's a simple ordinary act that any of us can do, in five minutes from the kitchen table: Put the email address / letter to the editor submission field into our contacts. And when the major national outlets carry a mass shooting story (as all but Fox are right now reporting on the Maine shooting, NPR, Associated Press, CNN, CBS, WaPo, about the ME shooting yesterday)... just send in a very brief note along the lines of

Quote

I appreciate and rely on your news coverage. I notice today that you have not yet reported on the mass shooting yesterday in _____(other state)_______. As gun violence is a national issue that affects all Americans, from which none of us are immune even in our community, I hope you report on it soon.

... it would add up.  No instant gratification; that's not how change is effected. But over time.

[Murphy101]

1 minute ago, Pam in CT said:

re "the weather gets more air time"

This is a critical insight.

Our local-ish news may presume their local-ish audience cares more about looming thunderclouds nearby than dead kids / churchgoers / mall shoppers / concertgoers in another state.

Here's a simple ordinary act that any of us can do, in five minutes from the kitchen table: Put the email address / letter to the editor submission field into our contacts. And when the major national outlets carry a mass shooting story (as all but Fox are right now reporting on the Maine shooting, NPR, Associated Press, CNN, CBS, WaPo, about the ME shooting yesterday)... just send in a very brief note along the lines of

... it would add up.  No instant gratification; that's not how change is effected. But over time.

The problem is media monopoly. The weather is probably the only news that’s not cut and paste across multiple stations in a network.  It’s all just different pretty faces reading the same teleprompter scripts.

It’s one reason why social media can deliver faster more accurate news.  Not that it always does or that what media outlets chose from it is.  But there really aren’t very many actual investigating reporters anymore, local or otherwise. 

[Kalmia]

I live about 40 minutes away and my sister lives in the next town. I am so angry. Mainers have had a long history of responsible gun ownership, but the American culture of violence is bleeding into our formerly peaceful state. I recently found out that a brother of one of my old friends is a huge assault weapon advocate, here, making videos and booklets to scare people and get them hot and excited about the power of guns in their hands. I can't imagine any of the people I knew here back in the 70s or 80s doing such a thing or condoning such a thing. He would have been shunned by his small town. Guns were tools for hunting, putting down injured farm animals, or killing the garden-eating woodchuck. Now killing people is fetishized in our culture. I wish COVID lockdowns hadn't convinced us not to let our daughter go to college in Canada (we were worried about border closures and not being able to get to her). We had hoped she'd marry someone and settle up there, moving the next generations of our family to a slightly more sane country. Now, Maine is still comparatively safe, obviously compared to many other states, the last mass shooting like this happened in the 40s, I think, but won't be for long with the gun and hate and fear propaganda reaching into everyday people's homes here through the internet. Once the internet allowed anyone on Earth to influence hearts and minds of millions with evil intent and violent propaganda, it was game over for civilization, I think. Only the strictest gun laws can save us, and those are never going to pass, because dollars are more important than lives. 

[mommyoffive]

17 minutes ago, Vintage81 said:

Is this the correct incident?

https://www.newscentermaine.com/article/news/crime/maine-shooting-bowdoin-suspect-guns-joseph-eaton-yarmouth-maine-shooting/97-5ba19156-2cc8-45b5-8805-15dddbf97575

In this article it mentions the shooter had previously been convicted of a felony, therefore should not have been legally able to own firearms. Hopefully the police can figure out how he obtained them....not that it brings back those who have passed, but perhaps it will identify another problem or person who helped him. 

It is so sad that I hadn't even heard about this.  

[MEmama]

2 minutes ago, mommyoffive said:

It is so sad that I hadn't even heard about this.  

Exactly. We all remember when this would have dominated the news headlines all over the country, a small, safe place like small town Maine facing such horror. Now it's multiple times a day, all over the country.

This country has a sickness.

[Eos]

6 minutes ago, Kalmia said:

Once the internet allowed anyone on Earth to influence hearts and minds of millions with evil intent and violent propaganda, it was game over for civilization,

Agree.  This grieves my heart.

Edited April 19, 2023 by Eos

[Pam in CT]

re monopolistic media business models

13 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

The problem is media monopoly. The weather is probably the only news that’s not cut and paste across multiple stations in a network.  It’s all just different pretty faces reading the same teleprompter scripts.

It’s one reason why social media can deliver faster more accurate news.  Not that it always does or that what media outlets chose from it is.  But there really aren’t very many actual investigating reporters anymore, local or otherwise. 

This is true and, simultaneously, not as limiting as maybe appears.  Associated Press and Reuters are set up to be newsfeeds to other sources -- their business model is they scour the nation and earth for stories and other, smaller outlets can reprint them word for word for a nominal per-article fee.  AP has a very well reported timely story up on the Maine shooting right now which any local outlet could simply reprint (with AP attribution) on a one-off per-article fee basis.  

(Larger outlets with business models that function as news aggregators, like Huffington Post and yahoo news and apple news, have a different subscription-based fee structure with feeds like AP. But a little one can do single article one-offs.)

But they have to know that their audience CARES.

[Vintage81]

6 minutes ago, mommyoffive said:

It is so sad that I hadn't even heard about this.

26 minutes ago, Pam in CT said:

re "the weather gets more air time"

This is a critical insight.

Our local-ish news may presume their local-ish audience cares more about looming thunderclouds nearby than dead kids / churchgoers / mall shoppers / concertgoers in another state.

Here's a simple ordinary act that any of us can do, in five minutes from the kitchen table: Put the email address / letter to the editor submission field into our contacts. And when the major national outlets carry a mass shooting story (as all but Fox are right now reporting on the Maine shooting, NPR, Associated Press, CNN, CBS, WaPo, about the ME shooting yesterday)... just send in a very brief note along the lines of

... it would add up.  No instant gratification; that's not how change is effected. But over time.

FYI…it hasn’t been updated today and was published yesterday so maybe that’s why it was harder to find 🤷‍♀️

https://www.foxnews.com/us/maine-police-identify-gunman-allegedly-shot-killed-four-people-wounded-three-others

[SeaConquest]

I am so fed up, I signed up for Moms Demand Action. I was inspired by one of you all (apologies that I don't remember who it was). So, whoever posted here about becoming active with them -- thank you. The CA statewide new volunteer meeting is on 4/24 at 8pm on Zoom.  

[pgr]

We're in Maine and I've been considering emailing the NYT, especially since shooting at random cars on the highway seems to be relevant to everyone, not just Mainers. On the other hand, I sometimes wonder if would-be future psychopathic perpetrators feed off the publicity these horrific events get.

The fact that this is "the new normal" is not OK. Nor is it normal.

[knitgrl]

I didn't put it together that @MEmama was from Maine. So, I did a search for the latest shooting and found out about the one this past weekend at a birthday party in Dadeville, Alabama. 😪

[Kalmia]

I just read this statement by the murderer in an article about the shooting of the young woman in the car in NY: "Mausert said Monahan did not intend to hurt anyone when he fired. “When you have a victim and a tragedy, the thing everyone wants is a villain, but not every time there’s a victim and tragedy is there a villain,” he said. “A number of errors were made that were unintentional.” Kevin Monahan. 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/boyfriend-n-y-woman-gunned-054624188.html

My god, if you point a gun at someone and pull the trigger the result is likely to HURT someone! Firing a gun at a car is INTENTIONAL. If you shoot at unknown people you can't even see in a car, you are a VILLAIN!!!

Are people so cut off from basic reality that they don't know this?? Do they live in a fantasy video game where everyone has 12 lives???? 

I can't even. 

Since the gun lobby always wins when we try to make laws against murderous weapons, maybe we could try to get at them sideways with mandatory gun safety and ethics training, at least 6 hours before anyone can purchase a gun. And make it old style training--a gun is a tool not a weapon, never point a gun at a person, etc. Or get at them by forcing gun owners to buy insurance in order to own guns, just like we have to when we buy automobiles. I have no idea why this second one isn't already a thing. Both are deadly weapons. 

 

 

Edited April 19, 2023 by Kalmia

[Heartstrings]

2 hours ago, Murphy101 said:

one of the last few shootings have even made it to my news feeds. If WTM didn’t discuss them, I wouldn’t have even known about them.

I’m pretty news aware and hadn’t heard if this incident until this thread.  There are so MANY they don’t all penetrate.

[knitgrl]

1 minute ago, Kalmia said:

I just read this statement by the murderer in an article about the shooting of the young woman in the car in NY: "Mausert said Monahan did not intend to hurt anyone when he fired. “When you have a victim and a tragedy, the thing everyone wants is a villain, but not every time there’s a victim and tragedy is there a villain,” he said. “A number of errors were made that were unintentional.” Kevin Monahan. 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/boyfriend-n-y-woman-gunned-054624188.html

My god, if you point a gun at someone and pull the trigger the result is likely to HURT someone! Firing a gun at a car is INTENTIONAL. Are people so cut off from basic reality that they don't know this?? Do they live in a fantasy video game where everyone has 12 lives???? 

I can't even. 

Since the gun lobby always wins when we try to make laws against murderous weapons, maybe we could try to get at them sideways with mandatory gun safety and ethics training, at least 6 hours before anyone can purchase a gun. And make it old style training--a gun is a tool not a weapon, never point a gun at a person, etc. Or get at them by forcing gun owners to buy insurance in order to own guns, just like we have to when we buy automobiles. I have no idea why this second one isn't already a thing. Both are deadly weapons. 

 

 

This was my reaction as well. I mean, if you merely want to scare the daylights out of them, you fire up into the air. Unintentional, my a$$.

[MEmama]

6 minutes ago, knitgrl said:

This was my reaction as well. I mean, if you merely want to scare the daylights out of them, you fire up into the air. Unintentional, my a$$.

Or you know, just yell Get Off My Lawn/Driveway. No lethal weapons necessary.

[Murphy101]

40 minutes ago, knitgrl said:

This was my reaction as well. I mean, if you merely want to scare the daylights out of them, you fire up into the air. Unintentional, my a$$.

This.  It ticked me off too.  Just because the villain is a haphazard dumba$$ who didn’t have to put thoughtful effort in killing someone doesn’t mean they aren’t still a villain.   It actually horrifies me more.  And perfectly illustrates my stance that while we can’t stop all gun murders, we absolutely can make it harder for them to do it so easily and frequently.  

33 minutes ago, MEmama said:

Or you know, just yell Get Off My Lawn/Driveway. No lethal weapons necessary.

Or even a cop can say, “I have a gun and will shoot. Stop and step away!”

Most people do not want to be shot and will happily run in the opposite direction.

[Vintage81]

I wonder if some people have a huge misunderstanding of the “stand your ground” laws in their states (not sure if these states have them). Like do they think that if someone merely steps foot on their property, they’re allowed to shoot them? Gun owners definitely need to be educated on these laws. 

[Grace Hopper]

3 hours ago, Murphy101 said:

The problem is media monopoly. The weather is probably the only news that’s not cut and paste across multiple stations in a network.  It’s all just different pretty faces reading the same teleprompter scripts.

It’s one reason why social media can deliver faster more accurate news.  Not that it always does or that what media outlets chose from it is.  But there really aren’t very many actual investigating reporters anymore, local or otherwise. 

Seriously, I get so much news from tiktok. I don’t mean that it’s my only source - when I see something I definitely jump to one of the large news services like Reuters or AP - but for news alerts and raw footage it’s the fastest source of breaking news. 
 

I understand it comes with security risks but I am almost starting to think the efforts to shut it down has more to do with shutting down info (ie, like footage coming out of some state house sessions) than with actual security risks. Twitteresque, iykwim. 

Edited April 19, 2023 by Grace Hopper

[ktgrok]

4 hours ago, MEmama said:

I think I'm of the mind now that they ought be treating this like they (finally) did the Vietnam war--plaster the gruesome images all over the news. Show these psychopaths who put their guns over people the cold truths of their fetish. Show the blood, make us listen to the screams, write follow up stories about how damaged the children are growing up without parents (or with the knowledge they shot a sibling with moms handgun). Hell, show the insurance bills for the lucky who survive. MAKE THEM SEE IT AND HAVE NIGHTMARES.

This is NOT OKAY and we shouldn't be treating it like it's ho hum, nothing can be done. 

My concern is that this would end up causing such trauma and really, PTSD, to young kids that end up seeing and hearing it that we'd do more damage than good. Those that don't care likely will turn it off, and innocent kids would be even more traumatized. And they are the ones that have to actually go INTO the schools - having them be MORE terrified won't be a good thing. 

[Grace Hopper]

2 hours ago, SeaConquest said:

I am so fed up, I signed up for Moms Demand Action. I was inspired by one of you all (apologies that I don't remember who it was). So, whoever posted here about becoming active with them -- thank you. The CA statewide new volunteer meeting is on 4/24 at 8pm on Zoom.  

I’m thinking of joining, too. There are so many conflated issues in the events being discussed in this thread, but certainly one common denominator. 

[Frances]

4 hours ago, Murphy101 said:

None of the last few shootings have even made it to my news feeds. If WTM didn’t discuss them, I wouldn’t have even known about them. Listening to Fm news radio on the way to a dental appt this morning and no mention of any shootings for the entire 20 minute drive.

Granted I don’t listen to much of anything anymore. But it’s just not even unusual enough to be news anymore. The weather gets more news air time than shootings. 

The closest thing to a newsfeed I get each day is an email with AP headlines and brief summaries. The majority of shootings discussed on WTM appear in these emails. Personally, I don’t trust any social media platform to be curating news for me.

[MEmama]

4 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

My concern is that this would end up causing such trauma and really, PTSD, to young kids that end up seeing and hearing it that we'd do more damage than good. Those that don't care likely will turn it off, and innocent kids would be even more traumatized. And they are the ones that have to actually go INTO the schools - having them be MORE terrified won't be a good thing. 

Yeah, that's clearly not the audience I want to traumatize (further). It's not like anyone watches the nightly news at 10 after the kids go to bed anymore. 

I'm just mad, like most other Americans. Mad and disgusted and truly disturbed at the sheer lack of empathy in too many people we share a country with. 

[Acadie]

My gosh, I'm so sorry to hear this. 

Completely agree that our country has a sickness when it comes to guns. It doesn't have to be this way. 

I'm sensing a shift in news coverage and the way people talk about gun violence and the politics of gun control, and I really hope there comes a tipping point where things dramatically change. In the meantime,  how do we stay politically active and aware without losing our ever-loving minds?How do we take care of the people we love and our own hearts as well?  

May we be safe and protected. 

May our children be safe and protected.

May we live with greater ease. 

[Heartstrings]

34 minutes ago, Vintage81 said:

I wonder if some people have a huge misunderstanding of the “stand your ground” laws in their states (not sure if these states have them). Like do they think that if someone merely steps foot on their property, they’re allowed to shoot them? Gun owners definitely need to be educated on these laws. 

I think the issue is that the laws really do function almost just like that, or have in the past.  Zimmerman chased Trayvon Martin down, even after 911 operators told him not to.  He left his home, with a gun, chased down a human child and killed him.  He got off because he was “scared for his life or safety”.   You don’t have to be on your property to Stand Your Ground either. They aren’t really get out of jail free cards, but very nearly so.   
 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ralph-yarl-shooting-andrew-lester-stand-your-ground-laws/  (Excerpts)

 

About 35 states have enacted some form of "stand your ground" laws — or expanded "castle doctrine" laws — in the decade following Martin's death, with each one defining how and where a person can defend themselves when they feel their life is in danger. 

Proponents of the laws, including the National Rifle Association, argue that they give people the right to protect themselves, no matter where they are. Opponents say that these laws foster a "shoot first, ask questions later" mentality that can lead to rising homicide rates, and can also disproportionately affect minorities. 

Florida was the first state to fully enact a "stand your ground" law in 2005, which allows people to use force — including deadly force — from any location if they felt their lives were in danger.  

Under earlier self-defense laws, people could reasonably defend themselves within their homes. But once outside their homes, people could not use deadly force if there was a safe way to retreat — until the expansion of "stand your ground" laws.

Missouri adopted a "stand your ground" law for purposes of actions on one's own property in 2007, and then in 2016 expanded the law to any place where someone is authorized to be, said Webster. This could be at a friend's house or a public space, and a person doesn't have to retreat if "they feel their safety is threatened," said Webster. Prosecutors must prove the person who shot someone was not in danger from the person he shot, said Webster.

 

[Murphy101]

45 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

My concern is that this would end up causing such trauma and really, PTSD, to young kids that end up seeing and hearing it that we'd do more damage than good. Those that don't care likely will turn it off, and innocent kids would be even more traumatized. And they are the ones that have to actually go INTO the schools - having them be MORE terrified won't be a good thing. 

Kids are already being traumatized.

At least this trauma might end with better results than thoughts and prayers and more gun sales.

[Vintage81]

21 minutes ago, Heartstrings said:

I think the issue is that the laws really do function almost just like that, or have in the past.  Zimmerman chased Trayvon Martin down, even after 911 operators told him not to.  He left his home, with a gun, chased down a human child and killed him.  He got off because he was “scared for his life or safety”.   You don’t have to be on your property to Stand Your Ground either. They aren’t really get out of jail free cards, but very nearly so.   
 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ralph-yarl-shooting-andrew-lester-stand-your-ground-laws/  (Excerpts)

 

About 35 states have enacted some form of "stand your ground" laws — or expanded "castle doctrine" laws — in the decade following Martin's death, with each one defining how and where a person can defend themselves when they feel their life is in danger. 

Proponents of the laws, including the National Rifle Association, argue that they give people the right to protect themselves, no matter where they are. Opponents say that these laws foster a "shoot first, ask questions later" mentality that can lead to rising homicide rates, and can also disproportionately affect minorities. 

Florida was the first state to fully enact a "stand your ground" law in 2005, which allows people to use force — including deadly force — from any location if they felt their lives were in danger.  

Under earlier self-defense laws, people could reasonably defend themselves within their homes. But once outside their homes, people could not use deadly force if there was a safe way to retreat — until the expansion of "stand your ground" laws.

Missouri adopted a "stand your ground" law for purposes of actions on one's own property in 2007, and then in 2016 expanded the law to any place where someone is authorized to be, said Webster. This could be at a friend's house or a public space, and a person doesn't have to retreat if "they feel their safety is threatened," said Webster. Prosecutors must prove the person who shot someone was not in danger from the person he shot, said Webster.

 

So my understanding, in general about stand your ground laws is this from what you posted above..."with each one defining how and where a person can defend themselves when they feel their life is in danger." 

In the two recent incidents...the boy who rang the doorbell and got shot, and the kids who pulled up in the driveway and got shot...I don't see how either of the two shooters can claim they felt their lives were in danger. I believe these are both still active investigations, so there's a chance more information may come out, but based on the information released so far, nothing that I've seen would indicate that. 

However, the two shooters may be falsely educated on what these laws cover. Did they know the bolded part...that they had to fear for their life prior to shooting? All gun owners NEED to be educated on this. People should have the right to protect themselves when they feel their life is in danger. 

[MEmama]

10 minutes ago, Vintage81 said:

. People should have the right to protect themselves when they feel their life is in danger. 

And if we didn't have one of the mostly heavily armed populations on earth, we wouldn't need to be afraid that our lives in danger so often. 
 

Seems to me like there's pretty simple solution in there somewhere. If only there were other, very similar countries we look to for guidance...🤔

[ktgrok]

30 minutes ago, Vintage81 said:

So my understanding, in general about stand your ground laws is this from what you posted above..."with each one defining how and where a person can defend themselves when they feel their life is in danger." 

 

Part of the issue is, it isn't that their life has to BE in danger, they just have to feel it is. And maybe they do, if they are paranoid and racist and who knows what. But we shouldn't be able to kill people based on feelings, rather than actual information. 

[Heartstrings]

30 minutes ago, Vintage81 said:

So my understanding, in general about stand your ground laws is this from what you posted above..."with each one defining how and where a person can defend themselves when they feel their life is in danger." 

In the two recent incidents...the boy who rang the doorbell and got shot, and the kids who pulled up in the driveway and got shot...I don't see how either of the two shooters can claim they felt their lives were in danger. I believe these are both still active investigations, so there's a chance more information may come out, but based on the information released so far, nothing that I've seen would indicate that. 

However, the two shooters may be falsely educated on what these laws cover. Did they know the bolded part...that they had to fear for their life prior to shooting? All gun owners NEED to be educated on this. People should have the right to protect themselves when they feel their life is in danger. 

It centers on reasonable.  Would a reasonable person feel their life was in danger in these situations.  That has problems.  First, which people? 12 Fox News viewers might think it was reasonable.  12 paranoid elderly people would think it was reasonable.  12 ammo sexuals would think it was reasonable.  These guys that did the shooting surely feel that they were reasonable in their action.  No one does something thinking they are the bad guys.  You’re trying to guess what 12 jurors in a box might think.  They let Zimmerman off, and many many others, that were clearly guilty, clearly the aggressor.  Because the law says “reasonable fear” not “certainty”.   Fear is seldom reasonable.    
 

These guys have a good chance of getting off or never being charged because of these laws.   Never being charged is the usual case because prosecutors won’t take cases they can’t win and they usually can’t win these.  There might be charges brought in these cases because of public pressure but they’ll probably plead to something minor.  
 

The NRA wrote most of these laws and approves of them.   I think that says everything we need to know.  
 

 

[Vintage81]

29 minutes ago, MEmama said:

And if we didn't have one of the mostly heavily armed populations on earth, we wouldn't need to be afraid that our lives in danger so often. 
 

Seems to me like there's pretty simple solution in there somewhere. If only there were other, very similar countries we look to for guidance...🤔

What is a "very similar" country to the US? I kind of feel as though we are unique in our issues which oftentimes makes it hard to look for guidance. 

[Melissa in Australia]

2 minutes ago, Vintage81 said:

What is a "very similar" country to the US? I kind of feel as though we are unique in our issues which oftentimes makes it hard to look for guidance. 

Maybe Sudan? 

[MEmama]

17 minutes ago, Vintage81 said:

What is a "very similar" country to the US? I kind of feel as though we are unique in our issues which oftentimes makes it hard to look for guidance. 

We are far from unique, other than the fetish of guns. Even then, in other countries that has been *legislated*, unlike here. That's how we know it can work. 

[Vintage81]

9 minutes ago, MEmama said:

We are far from unique, other than the fetish of guns. Even then, in other countries that has been *legislated*, unlike here. That's how we know it can work. 

Hmmmm...I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. 

We are a large country (population wise) made up of 50 unique states, that sometimes act as their own little countries. Each state/region has different people and culture. While I understand that other countries have come up with legislation that you think would help, I think it would be difficult to enact those things here because of how different we are. Maybe I'm wrong, but I just don't see it. 

[Happy2BaMom]

The hard part is that there are SO MANY guns in this country....more guns than people. They are EASY for ANYONE to get. Who the hell needs to buy one when (chances are, esp in certain circles) you can get any gun of choice from any one of a number of houses / friends / networks?

I honestly do not think passing new gun laws will change anything. We're way past that point, because we can no longer restrict access. Such is the natural result of the past 30 years of loosening restrictions/access/laws on gun ownership & the "right" to randomly shoot other people.

What we could do is to start holding the owner(s) of the guns legally liable for the use of their guns. Someone steals your gun? You get 24 hours to report, or you are legally (& financially) responsible for what is done with that gun. THAT would change things.

But we are years from that happening. Too many people will never agree to it, because the point has become....power in irresponsible gun ownership (& use). That is what is now considered a right.

I'm willing to fight, but don't misunderstand what we're going to be up against. It will take years of voting out some people and voting in others.

[Frances]

2 hours ago, Frances said:

The closest thing to a newsfeed I get each day is an email with AP headlines and brief summaries. The majority of shootings discussed on WTM appear in these emails. Personally, I don’t trust any social media platform to be curating news for me.

Quoting myself to report that the AP headline summary I just received via email has as the first article a summary of all the recent shootings discussed in this thread.

[Terabith]

Not to get all religious on people, but American approach to guns can’t really be described as anything other than idolatry. We worship guns.  They are our highest and dearest ideals, that we value far more than our children.  

[KSera]

1 hour ago, Happy2BaMom said:

I honestly do not think passing new gun laws will change anything. We're way past that point, because we can no longer restrict access. Such is the natural result of the past 30 years of loosening restrictions/access/laws on gun ownership & the "right" to randomly shoot other people.

 

I don't agree with not doing anything because it won't make an immediate, complete turnabout. There will be crimes that don't happen because the person can't purchase a gun themself. Beyond that, over time, more and more guns will leave circulation (I'm heavily in favor of heavily incentivized buy backs), and the number of guns out there will reduce. It will take time, but it would put our children's children in a country with fewer guns and fewer shootings and gun deaths. And by the time it's our great grand-children, I expect what our own children lived through will seem outlandishly backwards and barbaric. I guess the thinking that it's too late makes me think of the same mindset that doesn't see any point in trying to put the brakes on climate change. Just because we can't fix it immediately doesn't make it not worth doing for the future.

I agree completely with you on liability laws. I think more people would at least keep them locked up properly if that were the case, and that would lead to fewer suicides and stolen guns. I expect it would also lead to some people turning in their guns because they don't actually want the gun enough to have to carry the potential liability. Of course, the NRA will fight that hard, as they have, and that means it won't pass because they own the politicians they pay to do their bidding.

[Murphy101]

Stand your ground/castle defense is not the same as personal bodily self-defense, but people at least partially think those are reasonable laws.

None of that should be applied to some of the frankly batcrap scenarios in the news these days.

Stand your ground shouldn’t apply to deciding to shoot anyone that rings the doorbell.  Or chasing someone down to shoot them in the back blocks away from the first encounter. We maybe could argue it was insanity of some kind, but it wasn’t reasonable self defense by any sane standard.

Otherwise anyone could shoot anyone on the flimsy basis of feeling nervous.  God forbid they confuse that feeling with just having too much coffee that day or needing a smoke break.

And if that’s where our nation is and many genuinely believe that Americans are some new species that can’t figure out how to manage this at least as well as most other countries or even as well as the UK or EU - then dang it I guess I need to make buying guns a priority for our family bc it’s every gun slinger for themselves out there.

Edited April 20, 2023 by Murphy101

[Faith-manor]

3 hours ago, Terabith said:

Not to get all religious on people, but American approach to guns can’t really be described as anything other than idolatry. We worship guns.  They are our highest and dearest ideals, that we value far more than our children.  

In our town, several people who are members of the local church sported political signs, "God, Guns, _____" insert politician name. Doesn't bode well for the mentality of that religious group.

I really do think ammosexuals have an addiction to their firearms. They have no problem with the casualties. Parents like those of Ethan Crumbley are not rare at all in my neck of the woods.

[Heartstrings]

Todays crazy guy with a gun kills innocent person for minor annoyance news….6 year old shot at over ball rolling into a neighbors yard.  
 

https://people.com/crime/6-year-old-girl-parents-shot-after-basketball-rolls-into-neighbors-yard/

 

is Mercury in retrograde?  Full moon?  Fungus in the wheat?   What the heck is going on?  Has the whole country gone mad? 
 

ETA: I wrote killed.  The girl and her dad both survived.  

Edited April 20, 2023 by Heartstrings