Mass Shootings Maine

[Hardcore troubadour 14,424]

4 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Was there someone here calling to defund the police?

I must have missed it.

It wasn’t happening? 

[nobody 2,500]

1 minute ago, TimHauck said:

He specifically said not to take away everyone’s guns.  No one here said they wanted to take away everyone’s guns.  

He said to stop selling guns commercially.  In 50 years, what are people going to do to kill people?

[nobody 2,500]

Just now, Hardcore troubadour said:

It wasn’t happening? 

You didn't see someone signing "defund the police" in sign language with your own two eyes, so it's not a concern.

[IGotWorms 4,053]

3 minutes ago, KSB2424 said:

  

B.  Here?  I’m speaking in terms of America and our governing bodies who make laws.  

Oh okay, well you said “some of y’all need to make up your minds” so it seemed like you were referring to people here

[BrahmaBulls 627]

10 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Was there someone here calling to defund the police?

I must have missed it.

You miss most things so not surprising

[IGotWorms 4,053]

Just now, BrahmaBulls said:

You miss most things so not surprising

Why don’t you help me out with a link then?  

[Patented Phil 1,370]

44 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

Isn’t this a contradiction? If the justice system was truly politicized and run by lefties, wouldn’t assault rifles be banned? 

It’s not for lack of effort.  I just had to sit through that leftist puke Andrew McCabe on CNN drone on with a 5-minute diatribe about banning assault weapons.

[Gepetto 1,215]

8 hours 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. 

https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/what-does-0

What Does the Fourth Amendment Mean?

The Constitution, through the Fourth Amendment, protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government.  The Fourth Amendment, however, is not a guarantee against all searches and seizures, but only those that are deemed unreasonable under the law.

Whether a particular type of search is considered reasonable in the eyes of the law, is determined by balancing two important interests.  On one side of the scale is the intrusion on an individual's Fourth Amendment rights.  On the other side of the scale are legitimate government interests, such as public safety.

The extent to which an individual is protected by the Fourth Amendment depends, in part, on the location of the search or seizure.  Minnesota v. Carter, 525 U.S. 83 (1998).

Home

Searches and seizures inside a home without a warrant are presumptively unreasonable.
Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573 (1980).

However, there are some exceptions. A warrantless search may be lawful:

If an officer is given consent to search; Davis v. United States, 328 U.S. 582 (1946)
If the search is incident to a lawful arrest; United States v. Robinson, 414 U.S. 218 (1973)
If there is probable cause to search and exigent circumstances; Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573 (1980)
If the items are in plain view; Maryland v. Macon, 472 U.S. 463 (1985).

A Person

When an officer observes unusual conduct which leads him reasonably to conclude that criminal activity may be afoot, the officer may briefly stop the suspicious person and make reasonable inquiries aimed at confirming or dispelling the officer's suspicions. 
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968)
Minnesota v. Dickerson, 508 U.S. 366 (1993)

Schools

School officials need not obtain a warrant before searching a student who is under their authority; rather, a search of a student need only be reasonable under all the circumstances. 
New Jersey v. TLO, 469 U.S. 325 (1985)

Cars

Where there is probable cause to believe that a vehicle contains evidence of a criminal activity, an officer may lawfully search any area of the vehicle in which the evidence might be found. 
Arizona v. Gant, 129 S. Ct. 1710 (2009),

An officer may conduct a traffic stop if he has reasonable suspicion that a traffic violation has occurred or that criminal activity is afoot. 
Berekmer v. McCarty, 468 U.S. 420 (1984), 
United States v. Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266 (2002).

An officer may conduct a pat-down of the driver and passengers during a lawful traffic stop; the police need not believe that any occupant of the vehicle is involved in a criminal activity.
Arizona v. Johnson, 555 U.S. 323 (2009). 

The use of a narcotics detection dog to walk around the exterior of a car subject to a valid traffic stop does not require reasonable, explainable suspicion.
Illinois v. Cabales, 543 U.S. 405 (2005).  

Special law enforcement concerns will sometimes justify highway stops without any individualized suspicion. 
Illinois v. Lidster, 540 U.S. 419 (2004).

An officer at an international border may conduct routine stops and searches. 
United States v. Montoya de Hernandez, 473 U.S. 531 (1985).

A state may use highway sobriety checkpoints for the purpose of combating drunk driving. 
Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz, 496 U.S. 444 (1990).

A state may set up highway checkpoints where the stops are brief and seek voluntary cooperation in the investigation of a recent crime that has occurred on that highway.  
Illinois v. Lidster, 540 U.S. 419 (2004).

However, a state may not use a highway checkpoint program whose primary purpose is the discovery and interdiction of illegal narcotics.
City of Indianapolis v. Edmond, 531 U.S. 32 (2000).

DISCLAIMER: These resources are created by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts for educational purposes only. They may not reflect the current state of the law, and are not intended to provide legal advice, guidance on litigation, or commentary on any pending case or legislation.

[Patented Phil 1,370]

It’s the height of ignorance and naivety to think this country can effectively manage red flag laws fairly and consistently.  Idiot LeftTards can’t even define “assault weapon,” never mind “mental illness”.  These are the people who believe “silence is violence.”

[KSB2424 3,106]

It’s either Asperger’s or undiagnosed Autism.  To focus so hard on the small, irrelevant things whilst lacking the ability to comprehend the overwhelming point.  Then followed by such anger. No wonder threads get hijacked over the simplest of things by Worms. 

Now that I know, I’ll be nicer.  

[TimHauck 2,513]

5 minutes ago, Patented Phil said:

It’s the height of ignorance and naivety to think this country can effectively manage red flag laws fairly and consistently.  Idiot LeftTards can’t even define “assault weapon,” never mind “mental illness”.  These are the people who believe “silence is violence.”

What’s your solution to reducing the number of mass shootings?

[KSB2424 3,106]

2 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

What’s your solution to reducing the number of mass shootings?

You didn’t ask me but:  Root Cause Analysis.  I think it’d be a great exercise.  
 

[Patented Phil 1,370]

8 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

What’s your solution to reducing the number of mass shootings?

Better mental health care:

America Has Reached Peak Therapy. Why Is Our Mental Health Getting Worse?

[GobbleDog 919]

3 hours ago, Blue Horseshoe said:

Even if Democrats could generate enough numbers in Congress to try to sidestep Bruen, SCOTUS would just strike that down too.

Depends who's on SCOTUS. They keep ridiculously changing rulings and definitions.... for once it might do some good.

[avoiding injuries 1,411]

32 minutes ago, Patented Phil said:

It’s the height of ignorance and naivety to think this country can effectively manage red flag laws fairly and consistently.  Idiot LeftTards can’t even define “assault weapon,” never mind “mental illness”.  These are the people who believe “silence is violence.”

They can’t even define what a woman is. Let’s start there. 

[IGotWorms 4,053]

35 minutes ago, KSB2424 said:

It’s either Asperger’s or undiagnosed Autism.  To focus so hard on the small, irrelevant things whilst lacking the ability to comprehend the overwhelming point.  Then followed by such anger. No wonder threads get hijacked over the simplest of things by Worms. 

Now that I know, I’ll be nicer.  

Asperger’s or autism to clarify your posts?

How about you quit with your focking bullsh1t, and I’ll quit calling you out on it. Deal?

[GobbleDog 919]

57 minutes ago, KSB2424 said:

No wonder threads get hijacked

I wish these threads stuck to opinions and news about the story, possibly an occasional macabre joke (better be real damn funny considering this atrocity). 

Instead it's Trump vs Biden, gun debates, and KSB vs Worms.  

[KSB2424 3,106]

Root Cause Analysis : Let’s set a timeline.  When did these school shootings and mass random shootings start?  In my lifetime that was Columbine.  Which was what? 1999. 

There has always been random murder or even things like the Kent State shootings but that seems more random than now. 
 

 

[thegeneral 2,644]

3 minutes ago, GobbleDog said:

I wish these threads stuck to opinions and news about the story, possibly an occasional macabre joke (better be real damn funny considering this atrocity). 

Instead it's Trump vs Biden, gun debates, and KSB vs Worms.  

When there’s no moderation this happens. Not really a way around it. 

[Hardcore troubadour 14,424]

1 minute ago, thegeneral said:

When there’s no moderation this happens. Not really a way around it. 

You should head back to your safe space. Oh wait, you clowns ruined it. 

[thegeneral 2,644]

2 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

You should head back to your safe space. Oh wait, you clowns ruined it. 

I wasn’t arguing for moderation, commenting on the point that threads like these turn into unreadable betch fests without it. Go fock yourself

[SUXBNME 1,446]

1 hour ago, TimHauck said:

What’s your solution to reducing the number of mass shootings?

Get rid of social media.  

Obviously never gonna happen, (nor should it)but that is pretty much the root cause in most cases it seems, right? 

A big FU to Al Gore for inventing the interwebs 
 

[cyclone24 1,912]

Hey, I was just checking in to see if the good guy with the gun showed up? No? OK

[KSB2424 3,106]

12 minutes ago, GobbleDog said:

I wish these threads stuck to opinions and news about the story, possibly an occasional macabre joke (better be real damn funny considering this atrocity). 

Instead it's Trump vs Biden, gun debates, and KSB vs Worms.  

You’re not wrong and I’m guilty as charged.  I do try to stay on topic but it’s sometimes hard as the pigs like rolling in the mud. 

[seafoam1 2,617]

7 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

I wasn’t arguing for moderation, commenting on the point that threads like these turn into unreadable betch fests without it. Go fock yourself

Just go away then. What's the question in your life?

[thegeneral 2,644]

Just now, cyclone24 said:

Hey, I was just checking in to see if the good guy with the gun showed up? No? OK

Sean Hannity will use kung fu

[thegeneral 2,644]

Just now, seafoam1 said:

Just go away then. What's the question in your life?

Hey dumbass there’s a place for slap fights and posting pointless crap on the internet. This is the place.

So go get my shine box!

[Hardcore troubadour 14,424]

11 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

I wasn’t arguing for moderation, commenting on the point that threads like these turn into unreadable betch fests without it. Go fock yourself

You long to be moderated. You’re like Lisa Simpson begging to be graded. 

[seafoam1 2,617]

1 minute ago, thegeneral said:

Hey dumbass there’s a place for slap fights and posting pointless crap on the internet. This is the place.

So go get my shine box!

ok. good one. 

[GutterBoy 2,898]

Alright, so we build all these mental institutions and start locking people up, we get rid of social media, institute a system of red flags, fully fund the FBI and police, did I miss anything?  That should do it right?  We'll keep all the guns, but let's just do everything else and hope that works.  And let's not even look at data from around the world.  As long as we have these cool rifles for pics we're good.

[thegeneral 2,644]

Just now, Hardcore troubadour said:

You long to be moderated. You’re like Lisa Simpson begging to be graded. 

Quite the contrary. I enjoy telling asshats to go piss up a rope

[thegeneral 2,644]

2 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

Alright, so we build all these mental institutions and start locking people up, we get rid of social media, institute a system of red flags, fully fund the FBI and police, did I miss anything?  That should do it right?  We'll keep all the guns, but let's just do everything else and hope that works.  And let's not even look at data from around the world.  As long as we have these cool rifles for pics we're good.

Did no one make the argument to arm the dudes renting shoes at bowling alleys?

[Voltaire 5,032]

Usually these things end soon after they start. We're not use to seeing a guy who can elude the law this long.

[TimHauck 2,513]

14 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

Alright, so we build all these mental institutions and start locking people up, we get rid of social media, institute a system of red flags, fully fund the FBI and police, did I miss anything?  That should do it right?  We'll keep all the guns, but let's just do everything else and hope that works.  And let's not even look at data from around the world.  As long as we have these cool rifles for pics we're good.

No, no red flag laws.  Too easy for libs to mess them up

[HellToupee 1,370]

 

[thegeneral 2,644]

9 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

Usually these things end soon after they start. We're not use to seeing a guy who can elude the law this long.

Sadly I can see this happening again and again. Skilled people out there, lots of crazy, easy access to unlimited weapons, targets everywhere, free society.

Hope I’m wrong.

[Mike Honcho 4,854]

13 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

Usually these things end soon after they start. We're not use to seeing a guy who can elude the law this long.

DB Cooper's not impressed. 

[Blue Horseshoe 348]

54 minutes ago, GobbleDog said:

Depends who's on SCOTUS. They keep ridiculously changing rulings and definitions.... for once it might do some good.

 

The Bruen ruling is based on 2nd Amendment principles. 

To get what you want, or say what you want, Bruen needs to be overturned. That can only happen by repealing the 2nd Amendment of US Constitution. Bruen exists because of gross overreach, particularly in Blue strongholds, that try to "game" around the fact that they can't legally fully ban firearms period. This is NO DIFFERENT than in Texas, where abortion laws are gamed to the point where it's effectively attempting to outlaw abortion without technically completely trying to wipe it off the board. I'm Conservative leaning, and I'm actually criticizing the Texas GOP for their abortion stances and attempted public policy at it, because it's in bad faith. (i.e. just try to outright ban it if you want it completely banned in your state, don't game it so you can fundraise off if it and try not to incite the Pro Choice voters in your districts) 

Kathy Hochul in New York, had a midnight session of the NY State Legislature after the Bruen ruling meet together. They came up with the CCIA 2022, which demanded anyone applying for a gun permit in NY to submit to releasing all their social media accounts, then doxx everyone who has ever lived with them in any household, while setting public gun restrictions so widely, that it would be impossible to carry a firearm outside your home. This was struck down legally, of course it would, it defies Bruen and SCOTUS openly. But Hochul want to fundraise off of it since she barely beat out Lee Zeldin after taking over for the ousted Cuomo. When this failed, Hochul pushed to have ammunition only be sold if the buyers could be vetted and approved, which again, is a delaying tactic to attempt to choke out ammunition period in New York, which makes firearms useless by extension. ( I.E. if they can't ban guns, they'll try to ban bullets. This happened in the Obama Adminstration, where his DOD was told to order trillions of rounds, while changing environmental standards to make it harder for companies to make ammo period. Since these companies are obligated to fulfill government/military contracts first, they were running 365/24/7 to fill those orders, choking out the civilian ammunition market on purpose. This is also around the timeline that Obama and Biden told Eric Holder to send the Sinaloa drug cartel countless AK47s and anti-material rifles, with our tax dollars no less, in Operation Fast And Furious) 

So no, this does not depend on SCOTUS. Even a hard left leaning SCOTUS, with that kind of majority, would not simply run over the 2nd Amendment on their own. They aren't going to, not even as woke zealots, burn their own judicial legacy, on setting the Constitution on fire, when NO ONE WOULD COMPLY. Every major law enforcement agency in the country would simply refuse to act on it. They are going to send in their street cops, already embattled and defunded, into potential firefight after firefight to grab guns in a pathway that is clearly does not align with the actual Constitution? 

If you want what you say you want, you need an Amendment to the US Constitution to wipe the 2nd Amendment off the map. That's it. I've laid it out for you. So, again, nothing you say here makes any sense legally. You can't just pretend the parts of the Constitution you don't like simply don't exist at all. 

[shorepatrol 1,845]

24 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

Quite the contrary. I enjoy telling asshats to go piss up a rope

On the internet. 

[Voltaire 5,032]

4 hours ago, Mike Honcho said:

DB Cooper's not impressed. 

Give it time. It seems to me that if I ever wanted to go into the mass murder, bank robber, or a plane skyjacker line of work, I'd prioritize having an escape plan like DB.