I would LOVE to vote for a congressional candidate who backs reasonable gun restrictions. I'd love to ban all guns like Australia did. But in North Carolina it's impossible to find even a Democrat who would commit political suicide by advocating for gun restrictions. And NC just readjusted/re-gerrymandered its House districts to guarantee that 11 out of its 13 districts are now GOP, now that its legislature is veto-proof. What would you like me to do? My husband, a retired Army officer, has at least two AR-15s and a couple pistols. He insists that they're for recreational target shooting, but at the beginning of the pandemic said that he was glad we were capable of defending ourselves in case the world went crazy. I guess he was worried about toilet-paper looters. What would you like me to do in a world like this?
In these cases, no one opposes gun safety because the gun lobby is the loudest voice in the room. If they thought they'd lose elections by opposing certain types of gun safety legislation, they'd quickly change their stance.
So the only recourse is for the majority to get louder for whatever safety measures your voters won't oppose. Universal background checks, red flag laws and assault weapons bans are the three most often supported by gun owners, but in your state it may be only one or two of those.
People in situations like yours can consider joining, supporting or amplifying national organizations like Everytown For Gun Safety, March For Our Lives, Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence or a state or local organization. Attend marches or rallies if they're able.
They can also make calls to Congress, write letters or email or sign petitions. When sensible gun laws are the loudest voice in the room, those legislators whose gun rights support is based on their perception of public sentiment will change their minds.
In the 1970s, I lived for 6 years in the greater Bangor / Ellsworth Maine area. There were shotguns in the closet of almost every homeowner I knew. When my 20 year old girlfriend's younger brother "bagged his first deer," we celebrated and ate. I never thought twice about guns, and certainly never worried about them. I saw guns in the woods and on racks in trucks...never anywhere that seemed out of place. Nobody carried them to show off. Gun owners were responsible.
Now it's 2023 and I live in Massachusetts. I would like to see handguns and assault weapons banned and "bought back," but still don't have a problem with those who responsibly hunt for food.
Gun licenses should be regulated akin to a small plane pilot's license: you must practice and be certified on a regular basis to show you can safely operate the gun and hit the target.
Do you know of anyone who "hunts for food" with an assault rifle? It's a very lame excuse and needs to be shut down. The gun culture is not one I can support.
America has a gun culture. Accessibility to guns is everything!
"The “world’s greatest country” is now a shooting gallery...awash with 125 firearms for every 100 people and with more than 40 million military-style assault weapons, Armed Madhouse USA is now averaging two mass shootings per day. The slaughters don’t make the national news anymore unless the body count is at least ten. The bigger ones are followed by the usual NRA-cancelled dead- end debate of (a) “it’s the guns” (which it is) versus (b) “it’s mental illness” and/or “moral failure.” No serious gun reform ever follows despite huge majority support for gun control. Everyone knows it’s just a matter of time until the next Columbine, Aurora, Parkland, Sandy Hook, Uvalde, El Paso, Lewiston, Maine, etc."
That why it was in quotes.... there will be mass shootings as long as there is a gun culture-and gun accessibility- such ownership is unparallel -not even terrorist societies are so well gunned.
Whenever these events happen, gun rights advocates often point to those suicide numbers in order to deflect. For many, those deaths don't count.
Or they'll say that it's not a gun problem, it's a mental health problem, as if the two were somehow mutually exclusive. Then they'll continue to ignore the mental health issues in this country, or even demean those afflicted.
I live in the town next to where the shooter was from, and it really hit home how disingenuous those arguments are. I've seen a good number of people in that community lament how the mental health situation in our country failed him, but I'm sure many of those same people are happy to ignore the mental health problems of those 158 gun suicides last year.
Thank you for specifically recognizing the four members of the Deaf community. An incalculable loss. Please remember that we call ourselves big D Deaf. Little d deaf is the medical term. Big D Deaf is the culture and community. Thanks.
Regarding red flag laws - it’s my understanding from other sources that Maine has a “yellow flag” law, which requires the additional step of a medical/mental health professional to evaluate and say this person is a danger. And that it wasn’t used to his full extent by any of the many people who saw what was happening with this man (family, fellow Guard members, law enforcement etc). I don’t know how we fix anything when people won’t use the laws already in place. :(
My Mother had a psychotic break in her mid 50s after a lifetime of undiagnosed, untreated bipolar disorder. Getting her blue papered was a year long, difficult process.
Yellow flag laws have this same issue.
Everyone in my mother's life knew she was out of control and in serious danger, but getting any authorized medical/mental health professional to sign off on that—even with lawyers, her court appointed advocate, law enforcement, her primary care physician, all of her children and her siblings fighting for it to happen—was way too difficult and way too long of a process. Luckily our family is in the minority in Maine and have never had a gun in our home.
Red flag laws allow the precaution to be taken before the long evaluation process, not after.
Yes, involuntary psychiatric commitment requires having the person "blue papered." Without it the most that can be done is a 24, 48 or 72 hour psychiatric hold.
My heart goes out to all the people of Maine,the nicest people in the country,beautiful state,have many wonderful memories and friends in Maine,a terrible thing has happened,only God knows why.It’s to easy to make judgments and preach,I know that the people of this wonderful state will take care of their own,and figure out how it happened and they’ll do their best to make it right.Peace from a brother in Boston.
Will be using part of this statement in my next LTE: “It's that in a country where assault weapons are easier to get than contraceptives, this can happen anywhere.”
I live not too far from ritzy Highland Park, IL, and used to work for the tiny local library in the neighboring working class small suburb of Highwood, IL, where the Highland Park shooter lived. We in the Chicago suburbs are all accustomed to reading about gun violence (mainly gang-related, which I don’t discount as being extremely destructive) in the big city of Chicago, but the idea of a mass murder in a place like Highland Park was pretty much unimaginable. It’s the kind of lakeside suburb where even the chain stores are extra fancy. Most homes there cost at least a million bucks. And it’s extra beautiful in the summer, with lots of greenery, a breeze off the lake, wealthy people shopping and relaxing. And then, on 4th of July a year ago, a very disturbed young man killed a lot of innocent people who were just attending a parade.
Mass murderers aren’t something we can predict based on location. The people who commit these heinous murders are going to go after innocent people anywhere they can easily find them. Our choice is simple: either remove the easy access to weapons that can kill dozens of people in less than a minute, or just accept that THIS WILL KEEP HAPPENING.
Apparently we’ve (unimaginably, heinously) chosen the later.
I have never in my life called myself a "Mainer" nor has anyone else I know. Even our Air National Guard unit is designated the Maineiacs. It's not in jest or a joke—It's been our identity longer than I've been alive and I'm 54 years old.
This is a Trekkie versus Trekker situation. Once Maine became more urban with more people from away, suddenly calling ourselves Maineiacs was embarrassing for some people so they switched to "Mainers."
I live in The County—which if you're from Maine you know I'm referring to the largest by area county in any state East of the Mississippi River—where we're not embarrassed to still call ourselves Trekkies, I mean Maineiacs.
Proper according to who though? Actual Maineiacs or people from away? Just because we call Deutschland "Germany," it doesn't make someone in that country "improper" to call themselves Deutsch instead of German.
I'm a Maineiac, most of my maternal family who aren't Canadiens—we're part Metìs so please don't correct my spelling—are Maineiacs and we always have been.
I wrote this from my personal perspective so why would it be proper to change my identity for it? It may not be a term you like, but it's still my identity.
No worries and no offense taken. And I also understand your perspective.
As an Indigenous woman there are some terms other Indigenous peoples use to refer to themselves that I never use and personally find demeaning—squ*w being one of the main ones. But as members of a shared identity—Indigenous North American—I respect their right to self-identify as they wish and cannot in good conscience demand they not use the term. But I come from a culture where our identities were forcibly stripped from us so my perspective and reactions will forever be influenced by that legacy.
All I will do is share my feelings and perspective in response.
As this is a first person perspective from a proud Indigenous North American Maineiac, the term is the only appropriate one for me to use for my own identity.
Had a "Mainer" written this, they might use that term.
I would LOVE to vote for a congressional candidate who backs reasonable gun restrictions. I'd love to ban all guns like Australia did. But in North Carolina it's impossible to find even a Democrat who would commit political suicide by advocating for gun restrictions. And NC just readjusted/re-gerrymandered its House districts to guarantee that 11 out of its 13 districts are now GOP, now that its legislature is veto-proof. What would you like me to do? My husband, a retired Army officer, has at least two AR-15s and a couple pistols. He insists that they're for recreational target shooting, but at the beginning of the pandemic said that he was glad we were capable of defending ourselves in case the world went crazy. I guess he was worried about toilet-paper looters. What would you like me to do in a world like this?
In these cases, no one opposes gun safety because the gun lobby is the loudest voice in the room. If they thought they'd lose elections by opposing certain types of gun safety legislation, they'd quickly change their stance.
So the only recourse is for the majority to get louder for whatever safety measures your voters won't oppose. Universal background checks, red flag laws and assault weapons bans are the three most often supported by gun owners, but in your state it may be only one or two of those.
People in situations like yours can consider joining, supporting or amplifying national organizations like Everytown For Gun Safety, March For Our Lives, Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence or a state or local organization. Attend marches or rallies if they're able.
They can also make calls to Congress, write letters or email or sign petitions. When sensible gun laws are the loudest voice in the room, those legislators whose gun rights support is based on their perception of public sentiment will change their minds.
Noone has guts!
In the 1970s, I lived for 6 years in the greater Bangor / Ellsworth Maine area. There were shotguns in the closet of almost every homeowner I knew. When my 20 year old girlfriend's younger brother "bagged his first deer," we celebrated and ate. I never thought twice about guns, and certainly never worried about them. I saw guns in the woods and on racks in trucks...never anywhere that seemed out of place. Nobody carried them to show off. Gun owners were responsible.
Now it's 2023 and I live in Massachusetts. I would like to see handguns and assault weapons banned and "bought back," but still don't have a problem with those who responsibly hunt for food.
Gun licenses should be regulated akin to a small plane pilot's license: you must practice and be certified on a regular basis to show you can safely operate the gun and hit the target.
Well said. I also like the idea of requiring liability insurance in order to obtain a license.
Do you know of anyone who "hunts for food" with an assault rifle? It's a very lame excuse and needs to be shut down. The gun culture is not one I can support.
We watch from Europe in complete disbelief. Surely, this time….
America has a gun culture. Accessibility to guns is everything!
"The “world’s greatest country” is now a shooting gallery...awash with 125 firearms for every 100 people and with more than 40 million military-style assault weapons, Armed Madhouse USA is now averaging two mass shootings per day. The slaughters don’t make the national news anymore unless the body count is at least ten. The bigger ones are followed by the usual NRA-cancelled dead- end debate of (a) “it’s the guns” (which it is) versus (b) “it’s mental illness” and/or “moral failure.” No serious gun reform ever follows despite huge majority support for gun control. Everyone knows it’s just a matter of time until the next Columbine, Aurora, Parkland, Sandy Hook, Uvalde, El Paso, Lewiston, Maine, etc."
"greatest nation." You have been telling this to yourselves for decades!
That why it was in quotes.... there will be mass shootings as long as there is a gun culture-and gun accessibility- such ownership is unparallel -not even terrorist societies are so well gunned.
It's an Armed Madhouse .
Yes.
Whenever these events happen, gun rights advocates often point to those suicide numbers in order to deflect. For many, those deaths don't count.
Or they'll say that it's not a gun problem, it's a mental health problem, as if the two were somehow mutually exclusive. Then they'll continue to ignore the mental health issues in this country, or even demean those afflicted.
I live in the town next to where the shooter was from, and it really hit home how disingenuous those arguments are. I've seen a good number of people in that community lament how the mental health situation in our country failed him, but I'm sure many of those same people are happy to ignore the mental health problems of those 158 gun suicides last year.
Thank you for specifically recognizing the four members of the Deaf community. An incalculable loss. Please remember that we call ourselves big D Deaf. Little d deaf is the medical term. Big D Deaf is the culture and community. Thanks.
Thank you for the information. Edit made.
Regarding red flag laws - it’s my understanding from other sources that Maine has a “yellow flag” law, which requires the additional step of a medical/mental health professional to evaluate and say this person is a danger. And that it wasn’t used to his full extent by any of the many people who saw what was happening with this man (family, fellow Guard members, law enforcement etc). I don’t know how we fix anything when people won’t use the laws already in place. :(
My Mother had a psychotic break in her mid 50s after a lifetime of undiagnosed, untreated bipolar disorder. Getting her blue papered was a year long, difficult process.
Yellow flag laws have this same issue.
Everyone in my mother's life knew she was out of control and in serious danger, but getting any authorized medical/mental health professional to sign off on that—even with lawyers, her court appointed advocate, law enforcement, her primary care physician, all of her children and her siblings fighting for it to happen—was way too difficult and way too long of a process. Luckily our family is in the minority in Maine and have never had a gun in our home.
Red flag laws allow the precaution to be taken before the long evaluation process, not after.
Amelia, thank you for your perspective- I’d not thought of that. I’m sorry your family had to go through all of that.
I’ve not heard the term “blue papered” - is that related to psychiatric commitment?
Yes, involuntary psychiatric commitment requires having the person "blue papered." Without it the most that can be done is a 24, 48 or 72 hour psychiatric hold.
Isn't it the way.......when something hits you, you wake up.
When bombs hit the US maybe all will wake up.
The stupidity of guns in the US makes me cringe!
What With a Sacred Amendment . .
And a Cheerful Studious New Maga Gav'ler
Heard a Voice! that unknotted this Baffler . .
He had Bad Feelings in his Heart .. and That's
where to start . .to stop the next Run
for Your Life crowd scatterer . .
Dead Eye Cultural Icons . .. #and Big Biz . . .
My heart goes out to all the people of Maine,the nicest people in the country,beautiful state,have many wonderful memories and friends in Maine,a terrible thing has happened,only God knows why.It’s to easy to make judgments and preach,I know that the people of this wonderful state will take care of their own,and figure out how it happened and they’ll do their best to make it right.Peace from a brother in Boston.
Will be using part of this statement in my next LTE: “It's that in a country where assault weapons are easier to get than contraceptives, this can happen anywhere.”
I live not too far from ritzy Highland Park, IL, and used to work for the tiny local library in the neighboring working class small suburb of Highwood, IL, where the Highland Park shooter lived. We in the Chicago suburbs are all accustomed to reading about gun violence (mainly gang-related, which I don’t discount as being extremely destructive) in the big city of Chicago, but the idea of a mass murder in a place like Highland Park was pretty much unimaginable. It’s the kind of lakeside suburb where even the chain stores are extra fancy. Most homes there cost at least a million bucks. And it’s extra beautiful in the summer, with lots of greenery, a breeze off the lake, wealthy people shopping and relaxing. And then, on 4th of July a year ago, a very disturbed young man killed a lot of innocent people who were just attending a parade.
Mass murderers aren’t something we can predict based on location. The people who commit these heinous murders are going to go after innocent people anywhere they can easily find them. Our choice is simple: either remove the easy access to weapons that can kill dozens of people in less than a minute, or just accept that THIS WILL KEEP HAPPENING.
Apparently we’ve (unimaginably, heinously) chosen the later.
With such a serious article it is disrespectful to call us Maine-iacs. We are Mainers, please edit.
I have never in my life called myself a "Mainer" nor has anyone else I know. Even our Air National Guard unit is designated the Maineiacs. It's not in jest or a joke—It's been our identity longer than I've been alive and I'm 54 years old.
This is a Trekkie versus Trekker situation. Once Maine became more urban with more people from away, suddenly calling ourselves Maineiacs was embarrassing for some people so they switched to "Mainers."
I live in The County—which if you're from Maine you know I'm referring to the largest by area county in any state East of the Mississippi River—where we're not embarrassed to still call ourselves Trekkies, I mean Maineiacs.
I grew up in Maine, and we did not consider it disrespectful to call us Maine-iacs. That’s how we described ourselves.
The proper reference is Mainers. I use the mainiac one myself however, this is going out to many who do not know this is used in jest.
Proper according to who though? Actual Maineiacs or people from away? Just because we call Deutschland "Germany," it doesn't make someone in that country "improper" to call themselves Deutsch instead of German.
I'm a Maineiac, most of my maternal family who aren't Canadiens—we're part Metìs so please don't correct my spelling—are Maineiacs and we always have been.
I wrote this from my personal perspective so why would it be proper to change my identity for it? It may not be a term you like, but it's still my identity.
I appreciate your very valid explanation. I personally find the term demeaning however this is not my Substack. Apologies if I offended your identity!
No worries and no offense taken. And I also understand your perspective.
As an Indigenous woman there are some terms other Indigenous peoples use to refer to themselves that I never use and personally find demeaning—squ*w being one of the main ones. But as members of a shared identity—Indigenous North American—I respect their right to self-identify as they wish and cannot in good conscience demand they not use the term. But I come from a culture where our identities were forcibly stripped from us so my perspective and reactions will forever be influenced by that legacy.
All I will do is share my feelings and perspective in response.
Got it . .but Remember the Insane . .Shooter in Maine . .. is probably here to stay...
#the space takes . . .
Please edit the use of "Maineiacs." It is jarring. We use "Mainer." Thank you.
I don't use that term to refer to myself—ever.
As this is a first person perspective from a proud Indigenous North American Maineiac, the term is the only appropriate one for me to use for my own identity.
Had a "Mainer" written this, they might use that term.