Why did nobody in Maine fight back?

[michaelh1951]

I'm curious why, at least according to what I've seen, nobody in Maine fought back against the recent shooter. It is my understanding that Maine is a permitless carry state, and that in addition approximately 2% of the population actually have carry permits. So wouldn't you think that among all the people he encountered, at least one would have been armed?
Anyone heard or have any ideas? This is certainly a case where "a good guy with a gun" could have saved the day, but it didn't happen.

[TKM]

You know how to tell us that you don't know what you are talking about without telling us you don't know what you are talking about.

[Yugo]

You know how to tell us that you don't know what you are talking about without telling us you don't know what you are talking about.

give him time hes kinda new here

[M1NM]

At the bowling alley it was "teen night" so probably zero of them were carrying. I don't know about the other place.

[Dan_Eastvale]

Maybe no CCW insurance? lol

[Xplosiv3]

I'm guessing because Maine is the safest state in the country with the lowest crime, even though permitless carry might be allowed there, people probably don't carry as often there as they would in a higher crime constitutional carry state like Texas or AZ.

And even then, unless you have military experience and have seen active combat and have the natural response to return fire in a firefight, your #1 priority is getting the hell out of there and/or hiding especially if you're with family. It would be very rare that somebody just happened to be carrying and was in a good enough position to go up against him (example: walking out of a bathroom behind the shooter and he doesn't see you and you're 6-10 feet away from him).

[TTT]

I'm curious why, at least according to what I've seen, nobody in Maine fought back against the recent shooter. It is my understanding that Maine is a permitless carry state, and that in addition approximately 2% of the population actually have carry permits. So wouldn't you think that among all the people he encountered, at least one would have been armed?
Anyone heard or have any ideas? This is certainly a case where "a good guy with a gun" could have saved the day, but it didn't happen.

Unfortunately it seems like very few people carry regularly, even if no permit is required. Not sure there is any chance of changing that.

[TKM]

"My son had grabbed some type of butcher knife or something and went towards the killer to try to stop him from killing anyone else, and that's when he shot my son with two shots to the stomach," Leroy Walker said.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/father-of-maine-bar-manager-says-he-rushed-gunman-with-knife-before-he-was-shot/ar-AA1iUv8Z

[epags]

And....

At the bowling alley it was "teen night" so probably zero of them were carrying. I don't know about the other place.

The other place was a bar. I believe this is the current law:
It is unlawful for a person, other than a law enforcement officer or a private investigator, to possess a firearm in a liquor-licensed establishment that is posted to prohibit or restrict the possession of firearms. It is unlawful for any person to possess a firearm while under the influence in such an establishment. In addition to other penalties, a person convicted of a violation faces revocation of any carry permit and remains ineligible to obtain or apply for a permit to carry a concealed firearm for five years from the date of that conviction. 17-A M.R.S.A. ? 1057.

[9Cal_OC]

My opinion is that, and seen in courses here in CA, that if you see a situation, to resort to escape if possible. One is to fight as last resort. There is no “incentive” for one to intervene (not that there should be) but those who intervene are scrutinized when a mistake is made and police are the safer option. So they say call for help.

Even many preach that here, to not get involved unless you have to. Tbh, a guy with a rifle vs some here that carry a J-frame, I can see most not even getting involved. I wouldn’t blame them but it makes it difficult to engage.

JMO

[rodralig]

#beAGoodWitness


_

[M76]

RIP to the innocent people slain

Lewiston may survive this, but not “die-versity”

https://barenakedislam.com/2012/10/04/under-fire-mayor-of-lewiston-maine-for-trying-to-keep-his-town-from-turning-into-a-somali-muslim-slum/

[Dan_Eastvale]

In such a situations most CCW holders would likely be terrified If they have a lot to lose .
It’s rare when a brave individual would stand up.

[Russian Bot]

Most of these events seem to happen at places where people aren't allowed to carry. My first thought was similar to yours, but I overthink everything and this was no exception. I thought more about it and a couple thing occurred to me. One the training gap between this guy and most CCW holders, he could pick up on somebody going for their weapon and shoot them before they were able to draw not like he had to worry about who he shot. He was focused with a single goal in mind, most of us would probably have distractions like family members and their locations. Either way significant advantage to the attacker.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

This is part of it...

My opinion is that, and seen in courses here in CA, that if you see a situation, to resort to escape if possible. One is to fight as last resort. There is no ?incentive? for one to intervene (not that there should be) but those who intervene are scrutinized when a mistake is made and police are the safer option. So they say call for help.

Even many preach that here, to not get involved unless you have to. Tbh, a guy with a rifle vs some here that carry a J-frame, I can see most not even getting involved. I wouldn?t blame them but it makes it difficult to engage.

JMO

Another factor is that despite all the tough talk, the mental preparedness, et al., no one can effectively judge what they will do when confronted. It's a phenomenon noted by SLA Marshall back during WWII and the Korean War... The Secret Of The Soldiers Who Didn't Shoot and, as that piece suggests, the assertion that many, trained soldiers don't actually shoot or fire their weapons for effect has stirred much controversy over the years. Ultimately, the ability to respond can be inculcated, to a degree, through real world experience. Short of that, proper training can 'program' individuals toward a response. However, even experience and proper training cannot make one perform in the moment. Worse. Few seek out or are exposed to real world experience or proper training.

It's why we laud first responders in that it takes ordinary individuals who do special things in such circumstances. That's why one definition of a 'hero' is someone who is scared to death, but does the job that needs doing anyway. All braggadocio aside, it's not as 'easy' as many think to get involved, let alone actually DO anything in such circumstances. That's without even addressing doing the RIGHT thing(s).

Now, couple that with the 'training' proffered to most who concealed carry. What's the first thing you are supposed to do? Avoid conflict if possible? Not only does this apply to what I quoted, but it introduces a certain hesitancy on top of one's natural fight or flight response, favoring 'flight,' particularly if it doesn't directly involve "you."

In short, there are a whole variety of, legitimate, reasons why even 'armed' individuals don't act.