Before the Lewiston shooting, Maine had what was termed a "yellow flag" law. It worked like a red flag law, but it was more limited in who could seek an order. Basically, it left it up to mental health experts after an evaluation.
Unfortunately, the Lewiston killer had seen mental health professionals who didn't do anything. It was reported that the law was too complex and that no one was really sure how to use it, so no one bothered.
A terrible excuse, in my view, but whatever.
Regardless of my take, though, Maine implemented a red flag law, as most other blue states had. Despite a long history of being a pro-gun blue state, Maine changed that pretty dang quick, and now that red flag law is set to go into effect on Saturday.
Maine's new “red flag” law will take effect on Saturday.
The red flag law, which was Question 2 on the November 2025 ballot, allows for family members or law enforcement to file an "extreme risk protection order" against an individual.
If that individual is found to pose a "significant danger of causing physical injury to themselves or another person by having access to a dangerous weapon," a court can rule that their weapons be temporarily taken away.
Now, this seems like a sound strategy to millions of Americans. Folks in Maine are now likely thinking, "At least we won't see another Lewiston."
Of course, Canada has its own version of a red flag law. It also has extensive gun licensing laws that must be kept up if one is to maintain their firearm ownership.
None of that prevented a man from murdering nine people in Tumbler Ridge up that way.
While anti-gunners sing the praises of red flag laws, the truth of the matter is that they don't do what proponents claim. We've seen a lot of mass killings that take place in states where such laws exist.
When they do happen, what we get from anti-gunners is how the problem was that these weren't used aggressively enough, but that opens up other problems.
Few people look at their loved one and think, "This guy is going to be famous for killing 15 people in a bar." They see someone troubled, but their focus is on helping them get better. They rarely think that the person they've known their whole lives is about to massacre people.
Instead, what this aggression gets is a bunch of people losing their gun rights for off-hand comments to frenemies and co-workers that don't actually mean anyone is going to be harmed, but those folks overreact, call the authorities, and then someone loses their guns and has to fight to get their rights restored, all without due process of law.
Maine will be no safer.
Lewiston was an anomaly, to say the least, and when it doesn't happen again for years, some jackwagon will say that it's proof that the law works, all without recognizing that Maine went decades without such a killing without it.
Meanwhile, Canada just proved that the laws don't stop mass killings. The problem is that anti-gunners who push these measures are too dense to get the message.
Editor’s Note: President Trump and Republicans across the country are doing everything they can to protect our Second Amendment rights and right to self-defense.
Help us continue to report on their efforts and legislative successes. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member