The BDN Opinion section operates independently and does not set news policies or contribute to reporting or editing articles elsewhere in the newspaper or on bangordailynews.com
Karyn Sporer is a lead researcher for the Department of Homeland Security’s National Counterterrorism Innovation, Technology, and Education Center of Excellence and an associate professor of sociology at the University of Maine. This column reflects her views and expertise and does not speak on behalf of any group or organization with which she is affiliated. She is co-leader of the Maine chapter of the national Scholars Strategy Network, which brings together scholars across the country to address public challenges and their policy implications. Members’ columns appear in the BDN every other week.
This month marks the first anniversary of Robert Card II’s rampage shooting in Lewiston that left 18 people dead and 13 others injured. This was not an attack without warning signs. In the months leading up to the shooting, Card’s family and friends reported to the local police and the Army concerns about his deteriorating mental health, access to guns, and threats to the community. While it is impossible to know if any intervention could have prevented Maine’s deadliest rampage shooting, what we do know is that family members and colleagues saw something and they said something.
There is no evidence that Card was motivated by ideological extremism, however future efforts aimed at reducing the risk of targeted violence can draw from what we already know about violent extremists.
It’s becoming clear that some of the most effective solutions to targeted violence lie not with governments or institutions, but within the home. The critical role of families in identifying and intervening when a loved one begins to radicalize is both essential and undervalued. However, to succeed in this role, families must be equipped with the right knowledge, support, and resources.
Family members often notice significant changes in individuals who are on the path to violent extremism, including increased isolation and withdrawal, more rigid religious or political beliefs, and open displays of extremist symbols or rhetoric. These behaviors have been observed in individuals who joined groups as diverse as the Islamic State or right-wing extremist movements like the Proud Boys and Atomwaffen. Yet, despite recognizing these troubling signs, many families feel powerless to act and face barriers that hinder their ability to intervene effectively.
On the family level, four main challenges impede action: adolescent development, adverse childhood conditions, lack of knowledge about radicalization, and secrecy from the radicalizing individual. Normal teenage rebellion or instability within the family — such as addiction or divorce — often masks warning signs. Meanwhile, childhood trauma, like abuse or neglect, can leave individuals vulnerable to radicalization. Perhaps most importantly, many families simply don’t know enough about radicalization or how quickly it can escalate. And when the individual deliberately hides their activities, detection becomes nearly impossible until it’s too late.
Institutional barriers add another layer of complexity. Schools, which are often the first line of defense, sometimes fail to notify families of concerning behaviors. Law enforcement, focused more on tracking and prosecuting extremists, often miss or ignore opportunities for early intervention. Worse, negative experiences with police — especially involving children — can create mistrust, deterring families from seeking help.
Yet, when family members do intervene, the results can be powerful. Successful interventions hinge on strong relationships and social bonds. Specifically, early, compassionate interventions — rooted in emotional and social support — are more likely to succeed. Sadly, many well-meaning interventions fail, often because family members lack the knowledge or resources to intervene appropriately. Rejection, harsh confrontations, or dismissing the problem tend to deepen the divide, pushing individuals further into the arms of extremist groups.
In the Lewiston case, the failures of the Sagadahoc County Sheriff’s Office and leaders of Card’s Army Reserve Unit highlight an urgent need to shift from a purely law enforcement approach towards a public health model that prioritizes early intervention, trauma-informed care, and community support.
If we truly want to prevent the risk of targeted violence and violent extremism, we must start by giving families the tools they need to recognize the signs and to intervene early. While strengthening Maine’s yellow flag law is a start, we should also be investing in prevention, education, and support systems that equip families to act before it’s too late. By doing so, we will not only prevent acts of violence but also heal the rifts that make individuals vulnerable to violence and radicalization in the first place.
