One, the report itself is 5 years old and the shooting data is 9 years old, with the data stopping in 2010. Is this accurate?
Two, they exclude shootings where a family member is the victim. In other words, the Dayton shooting would be excluded. This blows my mind because domestic abuse is a huge red flag and seems to be one of the few common defining characteristics of mass shooters, which is also a newer discovery that the 5 year old report doesnt even mention.
Three, the subset of 84 shootings in 10 years doesnt even touch the amount of mass shootings (defined by their terms) we've had this year so far. It feels like a statistical blip in comparison to what our tragic turn has a nation has ground out into data since 2010.
The data is likely as accurate as it can be without another similar study being performed. I haven’t looked if ALERRT has any more current data published.
They did not exclude shootings where a family member is victim, but at least one victim had to be unrelated to the shooter. The Dayton shooting would certainly be included
One, the report itself is 5 years old and the shooting data is 9 years old, with the data stopping in 2010. Is this accurate?
Two, they exclude shootings where a family member is the victim. In other words, the Dayton shooting would be excluded. This blows my mind because domestic abuse is a huge red flag and seems to be one of the few common defining characteristics of mass shooters, which is also a newer discovery that the 5 year old report doesnt even mention.
Three, the subset of 84 shootings in 10 years doesnt even touch the amount of mass shootings (defined by their terms) we've had this year so far. It feels like a statistical blip in comparison to what our tragic turn has a nation has ground out into data since 2010.
The data is likely as accurate as it can be without another similar study being performed. I haven’t looked if ALERRT has any more current data published.
They did not exclude shootings where a family member is victim, but at least one victim had to be unrelated to the shooter. The Dayton shooting would certainly be included
How many mass shootings have we had this year?
58 where at least 2 or more people were killed, over 200 with more than 2 injured. I can't speak to the gang shootings.
This information would probably be a lot easier to eek out if it wasn't illegal for the government to study it.
One, the report itself is 5 years old and the shooting data is 9 years old, with the data stopping in 2010. Is this accurate?
Two, they exclude shootings where a family member is the victim. In other words, the Dayton shooting would be excluded. This blows my mind because domestic abuse is a huge red flag and seems to be one of the few common defining characteristics of mass shooters, which is also a newer discovery that the 5 year old report doesnt even mention.
Three, the subset of 84 shootings in 10 years doesnt even touch the amount of mass shootings (defined by their terms) we've had this year so far. It feels like a statistical blip in comparison to what our tragic turn has a nation has ground out into data since 2010.
The data is likely as accurate as it can be without another similar study being performed. I haven’t looked if ALERRT has any more current data published.
They did not exclude shootings where a family member is victim, but at least one victim had to be unrelated to the shooter. The Dayton shooting would certainly be included
One, the report itself is 5 years old and the shooting data is 9 years old, with the data stopping in 2010. Is this accurate?
Two, they exclude shootings where a family member is the victim. In other words, the Dayton shooting would be excluded. This blows my mind because domestic abuse is a huge red flag and seems to be one of the few common defining characteristics of mass shooters, which is also a newer discovery that the 5 year old report doesnt even mention.
Three, the subset of 84 shootings in 10 years doesnt even touch the amount of mass shootings (defined by their terms) we've had this year so far. It feels like a statistical blip in comparison to what our tragic turn has a nation has ground out into data since 2010.
The data is likely as accurate as it can be without another similar study being performed. I haven’t looked if ALERRT has any more current data published.
They did not exclude shootings where a family member is victim, but at least one victim had to be unrelated to the shooter. The Dayton shooting would certainly be included
One, the report itself is 5 years old and the shooting data is 9 years old, with the data stopping in 2010. Is this accurate?
Two, they exclude shootings where a family member is the victim. In other words, the Dayton shooting would be excluded. This blows my mind because domestic abuse is a huge red flag and seems to be one of the few common defining characteristics of mass shooters, which is also a newer discovery that the 5 year old report doesnt even mention.
Three, the subset of 84 shootings in 10 years doesnt even touch the amount of mass shootings (defined by their terms) we've had this year so far. It feels like a statistical blip in comparison to what our tragic turn has a nation has ground out into data since 2010.
The data is likely as accurate as it can be without another similar study being performed. I haven’t looked if ALERRT has any more current data published.
They did not exclude shootings where a family member is victim, but at least one victim had to be unrelated to the shooter. The Dayton shooting would certainly be included
How many mass shootings have we had this year?
58 where at least 2 or more people were killed, over 200 with more than 2 injured. I can't speak to the gang shootings.
This information would probably be a lot easier to eek out if it wasn't illegal for the government to study it.
I’m reading through the wiki list now. Looks like an awful lot of shitty gang involvement. Especially in Chicago.
diablo III - beardsnbeer#1508 Mechwarrior Online - Rusty Bock
0
Options
knitdanIn ur baseKillin ur guysRegistered Userregular
Don’t bother
There’s nothing that will get through to that guy
He thinks bazookas and tanks should be available for civilian use
“I was quick when I came in here, I’m twice as quick now”
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
+4
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
One, the report itself is 5 years old and the shooting data is 9 years old, with the data stopping in 2010. Is this accurate?
Two, they exclude shootings where a family member is the victim. In other words, the Dayton shooting would be excluded. This blows my mind because domestic abuse is a huge red flag and seems to be one of the few common defining characteristics of mass shooters, which is also a newer discovery that the 5 year old report doesnt even mention.
Three, the subset of 84 shootings in 10 years doesnt even touch the amount of mass shootings (defined by their terms) we've had this year so far. It feels like a statistical blip in comparison to what our tragic turn has a nation has ground out into data since 2010.
The data is likely as accurate as it can be without another similar study being performed. I haven’t looked if ALERRT has any more current data published.
They did not exclude shootings where a family member is victim, but at least one victim had to be unrelated to the shooter. The Dayton shooting would certainly be included
How many mass shootings have we had this year?
58 where at least 2 or more people were killed, over 200 with more than 2 injured. I can't speak to the gang shootings.
This information would probably be a lot easier to eek out if it wasn't illegal for the government to study it.
I’m reading through the wiki list now. Looks like an awful lot of shitty gang involvement. Especially in Chicago.
Oi
I think that well-debunked horse is quite dead can we have another not so dead horse?
One, the report itself is 5 years old and the shooting data is 9 years old, with the data stopping in 2010. Is this accurate?
Two, they exclude shootings where a family member is the victim. In other words, the Dayton shooting would be excluded. This blows my mind because domestic abuse is a huge red flag and seems to be one of the few common defining characteristics of mass shooters, which is also a newer discovery that the 5 year old report doesnt even mention.
Three, the subset of 84 shootings in 10 years doesnt even touch the amount of mass shootings (defined by their terms) we've had this year so far. It feels like a statistical blip in comparison to what our tragic turn has a nation has ground out into data since 2010.
The data is likely as accurate as it can be without another similar study being performed. I haven’t looked if ALERRT has any more current data published.
They did not exclude shootings where a family member is victim, but at least one victim had to be unrelated to the shooter. The Dayton shooting would certainly be included
How many mass shootings have we had this year?
58 where at least 2 or more people were killed, over 200 with more than 2 injured. I can't speak to the gang shootings.
This information would probably be a lot easier to eek out if it wasn't illegal for the government to study it.
I’m reading through the wiki list now. Looks like an awful lot of shitty gang involvement. Especially in Chicago.
Oi
I think that well-debunked horse is quite dead can we have another not so dead horse?
Oh, sure, should we talk about the illegally obtained and served warrant in Houston being counted as a mass shooting on January 28th?
What it was 4 cops shot each other and murdered two home owners like fucking idiots.
Let’s count this one, too, January 19th, 2019 where a homeowner defended his property from 5 individuals, killing 3 and wounding 2 more. Also in Houston, TX.
SORRY I DONT ATTRIBUTE ALL OF THESE AS MASS SHOOTINGS OR THEY PAINT CRIMINALS AS VICTIMS (Police in Pecan Park incident, essentially a modern day Ruby Ridge but with less Janet Reno) OR A VALID DEFENSIVE GUN USE THAT NEVER HAPPENS IN REAL WORLD
He thinks bazookas and tanks should be available for civilian use
I think bazookas and tanks with working guns should be legal to purchase without a tax stamp. Right now they are NFA items (at least the gun on the tank is, a tank with a deactivated gun is entirely legal without a tax stamp) and legal.
So mass shootings don't count if they happen to black people, now?
Lol it is always the same upper middle class white people throwing this out. I grew up in the type of neighborhoods where gang violence exists. I have even posted about it in past threads and how violence is experienced in those neighborhoods anecdotally. You can save the "you don't care about black people" for someone else.
0
Options
knitdanIn ur baseKillin ur guysRegistered Userregular
He thinks bazookas and tanks should be available for civilian use
I think bazookas and tanks with working guns should be legal to purchase without a tax stamp. Right now they are NFA items (at least the gun on the tank is, a tank with a deactivated gun is entirely legal without a tax stamp) and legal.
Yeah that’s fucking insane
The people who wrote the 2nd amendment never intended to put this kind of weaponry in the hands of civilians.
knitdan on
“I was quick when I came in here, I’m twice as quick now”
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
He thinks bazookas and tanks should be available for civilian use
I think bazookas and tanks with working guns should be legal to purchase without a tax stamp. Right now they are NFA items (at least the gun on the tank is, a tank with a deactivated gun is entirely legal without a tax stamp) and legal.
Yeah that’s fucking insane
The people who wrote the 2nd amendment never intended to put this kind of weaponry in the hands of civilians.
Except all those privately owned gunships with guns on them which existed then.
One, the report itself is 5 years old and the shooting data is 9 years old, with the data stopping in 2010. Is this accurate?
Two, they exclude shootings where a family member is the victim. In other words, the Dayton shooting would be excluded. This blows my mind because domestic abuse is a huge red flag and seems to be one of the few common defining characteristics of mass shooters, which is also a newer discovery that the 5 year old report doesnt even mention.
Three, the subset of 84 shootings in 10 years doesnt even touch the amount of mass shootings (defined by their terms) we've had this year so far. It feels like a statistical blip in comparison to what our tragic turn has a nation has ground out into data since 2010.
The data is likely as accurate as it can be without another similar study being performed. I haven’t looked if ALERRT has any more current data published.
They did not exclude shootings where a family member is victim, but at least one victim had to be unrelated to the shooter. The Dayton shooting would certainly be included
How many mass shootings have we had this year?
58 where at least 2 or more people were killed, over 200 with more than 2 injured. I can't speak to the gang shootings.
This information would probably be a lot easier to eek out if it wasn't illegal for the government to study it.
I’m reading through the wiki list now. Looks like an awful lot of shitty gang involvement. Especially in Chicago.
Oi
I think that well-debunked horse is quite dead can we have another not so dead horse?
Oh, sure, should we talk about the illegally obtained and served warrant in Houston being counted as a mass shooting on January 28th?
What it was 4 cops shot each other and murdered two home owners like fucking idiots.
Let’s count this one, too, January 19th, 2019 where a homeowner defended his property from 5 individuals, killing 3 and wounding 2 more. Also in Houston, TX.
SORRY I DONT ATTRIBUTE ALL OF THESE AS MASS SHOOTINGS OR THEY PAINT CRIMINALS AS VICTIMS (Police in Pecan Park incident, essentially a modern day Ruby Ridge but with less Janet Reno) OR A VALID DEFENSIVE GUN USE THAT NEVER HAPPENS IN REAL WORLD
"So It Goes" see I can capslock it too
I mean, do you have a reason why they shouldn't be counted?
So mass shootings don't count if they happen to black people, now?
Lol it is always the same upper middle class white people throwing this out. I grew up in the type of neighborhoods where gang violence exists. I have even posted about it in past threads and how violence is experienced in those neighborhoods anecdotally. You can save the "you don't care about black people" for someone else.
He did, he saved it for dead legend, who said that mass shootings in Chicago (which having reviewed the list did indeed kill and injure overwhelmingly black people) should not be considered in the same light as other shootings because they were ‘gang activity’.
One, the report itself is 5 years old and the shooting data is 9 years old, with the data stopping in 2010. Is this accurate?
Two, they exclude shootings where a family member is the victim. In other words, the Dayton shooting would be excluded. This blows my mind because domestic abuse is a huge red flag and seems to be one of the few common defining characteristics of mass shooters, which is also a newer discovery that the 5 year old report doesnt even mention.
Three, the subset of 84 shootings in 10 years doesnt even touch the amount of mass shootings (defined by their terms) we've had this year so far. It feels like a statistical blip in comparison to what our tragic turn has a nation has ground out into data since 2010.
The data is likely as accurate as it can be without another similar study being performed. I haven’t looked if ALERRT has any more current data published.
They did not exclude shootings where a family member is victim, but at least one victim had to be unrelated to the shooter. The Dayton shooting would certainly be included
How many mass shootings have we had this year?
58 where at least 2 or more people were killed, over 200 with more than 2 injured. I can't speak to the gang shootings.
This information would probably be a lot easier to eek out if it wasn't illegal for the government to study it.
I’m reading through the wiki list now. Looks like an awful lot of shitty gang involvement. Especially in Chicago.
Fucking seriously, I never once felt that any of our pro-second amendment posters -that have had a shelf life of more then a few months- were ever stupid on like a fundamental level.
Deluded, maybe
Values out of whack? Undoubtedly.
But like, I've agreed with posts of yours before on other subjects, verbatim.
And now I'm starting to think I must be an asshole too.
RedTide#1907 on Battle.net
Come Overwatch with meeeee
Trying to mince over what is and isn’t considered a ‘mass shooting’ seems weird, since whatever criteria is used, it’s used everywhere.
It’s not like the US is having it’s numbers inflated by defining ‘mass shooting’ to have a broader application than other countries to make it seem worse by comparison. It’s the same standard being applied everywhere.
Trying to mince over what is and isn’t considered a ‘mass shooting’ seems weird, since whatever criteria is used, it’s used everywhere.
It’s not like the US is having it’s numbers inflated by defining ‘mass shooting’ to have a broader application than other countries to make it seem worse by comparison. It’s the same standard being applied everywhere.
It actually is not the same standard, even in the US.
Fucking seriously, I never once felt that any of our pro-second amendment posters -that have had a shelf life of more then a few months- were ever stupid on like a fundamental level.
Deluded, maybe
Values out of whack? Undoubtedly.
But like, I've agreed with posts of yours before on other subjects, verbatim.
And now I'm starting to think I must be an asshole too.
At least have the balls to quote me and just outright state you think I am an asshole imstead of being passive about it.
One, the report itself is 5 years old and the shooting data is 9 years old, with the data stopping in 2010. Is this accurate?
Two, they exclude shootings where a family member is the victim. In other words, the Dayton shooting would be excluded. This blows my mind because domestic abuse is a huge red flag and seems to be one of the few common defining characteristics of mass shooters, which is also a newer discovery that the 5 year old report doesnt even mention.
Three, the subset of 84 shootings in 10 years doesnt even touch the amount of mass shootings (defined by their terms) we've had this year so far. It feels like a statistical blip in comparison to what our tragic turn has a nation has ground out into data since 2010.
The data is likely as accurate as it can be without another similar study being performed. I haven’t looked if ALERRT has any more current data published.
They did not exclude shootings where a family member is victim, but at least one victim had to be unrelated to the shooter. The Dayton shooting would certainly be included
How many mass shootings have we had this year?
58 where at least 2 or more people were killed, over 200 with more than 2 injured. I can't speak to the gang shootings.
This information would probably be a lot easier to eek out if it wasn't illegal for the government to study it.
I’m reading through the wiki list now. Looks like an awful lot of shitty gang involvement. Especially in Chicago.
Oi
I think that well-debunked horse is quite dead can we have another not so dead horse?
Oh, sure, should we talk about the illegally obtained and served warrant in Houston being counted as a mass shooting on January 28th?
What it was 4 cops shot each other and murdered two home owners like fucking idiots.
Let’s count this one, too, January 19th, 2019 where a homeowner defended his property from 5 individuals, killing 3 and wounding 2 more. Also in Houston, TX.
SORRY I DONT ATTRIBUTE ALL OF THESE AS MASS SHOOTINGS OR THEY PAINT CRIMINALS AS VICTIMS (Police in Pecan Park incident, essentially a modern day Ruby Ridge but with less Janet Reno) OR A VALID DEFENSIVE GUN USE THAT NEVER HAPPENS IN REAL WORLD
"So It Goes" see I can capslock it too
I mean, do you have a reason why they shouldn't be counted?
You could make an argument that the state perpetrated the mass shooting against the homeowners and themselves, in a classic 3 Stooges miscue.
The individual who defended his home from a group of 5 people invading his home shouldn’t count, since he was most definitely in the right.
@tbloxham I was just continuing to go off of ALERRT’s definition seeing as that doesn’t blow it out of proportion, seeing as the most concerning element seems to be Active Shooter Events at Business or School. I’m not going to pretend that people don’t get caught up in wrong place wrong time but you
@Forar guess I’m just too immature to let my participation go without being a dickhead, I suppose. I felt like I was involved with a discussion on relatively good terms until the information I brought to the thread in the last 10 hours was either dismissed outright, overlooked (could be accidental), or accused me of mischaracterizing it. I realize I’m not going to change minds here. At most maybe offer a different perspective.
diablo III - beardsnbeer#1508 Mechwarrior Online - Rusty Bock
One, the report itself is 5 years old and the shooting data is 9 years old, with the data stopping in 2010. Is this accurate?
Two, they exclude shootings where a family member is the victim. In other words, the Dayton shooting would be excluded. This blows my mind because domestic abuse is a huge red flag and seems to be one of the few common defining characteristics of mass shooters, which is also a newer discovery that the 5 year old report doesnt even mention.
Three, the subset of 84 shootings in 10 years doesnt even touch the amount of mass shootings (defined by their terms) we've had this year so far. It feels like a statistical blip in comparison to what our tragic turn has a nation has ground out into data since 2010.
The data is likely as accurate as it can be without another similar study being performed. I haven’t looked if ALERRT has any more current data published.
They did not exclude shootings where a family member is victim, but at least one victim had to be unrelated to the shooter. The Dayton shooting would certainly be included
One, the report itself is 5 years old and the shooting data is 9 years old, with the data stopping in 2010. Is this accurate?
Two, they exclude shootings where a family member is the victim. In other words, the Dayton shooting would be excluded. This blows my mind because domestic abuse is a huge red flag and seems to be one of the few common defining characteristics of mass shooters, which is also a newer discovery that the 5 year old report doesnt even mention.
Three, the subset of 84 shootings in 10 years doesnt even touch the amount of mass shootings (defined by their terms) we've had this year so far. It feels like a statistical blip in comparison to what our tragic turn has a nation has ground out into data since 2010.
The data is likely as accurate as it can be without another similar study being performed. I haven’t looked if ALERRT has any more current data published.
They did not exclude shootings where a family member is victim, but at least one victim had to be unrelated to the shooter. The Dayton shooting would certainly be included
It's an obscene number. It's unique to our country and our inability to enact sensible gun control laws. It terrifies me. Scrolling through that list made me tear up. Children, adults, at school, in your home, at a club, in a gym, in an office, on the street, at a store, at a fair, at your place of worship - gun violence has penetrated every aspect of our daily lives. More cops or better trained cops is not the answer when almost anyone can buy an AR-15 from fucking WalMart.
So yeah, I used some capslock to emphasize that it is absolutely insane what the number is that you asked for.
I see that you followed this non-post up with some racist dreck about gang shootings. I'll be stepping back out of the thread now, but surely you see the idiocy of a position that "certain victims who I think deserved it" shouldn't be statistically relevant when we talk about the prevalence of gun violence in America. Our country is sick with gun culture and gun access, and attitudes like yours are why we can't seem to treat this disease in any meaningful way.
I think this page pretty clearly demonstrates the absurdity of the American gun debate. People framing themselves as 'responsible gun owners' while advocating for the ability to purchase literal tanks.
It would be hilarious if the zealotry didn't kill so many people.
Mass shootings perpetrated by the state should absolutely count because the sheer number of guns and the attitude towards them in the US played an important and direct role in those people being shot.
If law enforcement justifies shooting citizens first and asking questions later by citing a fear that anyone could be armed at any moment, that is actually an incredibly strong endorsement for reducing or removing firearm availability. For the state as well.
And as for the number itself: it could be half of what it is and still be insane. A quarter. An eighth. The number isn’t the important part, and you can tell because that’s the only part detractors ever focus on. It’s the fact that amongst the countries the US tends to identify with and consider peers, none of them have this issue.
Mass shootings perpetrated by the state should absolutely count because the sheer number of guns and the attitude towards them in the US played an important and direct role in those people being shot.
If law enforcement justifies shooting citizens first and asking questions later by citing a fear that anyone could be armed at any moment, that is actually an incredibly strong endorsement for reducing or removing firearm availability. For the state as well.
So the state murdering people and then citing they are murdering people because the state is afraid people are armed, is a good argument for the state to disarm people.
That is an absolute nuclear take.
0
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
One, the report itself is 5 years old and the shooting data is 9 years old, with the data stopping in 2010. Is this accurate?
Two, they exclude shootings where a family member is the victim. In other words, the Dayton shooting would be excluded. This blows my mind because domestic abuse is a huge red flag and seems to be one of the few common defining characteristics of mass shooters, which is also a newer discovery that the 5 year old report doesnt even mention.
Three, the subset of 84 shootings in 10 years doesnt even touch the amount of mass shootings (defined by their terms) we've had this year so far. It feels like a statistical blip in comparison to what our tragic turn has a nation has ground out into data since 2010.
The data is likely as accurate as it can be without another similar study being performed. I haven’t looked if ALERRT has any more current data published.
They did not exclude shootings where a family member is victim, but at least one victim had to be unrelated to the shooter. The Dayton shooting would certainly be included
How many mass shootings have we had this year?
58 where at least 2 or more people were killed, over 200 with more than 2 injured. I can't speak to the gang shootings.
This information would probably be a lot easier to eek out if it wasn't illegal for the government to study it.
I’m reading through the wiki list now. Looks like an awful lot of shitty gang involvement. Especially in Chicago.
Oi
I think that well-debunked horse is quite dead can we have another not so dead horse?
Oh, sure, should we talk about the illegally obtained and served warrant in Houston being counted as a mass shooting on January 28th?
What it was 4 cops shot each other and murdered two home owners like fucking idiots.
Let’s count this one, too, January 19th, 2019 where a homeowner defended his property from 5 individuals, killing 3 and wounding 2 more. Also in Houston, TX.
SORRY I DONT ATTRIBUTE ALL OF THESE AS MASS SHOOTINGS OR THEY PAINT CRIMINALS AS VICTIMS (Police in Pecan Park incident, essentially a modern day Ruby Ridge but with less Janet Reno) OR A VALID DEFENSIVE GUN USE THAT NEVER HAPPENS IN REAL WORLD
"So It Goes" see I can capslock it too
I mean, do you have a reason why they shouldn't be counted?
You could make an argument that the state perpetrated the mass shooting against the homeowners and themselves, in a classic 3 Stooges miscue.
The individual who defended his home from a group of 5 people invading his home shouldn’t count, since he was most definitely in the right.
tbloxham I was just continuing to go off of ALERRT’s definition seeing as that doesn’t blow it out of proportion, seeing as the most concerning element seems to be Active Shooter Events at Business or School. I’m not going to pretend that people don’t get caught up in wrong place wrong time but you
Forar guess I’m just too immature to let my participation go without being a dickhead, I suppose. I felt like I was involved with a discussion on relatively good terms until the information I brought to the thread in the last 10 hours was either dismissed outright, overlooked (could be accidental), or accused me of mischaracterizing it. I realize I’m not going to change minds here. At most maybe offer a different perspective.
I'm calling the data into question because it's old and I'm unsure of its scientific validity, in part due to age. This is what should be done with data from any source.
I'm under no obligation to accept it as is, but I also dont feel like asking those questions necessitated the whole butwhataboutism of Chicago which is an overdone and overwrought talking point scratching post that has been scratched thin and it can barely stand on its own.
Chicago isn't even in the top 10 when it comes to gun deaths per capita, the only stat that really matters, so bringing it back feels like some sort of partisan hack cheap shot and serves overtime as a red herring. "But what about your big liberal city?" is a go-nowhere argument used to just shut shit down.
Mass shootings perpetrated by the state should absolutely count because the sheer number of guns and the attitude towards them in the US played an important and direct role in those people being shot.
If law enforcement justifies shooting citizens first and asking questions later by citing a fear that anyone could be armed at any moment, that is actually an incredibly strong endorsement for reducing or removing firearm availability. For the state as well.
So the state murdering people and then citing they are murdering people because the state is afraid people are armed, is a good argument for the state to disarm people.
That is an absolute nuclear take.
Well, the state should be disarmed first, but yes.
The problem with your approach is that you actually want the arms race to increase. I want it to go in the opposite direction, and for the police to have LESS access to guns, not more, to be in line with the rest of the developed world.
There is value in categorizing the different kinds of mass shootings when examining additional factors to target, but at the end of the day "multiple deaths enabled by a projectile weapon" is enough.
One, the report itself is 5 years old and the shooting data is 9 years old, with the data stopping in 2010. Is this accurate?
Two, they exclude shootings where a family member is the victim. In other words, the Dayton shooting would be excluded. This blows my mind because domestic abuse is a huge red flag and seems to be one of the few common defining characteristics of mass shooters, which is also a newer discovery that the 5 year old report doesnt even mention.
Three, the subset of 84 shootings in 10 years doesnt even touch the amount of mass shootings (defined by their terms) we've had this year so far. It feels like a statistical blip in comparison to what our tragic turn has a nation has ground out into data since 2010.
The data is likely as accurate as it can be without another similar study being performed. I haven’t looked if ALERRT has any more current data published.
They did not exclude shootings where a family member is victim, but at least one victim had to be unrelated to the shooter. The Dayton shooting would certainly be included
One, the report itself is 5 years old and the shooting data is 9 years old, with the data stopping in 2010. Is this accurate?
Two, they exclude shootings where a family member is the victim. In other words, the Dayton shooting would be excluded. This blows my mind because domestic abuse is a huge red flag and seems to be one of the few common defining characteristics of mass shooters, which is also a newer discovery that the 5 year old report doesnt even mention.
Three, the subset of 84 shootings in 10 years doesnt even touch the amount of mass shootings (defined by their terms) we've had this year so far. It feels like a statistical blip in comparison to what our tragic turn has a nation has ground out into data since 2010.
The data is likely as accurate as it can be without another similar study being performed. I haven’t looked if ALERRT has any more current data published.
They did not exclude shootings where a family member is victim, but at least one victim had to be unrelated to the shooter. The Dayton shooting would certainly be included
It's an obscene number. It's unique to our country and our inability to enact sensible gun control laws. It terrifies me. Scrolling through that list made me tear up. Children, adults, at school, in your home, at a club, in a gym, in an office, on the street, at a store, at a fair, at your place of worship - gun violence has penetrated every aspect of our daily lives. More cops or better trained cops is not the answer when almost anyone can buy an AR-15 from fucking WalMart.
So yeah, I used some capslock to emphasize that it is absolutely insane what the number is that you asked for.
I see that you followed this non-post up with some racist dreck about gang shootings. I'll be stepping back out of the thread now, but surely you see the idiocy of a position that "certain victims who I think deserved it" shouldn't be statistically relevant when we talk about the prevalence of gun violence in America. Our country is sick with gun culture and gun access, and attitudes like yours are why we can't seem to treat this disease in any meaningful way.
I don’t think anybody deserves to suffer violence. Unfortunately I recognize that humans are incredibly violent and some will inflict that on others.
I can look at the MO of the shootings, many of which are drive-bys as reported on Wikipedia, and presume that is typical gang bullshit. Nowhere did I mention race.
I can also figure that there are many innocent victims that are not involved with gang activity that suffer due to the nature of drive-bys or the uncoordinated hits attempted by the criminals. That is terrible.
Anyway, don’t try to paint me as some fucking boogeyman klansman because I think there is a difference between systemic violence in a city that seems to have a lot of incidents (also strict gun control but we all know it’s all Indiana’s fault) and some cocksucker shooting up an El Paso Walmart due to some racist beliefs.
diablo III - beardsnbeer#1508 Mechwarrior Online - Rusty Bock
Fucking seriously, I never once felt that any of our pro-second amendment posters -that have had a shelf life of more then a few months- were ever stupid on like a fundamental level.
Deluded, maybe
Values out of whack? Undoubtedly.
But like, I've agreed with posts of yours before on other subjects, verbatim.
And now I'm starting to think I must be an asshole too.
At least have the balls to quote me and just outright state you think I am an asshole imstead of being passive about it.
I did, said something, hit post, felt I had more to say and said it.
Don't pull your fake macho shit on me, you scared child.
ceres on
RedTide#1907 on Battle.net
Come Overwatch with meeeee
Fucking seriously, I never once felt that any of our pro-second amendment posters -that have had a shelf life of more then a few months- were ever stupid on like a fundamental level.
Deluded, maybe
Values out of whack? Undoubtedly.
But like, I've agreed with posts of yours before on other subjects, verbatim.
And now I'm starting to think I must be an asshole too.
At least have the balls to quote me and just outright state you think I am an asshole imstead of being passive about it.
I have to call you a goose instead, but I'm sure you understand the intent.
One, the report itself is 5 years old and the shooting data is 9 years old, with the data stopping in 2010. Is this accurate?
Two, they exclude shootings where a family member is the victim. In other words, the Dayton shooting would be excluded. This blows my mind because domestic abuse is a huge red flag and seems to be one of the few common defining characteristics of mass shooters, which is also a newer discovery that the 5 year old report doesnt even mention.
Three, the subset of 84 shootings in 10 years doesnt even touch the amount of mass shootings (defined by their terms) we've had this year so far. It feels like a statistical blip in comparison to what our tragic turn has a nation has ground out into data since 2010.
The data is likely as accurate as it can be without another similar study being performed. I haven’t looked if ALERRT has any more current data published.
They did not exclude shootings where a family member is victim, but at least one victim had to be unrelated to the shooter. The Dayton shooting would certainly be included
One, the report itself is 5 years old and the shooting data is 9 years old, with the data stopping in 2010. Is this accurate?
Two, they exclude shootings where a family member is the victim. In other words, the Dayton shooting would be excluded. This blows my mind because domestic abuse is a huge red flag and seems to be one of the few common defining characteristics of mass shooters, which is also a newer discovery that the 5 year old report doesnt even mention.
Three, the subset of 84 shootings in 10 years doesnt even touch the amount of mass shootings (defined by their terms) we've had this year so far. It feels like a statistical blip in comparison to what our tragic turn has a nation has ground out into data since 2010.
The data is likely as accurate as it can be without another similar study being performed. I haven’t looked if ALERRT has any more current data published.
They did not exclude shootings where a family member is victim, but at least one victim had to be unrelated to the shooter. The Dayton shooting would certainly be included
It's an obscene number. It's unique to our country and our inability to enact sensible gun control laws. It terrifies me. Scrolling through that list made me tear up. Children, adults, at school, in your home, at a club, in a gym, in an office, on the street, at a store, at a fair, at your place of worship - gun violence has penetrated every aspect of our daily lives. More cops or better trained cops is not the answer when almost anyone can buy an AR-15 from fucking WalMart.
So yeah, I used some capslock to emphasize that it is absolutely insane what the number is that you asked for.
I see that you followed this non-post up with some racist dreck about gang shootings. I'll be stepping back out of the thread now, but surely you see the idiocy of a position that "certain victims who I think deserved it" shouldn't be statistically relevant when we talk about the prevalence of gun violence in America. Our country is sick with gun culture and gun access, and attitudes like yours are why we can't seem to treat this disease in any meaningful way.
I don’t think anybody deserves to suffer violence. Unfortunately I recognize that humans are incredibly violent and some will inflict that on others.
I can look at the MO of the shootings, many of which are drive-bys as reported on Wikipedia, and presume that is typical gang bullshit. Nowhere did I mention race.
I can also figure that there are many innocent victims that are not involved with gang activity that suffer due to the nature of drive-bys or the uncoordinated hits attempted by the criminals. That is terrible.
Anyway, don’t try to paint me as some fucking boogeyman klansman because I think there is a difference between systemic violence in a city that seems to have a lot of incidents (also strict gun control but we all know it’s all Indiana’s fault) and some cocksucker shooting up an El Paso Walmart due to some racist beliefs.
And yet there’s one extremely important common element to them.
Posts
248.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States_in_2019
Ahem, I'm sorry.
TWO HUNDRED AND FUCKING FORTY EIGHT.
58 where at least 2 or more people were killed, over 200 with more than 2 injured. I can't speak to the gang shootings.
This information would probably be a lot easier to eek out if it wasn't illegal for the government to study it.
Cool capital letters
I’m reading through the wiki list now. Looks like an awful lot of shitty gang involvement. Especially in Chicago.
There’s nothing that will get through to that guy
He thinks bazookas and tanks should be available for civilian use
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
Oi
I think that well-debunked horse is quite dead can we have another not so dead horse?
Oh, sure, should we talk about the illegally obtained and served warrant in Houston being counted as a mass shooting on January 28th?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pecan_Park_raid
What it was 4 cops shot each other and murdered two home owners like fucking idiots.
Let’s count this one, too, January 19th, 2019 where a homeowner defended his property from 5 individuals, killing 3 and wounding 2 more. Also in Houston, TX.
SORRY I DONT ATTRIBUTE ALL OF THESE AS MASS SHOOTINGS OR THEY PAINT CRIMINALS AS VICTIMS (Police in Pecan Park incident, essentially a modern day Ruby Ridge but with less Janet Reno) OR A VALID DEFENSIVE GUN USE THAT NEVER HAPPENS IN REAL WORLD
@So It Goes see I can capslock it too
Who said they were black? Fuck that is awful to say
Edit:
I hope y’all realize that I am not diminishing anybody’s losses due to violence, and I am most definitely acting like an obnoxious asshole
I think bazookas and tanks with working guns should be legal to purchase without a tax stamp. Right now they are NFA items (at least the gun on the tank is, a tank with a deactivated gun is entirely legal without a tax stamp) and legal.
Lol it is always the same upper middle class white people throwing this out. I grew up in the type of neighborhoods where gang violence exists. I have even posted about it in past threads and how violence is experienced in those neighborhoods anecdotally. You can save the "you don't care about black people" for someone else.
Yeah that’s fucking insane
The people who wrote the 2nd amendment never intended to put this kind of weaponry in the hands of civilians.
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
Except all those privately owned gunships with guns on them which existed then.
Couldn't very well show up to church social if you didn't have a gunship like all your neighbors
Steam - Talon Valdez :Blizz - Talonious#1860 : Xbox Live & LoL - Talonious Monk @TaloniousMonk Hail Satan
Good luck farming the agrees with this tripe lol.
...
Why?
Says the tank guy
Come Overwatch with meeeee
I mean, do you have a reason why they shouldn't be counted?
He did, he saved it for dead legend, who said that mass shootings in Chicago (which having reviewed the list did indeed kill and injure overwhelmingly black people) should not be considered in the same light as other shootings because they were ‘gang activity’.
Every post you make disgusts me.
Steam - Talon Valdez :Blizz - Talonious#1860 : Xbox Live & LoL - Talonious Monk @TaloniousMonk Hail Satan
There was also one in Allendale, South Carolina
Good. My hope is to disgust people with authoritarian policy preferences.
Deluded, maybe
Values out of whack? Undoubtedly.
But like, I've agreed with posts of yours before on other subjects, verbatim.
And now I'm starting to think I must be an asshole too.
Come Overwatch with meeeee
It’s not like the US is having it’s numbers inflated by defining ‘mass shooting’ to have a broader application than other countries to make it seem worse by comparison. It’s the same standard being applied everywhere.
It actually is not the same standard, even in the US.
At least have the balls to quote me and just outright state you think I am an asshole imstead of being passive about it.
You could make an argument that the state perpetrated the mass shooting against the homeowners and themselves, in a classic 3 Stooges miscue.
The individual who defended his home from a group of 5 people invading his home shouldn’t count, since he was most definitely in the right.
@tbloxham I was just continuing to go off of ALERRT’s definition seeing as that doesn’t blow it out of proportion, seeing as the most concerning element seems to be Active Shooter Events at Business or School. I’m not going to pretend that people don’t get caught up in wrong place wrong time but you
@Forar guess I’m just too immature to let my participation go without being a dickhead, I suppose. I felt like I was involved with a discussion on relatively good terms until the information I brought to the thread in the last 10 hours was either dismissed outright, overlooked (could be accidental), or accused me of mischaracterizing it. I realize I’m not going to change minds here. At most maybe offer a different perspective.
It's an obscene number. It's unique to our country and our inability to enact sensible gun control laws. It terrifies me. Scrolling through that list made me tear up. Children, adults, at school, in your home, at a club, in a gym, in an office, on the street, at a store, at a fair, at your place of worship - gun violence has penetrated every aspect of our daily lives. More cops or better trained cops is not the answer when almost anyone can buy an AR-15 from fucking WalMart.
So yeah, I used some capslock to emphasize that it is absolutely insane what the number is that you asked for.
I see that you followed this non-post up with some racist dreck about gang shootings. I'll be stepping back out of the thread now, but surely you see the idiocy of a position that "certain victims who I think deserved it" shouldn't be statistically relevant when we talk about the prevalence of gun violence in America. Our country is sick with gun culture and gun access, and attitudes like yours are why we can't seem to treat this disease in any meaningful way.
It would be hilarious if the zealotry didn't kill so many people.
If law enforcement justifies shooting citizens first and asking questions later by citing a fear that anyone could be armed at any moment, that is actually an incredibly strong endorsement for reducing or removing firearm availability. For the state as well.
And as for the number itself: it could be half of what it is and still be insane. A quarter. An eighth. The number isn’t the important part, and you can tell because that’s the only part detractors ever focus on. It’s the fact that amongst the countries the US tends to identify with and consider peers, none of them have this issue.
So the state murdering people and then citing they are murdering people because the state is afraid people are armed, is a good argument for the state to disarm people.
That is an absolute nuclear take.
I'm calling the data into question because it's old and I'm unsure of its scientific validity, in part due to age. This is what should be done with data from any source.
I'm under no obligation to accept it as is, but I also dont feel like asking those questions necessitated the whole butwhataboutism of Chicago which is an overdone and overwrought talking point scratching post that has been scratched thin and it can barely stand on its own.
Chicago isn't even in the top 10 when it comes to gun deaths per capita, the only stat that really matters, so bringing it back feels like some sort of partisan hack cheap shot and serves overtime as a red herring. "But what about your big liberal city?" is a go-nowhere argument used to just shut shit down.
Well, the state should be disarmed first, but yes.
The problem with your approach is that you actually want the arms race to increase. I want it to go in the opposite direction, and for the police to have LESS access to guns, not more, to be in line with the rest of the developed world.
I don’t think anybody deserves to suffer violence. Unfortunately I recognize that humans are incredibly violent and some will inflict that on others.
I can look at the MO of the shootings, many of which are drive-bys as reported on Wikipedia, and presume that is typical gang bullshit. Nowhere did I mention race.
I can also figure that there are many innocent victims that are not involved with gang activity that suffer due to the nature of drive-bys or the uncoordinated hits attempted by the criminals. That is terrible.
Anyway, don’t try to paint me as some fucking boogeyman klansman because I think there is a difference between systemic violence in a city that seems to have a lot of incidents (also strict gun control but we all know it’s all Indiana’s fault) and some cocksucker shooting up an El Paso Walmart due to some racist beliefs.
I did, said something, hit post, felt I had more to say and said it.
Don't pull your fake macho shit on me, you scared child.
Come Overwatch with meeeee
I have to call you a goose instead, but I'm sure you understand the intent.
And yet there’s one extremely important common element to them.
I dont think anyone is trying to argue every mass shooter has the same motivation.