5 shot overnight in Aurora, at least one suspect at large

Good point.

 

No its not intellectually dishonest. When you qualify the study parameters you are being open and above board.


So you think that because the FBI uses a different definition related only to actual killings they are involved with,
the fact there are nearly 2 incidents a day in America where at least 4 people are injured by gunfire is intellectually dishonest?

\Look in the mirror, man.

 

You keep leaving out the "...if it is intended to include as many shootings as possible..." part of my post.
I don't wonder why.

Nowhere here do I see you telling us why we should not use the FBI definition.
Well?

 

Yes it was intended to cover as many incidents where more than 4 people were hurt in single instances of gun related violence. What part of that do you not understand?

Use it all you want if you ONLY want to discuss incidents where the cut off to qualify is 4 dead bodies.

too nuanced for you?

 

Yes. To bump up the numbers, for political purposes.
Thus, intellectually dishonest.

 

Does it? I haven't seen that distinction, and don't believe it's applied. I wouldn't be surprised though. The progressives who keep track of these things are surely looking for ways to twist the narrative. Tough choice... keep the "100's of mass shootings a year" stat, or settle for a handful of crazy white dudes.

 

iguess the blowing up of high ranking non white politicians by white lunatics takes precedence in this case, shame on the media damn race traitors huh

 

Is that you Kaepernick?

 

they do both, they just ignore the majority of the non white shooters and over cover the white shooters. double bonus is white shooter/minority victim = shooter is now household name.