Another mass shooting

It's irrelevant, because there's also another exclusionary factor involved-

This occurred in a private home, and is therefore not a "mass shooting".

See how the "categories" game is played?

 

well thank the ****ing stars I did not do that. I made a suggestion that individuals should get training...NOTHING more.

 

Of course the people in DC do not understand it, but why would they when we keep sending them back?

Anyone that votes for the duopoly has no room to cry about it

 

so you are just making **** up.

Thanks

 

THANK YOU! Now we know "why" it wasn't "big" news, surprised?

 

Except the press did not know who did it, so that cannot be why.

Seems more likely it is just not news worthy anymore, it does not sell papers or clicks.

As a country we are just like "ho hum, another shooting, what do you want for lunch"

 

No one is going to shed a tear over 5 deaths when the media ignores 3,000 shootings in Chicago every year...

 

Good point. I wonder if the killer was taking psychiatric drugs.

 

Which is sort of the point of my OP. We have gotten to the point to where this is not even news any longer.

That is a bad thing, but many cannot see that for some odd reason

 

I think we ALL think it is a bad thing. What turns people off is politicians using atrocities to secure power instead of seriously trying to tackle the root cause of the atrocities. Its not guns. The use of guns in atrocities is how the problem reveals itself, but it is not the root problem. We need to tackle the root problem.

 

Well duh -- the Democrats are trying to pass gun their gun control agenda through Congress.
So far, in 2021, there have been more mass shootings, and people killed in mass shootings, than in 2020 and 2019, combined

 

I saw a short piece somewhere saying he had been on some drugs and that the doctor had taken him off those drugs.

 

Well they care if it is someone they know. But you are right. People have gotten so used t them and therefore have developed a high tolerance for them. They are simply part of the cultural norm.Even with the standard "thoughts and prayers" folks have become hardened/ jaded to them. What other nation can say that mass / and other shootings are simply part of their norm??

 

That seems to be a common thing among killers. Its easier to go after law abiding gun owners than the mighty pharm industry.

 

Unfortunately that is not even close to being true.

417 mass shootings in 2019 and 611 in 2020. Year 2019 was a bad one, until 2020 came and mass lawlessness descended on the US.

There has been 130 mass shootings this year, so it looks like it will be somewhere between 2019 and 2020 numbers.

 

Fortunately, that is not even close to being true.
2019: 7 shootings, 65 dead.
2020: 2 shootings, 9 deaths.
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data/
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-weapons-and-mass-shootings-in-the-us.582922/

 

Are you including mass shootings perpetrated by black gang members?

You can't do that, it's racist.

 

Is there a reason why it should be "whites only"?

The numbers are what they are.

417 mass shootings in 2019
611 mass shootings in 2020

People are only fooling themselves by trying to look at only one type of scenario, like what the other poster is trying to do.

 

Yes, because acknowledging that blacks are responsible for more gun crime than whites goes against the proper progressive narrative.

You need to play classification and categorization tricks in order to push the narrative that right wing white racists are the biggest threat, or else you're a radical right wing racist.

And you need to hide your tricks in the fine print-

Our research focused on indiscriminate rampages in public places resulting in four or more victims killed by the attacker. We exclude shootings stemming from more conventionally motivated crimes such as armed robbery or gang violence.

 

When "mass shooting" means whatever you want it mean, it means nothing.

 

Gun crimes in progressive-politician-run blue cities are out of control.

Yes, I am well aware of the problem.

 

That's why your numbers are not credible to describe the real situation, but they do mention the fact that they only count certain types of shootings. Why you try to sell that as the full picture is beyond me.

My numbers represent the actual picture and they do not try to re-define "mass shooting". The numbers are according to the existing definition (four or more victims).

 

That may be what you have been told to believe, but the problem exists in blue and red cities. For example Fort Worth, TX murders nearly doubled recently.

The wheels fell off of this nation in past few years, but lets hope it was only temporary. The partisan blame-shifting won't solve anything.

 

They are.

As noted in the source:
Our research focused on indiscriminate rampages in public places resulting in four or more victims killed by the attacker. We exclude shootings stemming from more conventionally motivated crimes such as armed robbery or gang violence. (Or in which the perpetrators have not been identified.) Other news outlets and researchers have since published larger tallies that include a wide range of gun crimes in which four or more people have been either wounded or killed. While those larger datasets of multiple-victim shootings are useful for studying the broader problem of gun violence, our investigation provides an in-depth look at a distinct phenomenon—from the firearms used and mental health factors to the growing copycat problem. Tracking mass shootings is complex; we believe ours is the most useful approach for studying this specific phenomenon.

As I then noted:
The Obama administration, seeking to bolster its gun control agenda, changed the definition of 'mass shootings' in 2013 to include 3, rather than 4, deaths per incident. As these shootings are not represented in the data set prior to 2013, they are excluded from the data set from 2013 and later.

If you do not have a meaningful definition of "mass shooting", your numbers mean nothing.

 

The definition is very meaningful.

To you a shooting is not a shooting unless it meets a very narrow set of characteristics. Your source admits it they are studying one "specific phenomenon" . They (mother jones) look ONLY at high profile shootings. It is one way to look at it, but you are trying to argue it is the ONLY way to define a shooting, or mass shooting.

Shooting = the action or practice of shooting with a gun.

Should it have something to do with mental health, or 'copycat' problem? No, the word is what it is, and its makes no sense to argue that a shooting is not a shooting unless the moon and the stars lined up when it happened. If a gang-banger shoots five people, then its a mass shooting because he used a firearm (act of shooting) and it resulted in multiple people being killed of injured. What would you call such incident? A fist fight? Why not just call it for what it is?