• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    81 year ago

    So you’ll only care about children dying in school when the numbers go up even higher than they already are?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        61 year ago

        There is no widely-accepted definition of “mass shooting” and different organizations tracking such incidents use different definitions. Definitions of mass shootings exclude warfare and sometimes exclude instances of gang violence, armed robberies, familicides and terrorism.

        Maybe it has something to do with it not being any kind of official term and your panties are twisted over how the media writes them up ignoring the pain and suffering from others and building your strawman off semantics?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            31 year ago

            Why are you like this? So since every mass shooting isn’t worse than the worst one they don’t matter? Stop making up excuses. I’m don’t with you.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                21 year ago

                Read very carefully please. It doesn’t matter what people call it, children dying to gun violence at school should not be happening, one per incident or 50 per incident is irrelevant, and the only difference between the US and first world nations where it doesn’t happen is our gun culture.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        21 year ago

        You have no idea how badly you’ve outed yourself as living in a little bubble where you think it will never happen to you, so you don’t care.

        Because you’ll never be in a relationship with a domestic abuser that executes a house full of people will you? You’re the gun owning male, so you get to decide who around you lives or dies.

        4 innocent people were killed – a number that is much more difficult to achieve without a gun – but you don’t want them counted because they knew the gun owner.

        You’ve let the gun lobby turn you into a fucking sociopath.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            41 year ago

            That doesn’t make a murder/suicide a “mass shooting”. I’m sorry apporoaching this rationally has you so upset

            Thanks, I love this reply. It’s only two sentences, but its so fantastically revealing.

            The first sentences calls your very own example a “murder/suicide”, a term which is unquestionably more misleading than “mass shooting”. The “murder” isn’t even plural, despite there being 4 of them.

            If you gathered up a million people, told half of them it was a murder/suicide and half of them it was a mass shooting, then asked them to guess the number of people killed, the latter would easily be closer to the truth.

            The second sentence just makes it clear you’re a fuckstain.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                21 year ago

                This isn’t high school debate class. Ad hominem means you’re not inherently wrong just because you’re a fuckwit. You can still be wrong and you can still be a fuckwit.

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    21 year ago

                    They’re a lost cause too because before I called you a fuckwit, I pointed out that you were only interested in being misleading in your favor, not actually stopping people from being mislead.

                    You took “ad hominem” as an easy out and as an added bonus, you were misleading about what ad hominem means.

      • prole
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 year ago

        I don’t really understand why it fucking matters. It is literally the number one cause of death among young people in this country. This happens nowhere else in the modern world. It’s unacceptable.

        Stop trying to make the conversation about semantics

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            41 year ago

            It matters because the Gun Violence Archive and the uncritical mass media are inflating the statistic to make people scared so they can push an agenda

            Bullshit. You’re attacking it because it’s counter to your agenda.

            Republicans, right-wing media, the gun lobby and the pro-gun community routinely fearmonger as a way to boost their own profits and power.

            Not only do you not care when they do it, you’ve enthusiastically put yourself and your own family in more danger because of it.

            You’re hopelessly compromised and your thoughts about how gun violence statistics are about as trustworthy as a cops views on police brutality statistics.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                51 year ago

                My agenda is “words mean things”

                If that was actually your agenda, this wouldn’t be your position. You want to lower the statistic using semantics and as an added bonus, take away the vocabulary needed to discuss a huge percentage of gun violence.

                The difference is, in scenario #1, nobody went to the party intending to shoot anyone. You can’t say the same for scenario #2.

                5 people were shot. Intentional vs accidental, premeditated vs impulse, none of that changes the fact that 5 people were shot and the event was a mass shooting.

                Even in your own example that you made as contrived as you needed, 3 innocent people were still shot and swept under the rug.

                The organizations you’re rallying against are completely open about their definitions, making them far more honest than you’re being.

                I’m sorry if that hurts your guns feelings.

                  • prole
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    21 year ago

                    You know what would be a pretty interesting way to look at this would be?

                    Lets take every modern nation in the world (we can bicker about what “modern” means later), and lets create a database similar to the one you’re taking issue with for each of those nations.

                    We can be just as uncharitable (or is it charitable?) in our definition of “mass shooting”… The exact issue you’re having here right? You think that these statistics unfairly show the US in a negative light.

                    Well how about we take a look, by that same criteria, how many “mass shootings” these other nations have. Hell, we can even do it per-capita.

                    How do you think that would look?