Misleading information and data on shootings

Status
Not open for further replies.

DustyGmt

Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2016
Messages
3,995
Location
Green Mountains
I looked at this article published in VOX and according to these people there have been 2000+ mass shootings in the US since sandy hook. Anybody else here take issue with that number?

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...Vaw3aGLkq_pn99FpCknld-uzj&cshid=1566027948260


Is there a new definition of "mass shooting". I looked up some of the highlighted areas to try to find reports of mass shootings and could not find any. It seems to me that these are just lies in an attempt to exaggerate the dire threat of shootings. Somebody last week told me it was something like 200+ since the Vegas shooter and I just dont believe it. I think these reports are bogus.
 
Last edited:
Many of those 2000 mass shootings were part of normal everyday gang activity across the country.

You know, the type of everyday stuff that accounts for much more death than the random acts of domestic terrorism that constitute the majority of what we know as the more mainstream definition of mass shootings.

I would think that the premeditated action of going into a gun free zone armed for war so you pick off people like fish in a barrel would merit its own definition and term.
 
Not really. It's unusual when four or more people are shot in acts of gang violence.

Ok fair enough. What would be a typical example of one that does not make headlines or stir politics?

Here is a not so typical example that happened around my parts. Husband murders his wife and kids and then commits suicide. Only 4 dead and one was self inflicted. Would this be counted?
 
It's hard to say. Apparently some of these "mass shootings" never make the national news.

Some big city drive by shootings have high counts. This one happened in Chicago.

https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/incident/1468091

I’m not trying to be difficult here and this is only speculation on my part but this example reeks of gangland type violence. I get it. If there are no suspects or arrests it is hard to really tell if it is gang related or not. I’m sort of curious how many more gang type mass shootings there are that are not classified as such.

I guess the thread title is working quite well in this instance.
 
I would think that the premeditated action of going into a gun free zone armed for war so you pick off people like fish in a barrel would merit its own definition and term.

Yeah, they know this is what everybody associates with that term so they fluff up the numbers with pretty typical examples of gun violence to keep people in an energized state of panic. I'm pretty sure that's what's going on here.
 
I looked at this article published in VOX and according to these people there have been 2000+ mass shootings in the US since sandy hook. Anybody else here take issue with that number?

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...Vaw3aGLkq_pn99FpCknld-uzj&cshid=1566027948260


Is there a new definition of "mass shooting". I looked up some of the highlighted areas to try to find reports of mass shootings and could not find any. It seems to me that these are just lies in an attempt to exaggerate the dire threat of shootings. Somebody last week told me it was something like 200+ since the Vegas shooter and I just dont believe it. I think these reports are bogus.

Actually, if you take mass shooting from mass murder, the FBI used to state 4 or more people killed at a singular location/event with no cooling off period to qualify as mass murder. So a mass shooting would involve 4 or more people shot at a singular event. There are indeed a LOT of such shootings.

Now by the other extreme, pro gun folks want to narrow the definition as far as possible. The only want to include non-gang, public mass events where 4 or more people are shot and often (following Mother Jones) want it to first be a mass murder before qualifying as a mass shooting.

Note that a mass murder doesn't care if it is gang-related, drug-related, familial, occupational, public, private, random, targeted, etc. Do you have any qualms with calling mass murders "mass murders" based on the FBI standard?
 
I looked at this article published in VOX and according to these people there have been 2000+ mass shootings in the US since sandy hook. Anybody else here take issue with that number?

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...Vaw3aGLkq_pn99FpCknld-uzj&cshid=1566027948260


Is there a new definition of "mass shooting". I looked up some of the highlighted areas to try to find reports of mass shootings and could not find any. It seems to me that these are just lies in an attempt to exaggerate the dire threat of shootings. Somebody last week told me it was something like 200+ since the Vegas shooter and I just dont believe it. I think these reports are bogus.

VOX is Communist and can be discarded in less than a New York Minute.:D
 
Not really. It's unusual when four or more people are shot in acts of gang violence.

It’s unusual when 4 or more people are shot in any act of violence. Gang violence accounts for the vast majority of gun related homicides and I’d bet a pretty penny that gang violence accounts for the majority of “mass shootings” however you happen to define it.
 
I've checked out few incidents in the GVA. Turns out that known gang involvement in mass shootings is not all that unusual.

Gun Violence Archive lists all the mass killings. That organization lists gang involvement of shooter/s, if known. In many cases it's not known whether there was gang involvement or not. In this case there was known gang involvement:

https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/incident/1426537

There may have been gang involvement in this one:

https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/incident/1405196

This happened at a graduation party:

https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/incident/1398553

Click on Incident in the right hand column.
 
I would like to see some data concerning premeditated shootings that occur in public places with a semi automatic rifle. That is I'm betting the scenario in which most people associate with the term "mass shooting". When the average uninformed person hears a statistic like "2,186 mass shootings since sandy hook" I think they assume they are scenarios similar to sandy hook. When they report these incidents the way they do, it's almost always with a push for AWB and stricter gun control.
 
I've checked out few incidents in the GVA. Turns out that known gang involvement in mass shootings is not all that unusual.

Even where it's not indicated, it often is. There are two "mass shootings" listed in 2019 that are in my area. Both were and only one article linked at GVA even hints at it. Knowing people in law enforcement helps. Trust me, it was gang related. Also, I believe Vox had an earlier version of this which was just an interactive map where you could scroll around and see the details. I checked one of the "mass shootings" in a rural area of the country (I think it was Montana) and three seconds of searching the internet revealed it was a drug deal of some kind. That's far and away different from something like Parkland or whatever.

The bigger point here:
This is why we shouldn't give the opposition any leeway to control the narrative. I know a lot of people here don't think it's worthwhile to raise objections to terminology, and in some cases they may be right. Debating minutiae like "assault weapon" vs. MSR between ourselves is pointless. But if we let it go unchecked where it's out there for public consumption, we're ceding a big part of the debate. So these things do matter. If we let "mass shooting" be this all encompassing term that only checks body counts, then we allow the idea that yearly, there's hundreds of events similar to the headline-grabbing ones. To me, that's not acceptable.
 
Vox is openly in favor of universal lawful citizen disarmament. Despite the fact that they routinely send their reporters into places that are news worthy due to criminals having guns.

Over-stating the level of violence plays into their political aims.

And, to be fair, Vox is based in the mega-cities where this sort of criminal violence is common. So, the fact that, for the rest of us, removing the top 10 most violent cities more accurately describes "our" risk is of no consequence to them. That, and we are all the ignorant rube who live out in the sticks and don't much matter. Except for providing them food, water, power, and chattel goods, of course.
 
Sd
Vox is openly in favor of universal lawful citizen disarmament. Despite the fact that they routinely send their reporters into places that are news worthy due to criminals having guns.

Over-stating the level of violence plays into their political aims.

And, to be fair, Vox is based in the mega-cities where this sort of criminal violence is common. So, the fact that, for the rest of us, removing the top 10 most violent cities more accurately describes "our" risk is of no consequence to them. That, and we are all the ignorant rube who live out in the sticks and don't much matter. Except for providing them food, water, power, and chattel goods, of course.

It is far more than that. More than any other far left organization, VOX is Stalinist and wants a "big brother" run government, no matter that that always leads to mass genocide, death camps, and total indoctrination of the civilian population

VOX is pure evil and has to be approached and read as such.
 
Remember as well that while the number of "mass shootings" is hyped very badly when they want to bolster their propaganda (for that's what is, plain and simple...) any shootings in Democrat controlled area are either downplayed -or not reported at all. I can remember years ago when Miami was wild and lawless -when bad stuff involving firearms was a daily occurrence - and widely reported (so widely that tourists from overseas quite coming here....) while the mayhem in places like Chicago and Baltimore was rarely reported at all...

Whenever the side that opposes our rights under the second amendment starts shouting opinion polls just add the word "Democrat" in front of whatever poll they're citing....
 
Folks on gun boards often talk about high violent crime rates in those awful "liberal" cities Fact is there are some very violent cities in "conservative" states.

St. Louis is the most violent city in the US. Memphis is #3, Kansas City #7, Indianapolis #10, Atlanta #13, Nashville #15, Miami #20, Wichita #21, Houston #22, New Orleans #24, Orlando #25

https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/most-dangerous-cities-in-the-united-states.html

Chicago don't even get an honorable mention on the list of most violent US cities.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top