It is interesting. We are essentially getting two opposite positions. There is your argument ("they only report white men shooting people, not minorities") vs. the other argument (which appears to be that minority oriented shootings are not real mass shootings and shouldn't count).
Yeah, I remember when a trans shooter shot up a school in Tennessee recently. It was crazy, I had to go to Tennessee and do my own detective work on this situation because it was totally unreported in the media. Derrr.
They let a trans libbie do work on school shootings? I doubt that. Even Tennessee wouldn’t let your shady ass near their schools.
The libbie media reported this potential shooter, including a photo clearly indicating that they are not white.
You say the funniest things! I love it when you make awesome comments instead of just drive-by negs and not funny gifs. Keep it up please!
Even that gets a bit sketchy as a criteria though. It kind of depends on how we define "random." Do we mean that some of the individuals were shot at random, all of the individuals were shot at random, the event was chosen at random, etc? For example, the Sandy Hook shooter killed his mother (a directed killing) and then went to go kill her class for some reason. Is that random? Ultimately, I suspect this entire divergence though is to avoid having to actually identify how many shooters were actually trans as a percentage of mass shootings. For example, here is a narrow measure of mass shootings ("only" showing 192 of the event). Of those events, 1 was committed by a transgendered person, 4 by females, and 187 by males. That would mean the mass shooting percentage by transgendered people, according to this classification system, would be 0.5%. Key Findings - Comprehensive Mass Shooter Data - The Violence Project
I’m glad you came along to join the too hot crowd. Just when I thought libbies couldn’t get any worse…you show up. You definitely make all the resident libbies look better. Perspective.
Things is precisely why the debate never moves forward. The overt conflation of statistics. 5 gang bangers shooting it out on a Saturday night in a middle school Parking lot is neither a ‘school shooting’ nor is it a ‘mass shooting’. One side of the debate considers it both and knowingly uses those to inflate the numbers. It’s the same as suicides are considered ‘gun violence’. Purposely to inflate and conflate. But back to the topic. Take a look at last 12-18 months of the real mass shooters and let’s find out. Maybe you’re right.
I notice that you still haven't answered the question. You just are excluding with no criteria for inclusion. Perhaps that is why the debate never moves forward. I don't think the question was unreasonable and it still hasn't been answered. I will ask it again: what makes something a "true" mass shooting vs. not mass shooting?
. We can both do that. I’ll make it easy for you. Simple yes or no. Does 5 gang bangers shooting it out at 2am at the local high school count as a mass shooting ? Is that a school shooting ?
There is no serious person that considers the above a mass shooting. Media. Of course they do Memphis Mass Shooting: Two Killed, 16 Injured As Gunfire Erupts During Block Party In Orange Mound - News18
Again, I asked a simple question. You are avoiding it. The question is what is a mass shooting? You are trying to exclude with absolutely no inclusion criteria. Would it be fair to say that your criteria is essentially racial? If not, then what is it?
Def not a school shooting. The first Q, though, makes no sense. I'm not sure why the need to get lost in the weeds on mass shooting criteria. The U.S. has a gun violence problem, whether the statistics are inflated or not.
