That is the question that I, also as an outsider, ask.
Or almost anyone who's not in the US.
There's a reason for that repeated Onion story.
That is the question that I, also as an outsider, ask.
And who was/what was that incident?
A likely almost mass shooting.
A man was arrested after entering an Atlanta supermarket with two rifles, three pistols, and body armor.
Look, a squirrel!![]()
Probably because they don't fit the narrative. Most mass shootings are either dudes killing their families or gang related and typically use a pistol.Yeah, not a surprising response.
Between the Atlanta shooting and the Colorado shooting there were seven other mass shootings and two more since, for a total of 106 mass shootings so far this year. Why are they mostly ignored?
Look, a squirrel.
Yeah, not a surprising response.
Between the Atlanta shooting and the Colorado shooting there were seven other mass shootings and two more since, for a total of 106 mass shootings so far this year. Why are they mostly ignored?
Look, a squirrel.
Probably because they don't fit the narrative. Most mass shootings are either dudes killing their families or gang related and typically use a pistol.
They also don't make most folks go,"****, that could happen to me!"
White squirrels fascinate the forum. Other squirrels, they try to avert their eyes to. At a gut-feeling guess, it's because these overwhelmingly white posters think "it's okay to condemn one of Us, but not one of Them". It's creepy, this Us v Them undercurrent of thought.
Yes, and again: "black mass killers are #BlackPeopleProblems. Expected, accepted, and uninteresting. But if a white shooter shows up at a movie theater or supermarket, hey man, THIS is something to talk about".
The conversation about Today's Mass Shooting should be centered on guns, and their availability. A skeptic should never drop this "why is it always a white guy" race-baiting.
The "But the Blacks" argument is simply the "Look a Squirrel" argument for racists.
The "poverty + dense population" argument doesn't hold water either.
If one takes a look at the 10 most murderous counties and independent cities in America, you will notice that low population density does not correlate with low murder rates.
For example:
Coahoma County, Mississippi – population per square mile is 45, homicide rate is 37 per 100,000.
Phillips County, Arkansas – population per square mile is 31, homicide rate is 31 per 100,000.
Macon County, Alabama – population per square mile is 35, homicide rate is 27 per 100,000.
District of Columbia – population per square mile is 9856, homicide rate is 27 per 100,000.
Washington County, Mississippi – population per square mile is 71, homicide rate is 25 per 100,000.
Dallas County, Alabama – population per square mile is 45, homicide rate is 25 per 100,000.
(I added DC for comparison.)
Five of the deadliest counties in the country have population density below the average in Appalachia, which is 115 per square mile.
White squirrels fascinate the forum. Other squirrels, they try to avert their eyes to. At a gut-feeling guess, it's because these overwhelmingly white posters think "it's okay to condemn one of Us, but not one of Them". It's creepy, this Us v Them undercurrent of thought.
Yes, and again: "black mass killers are #BlackPeopleProblems. Expected, accepted, and uninteresting. But if a white shooter shows up at a movie theater or supermarket, hey man, THIS is something to talk about".
The conversation about Today's Mass Shooting should be centered on guns, and their availability. A skeptic should never drop this "why is it always a white guy" race-baiting.
You seem to have forgotten poverty.
That strikes me as unfair.
When the news talks about mass shooters, they normally mean spree killings by maniacs, not crimes of violence that are explained by more mundane criminal motives.
If a white person kills his whole family, it does not get the same coverage that someone walking into a synagogue with a shotgun might, even if bodycount is similar.
The trope of the gunman attacking public places and killing people who are usually strangers is one that grabs more attention than more routine murders, even those with larger body counts. A triple murder during a robbery is a heinous crime, but it doesn't grab attention like these spectacular spree shootings, which often might be rightly described as incidents of domestic terrorism.
It has more to do with the victims, and how/why they were selected, than with whether the gunman is white or not. Walking into a grocery store and firing indiscriminately, for no understandable criminal motive other than to cause misery, is something that grabs headlines.
Up next we will show how police are cool with serial killers by pointing out how many police in the US technically fit the definition of serial killer of 2 or more killings with a cool down period between them. Why police really go to bat to keep these serial killers on the job.
I still don't understand how race is at all relevant to Boulder shooting. It's clearly random victim shooting, thus not relevant to gang violence. It's clearly mental health issue, and those are pretty race neutral. So why even go there ?
This is problem of mental care and gun control. Marginally police reaction. But that's it.
Yes, and again: "black mass killers are #BlackPeopleProblems. Expected, accepted, and uninteresting. But if a white shooter shows up at a movie theater or supermarket, hey man, THIS is something to talk about".
It strikes me as unfair that posters claim that "it's always a white guy", then call anyone disputing that (on factual grounds with supporting data) a racist.
All of which is basically what I said. "It could happen to me" is interesting, but "it happens to them" is a snoozer. Why do the upthread cited black spree killer stories get no attention?
"Random" in some sense. But we don't know why that particular store was chosen, since according to news reports the killer lived in Arvada and therefore would have had a number of other grocery stores closer to him.