At the risk of endless repetition:
When a mass shooting occurs, being a mass of people shot, statistics show that it is overwhelmingly a black man/men on the trigger. Statistics also show that these shootings are overwhelmingly "personal", that is, directed at specific people (the recent recounting shows multiple family executions and social gathering fights that escalated).
But when we talk about mass shootings, we are normally thinking of the random mass shooter, who walks into a large public gathering and starts taking random people out. Statistics show that white males are disproportionately (although not overwhelmingly) on the trigger. When we factor in highest fatalities, white boys again tip the scales, possibly correlating with a preference for accurate high powered weapons instead of a Saturday night special in the waistband.
So yes Bogative, you are right. Your use of GVA as a credible source and your recounting is accurate. But you are not going to get a concession from the posters who have accused you of not reporting white shooters, in part because you are sledgehammering the living **** out of the issue to a degree that it is no longer the point. The subject most people want to talk about is the random shooter, usually politically motivated. It's a terrifying thought to go to a movie or the grocery store and be confronted with some whack job with an AR-15. Posters do not identify with being at a block party or "da club" and getting caught in the crossfire. That's "their problem", to put it bluntly. I personally don't agree; a lot of the establishments and neighborhoods I frequent, I'm looking a mite pale, if you catch my drift. But can we roundly agree that you have made your point, are correct, will not get an honest response, and move on to more productive discussion than screaming "lookit, a BLACK MAN shot people again"?