• You may find search is unavailable for a little while. Trying to fix a problem.

[Continuation] Today's Mass Shooting (part 3)

Thermal said:
Yeah, you keep repeating that, but I don't think you are hearing what it sounds like.

It sounds to an English speaking ear that you are only concerned with a shooter that might show up where you (or someone you value) are likely to be, but **** those blacks.

If that's what you are saying, then...well...kudos for cards on the table. For my part, I'm concerned about a white supremacist with an AR and a manifesto, but I'm just as concerned about an American subculture that thinks killing is an argumentative tactic. The degree of planning is irrelevant, except in the ability to be proactive and stop it. But that in no way lessens my concerns about a party with mostly black attendees shooting each other up and bystanders and children being shot, and it's some cold blooded **** for you to say they are beneath concern.
Click to expand...

Mother Jones, a left-wing site, also doesn't count shoot-outs between people who know each other at parties. They only count pre-planned, indiscriminate shootings at soft public targets like schools, libraries, theaters, restaurants, churches etc, by malcontent people with a massive grudge or the mentally ill.
 
Hercules56 said:
Mother Jones, a left-wing site, also doesn't count shoot-outs between people who know each other at parties. They only count pre-planned, indiscriminate shootings at soft public targets like schools, libraries, theaters, restaurants, churches etc, by malcontent people with a massive grudge or the mentally ill.
Click to expand...

That responds to absolutely nothing I posted.
 
Thermal said:
That responds to absolutely nothing I posted.
Click to expand...

The recent shooting in Philly was clearly a mass-shooting.

Shooter was black, victims are black.

But this was a crazy person shooting strangers, indiscriminantly. Classic mass-shooting event.
 
Let me get this straight, Mass shootings only count in certain circumstances?
 
Hercules56 said:
The recent shooting in Philly was clearly a mass-shooting.

Shooter was black, victims are black.

But this was a crazy person shooting strangers, indiscriminantly. Classic mass-shooting event.
Click to expand...

Still addressing nothing I said.

I asked why you are concerned about a guy who plans a mass shooting (which is fairly rare) and not about a guy who carries a gun and has an impromptu mass shooting (which is very common and accounts for the most dead bodies).

You have said bluntly that black people just do this and you are not concerned with their corpses because you don't hang around black people.

I mean come on, dude. I'm giving you an out to temper that back and you're doubling down.
 
Last edited:
Hercules56 said:
I'm not dismissing the worthiness of black victims. The racist attacks in Buffalo and South Carolina were terrible.

But that's not the same thing. You know it. Folks are only now including unplanned shootings at parties where armed folks know each other so as to artificially ramp up the number of mass-shootings so they can make believe its a bigger problem than it really is.
Click to expand...
Do you actually think before you post?
 
Thinking that a whole load of mass shootings aren't important enough to mention?
How do you think that comes across?
 
Andy_Ross said:
Let me get this straight, Mass shootings only count in certain circumstances?
Click to expand...

No, "mass-shooting" is a Neologism, who's meaning has changed recently so as to achieve a political agenda.

After the massacres at Columbine, Virginia Tech and Dunblane, the term "mass-shooting" was used to describe a planned, indiscriminate attack against strangers at soft targets like schools, theaters, restaurants, malls..committed by deranged individuals seeking to enact revenge or to gain fame or to fight some sort of race war. It was never used for an unplanned attack on 4 or more people with a gun at a party cuz someone talked to the wrong gal.

.......Until recently, so as to inflate the numbers for the tears effect.
 
You don't think a shooting involving 4 or more casualties isn't a mass shooting?
That says a lot about the blood sacrifice the US is willing to make for guns.
 
Andy_Ross said:
You don't think a shooting involving 4 or more casualties isn't a mass shooting?
That says a lot about the blood sacrifice the US is willing to make for guns.
Click to expand...

"Mass-shooting" is a neologism.

Just like "anti-Semitism". It doesn't simply mean literally what is sounds like.
 
Four or more people being shot in one incident sure looks like a mass shooting to me.

They aren't even a majority of the shootings in the USA
 
Andy_Ross said:
Four or more people being shot in one incident sure looks like a mass shooting to me.

They aren't even a majority of the shootings in the USA
Click to expand...

Naaa, I say 10 or more peeps being shot should be the definition.

There is precedent for this. A "high-capacity" magazine has 11 or more bullets.
 
Hercules56 said:
Naaa, I say 10 or more peeps being shot should be the definition.

There is precedent for this. A "high-capacity" magazine has 11 or more bullets.
Click to expand...

Of course. 9 or less shot in an individual event is just another weekday in the USA. Not really worth a mention.
 
One reason to include "4 our more injured" is injuries can often be life-altering. They can be anywhere from a quick trip to Emergency (with its attendant costs thanks to the US health care system) to a lifetime of limited mobility, cognitive impairment, and pain.
 
Blue Mountain said:
One reason to include "4 our more injured" is injuries can often be life-altering. They can be anywhere from a quick trip to Emergency (with its attendant costs thanks to the US health care system) to a lifetime of limited mobility, cognitive impairment, and pain.
Click to expand...

4 is way too small a quantity to count as a "mass" anything. "Mass", is short for massive, which when referring to a quantity, means enormous, huge, extreme, exceptionally large. 4, is far from such a quantity.
 
Hercules56 said:
4 is way too small a quantity to count as a "mass" anything. "Mass", is short for massive, which when referring to a quantity, means enormous, huge, extreme, exceptionally large. 4, is far from such a quantity.
Click to expand...

4 shootings at once are a big thing in most of the world. It's just that you have so many in the USA it seems trivial
 
Hercules56 said:
No, "mass-shooting" was a term that didn't simply mean lots of people being shot in a single event.
Click to expand...
Yes it did. "Mass" means "a lot", "shooting" means they were gunned down by somebody shooting a gun.

It's a neologism, meant to refer to pre-planned shootings events by psychos meant to target strangers at soft targets like movie theaters, restaurants, concerts, etc.
Click to expand...

I don't agree. You need to provide some evidence.

ETA: it doesn't matter whether the shooting was planned or not. People die in such shootings and it is really ****** to claim that any particular mass shooting doesn't count.
 
Last edited:
jeremyp said:
Yes it did. "Mass" means "a lot", "shooting" means they were gunned down by somebody shooting a gun.



I don't agree. You need to provide some evidence.

ETA: it doesn't matter whether the shooting was planned or not. People die in such shootings and it is really ****** to claim that any particular mass shooting doesn't count.
Click to expand...

Mother Jones, a left wing site, only counts pre-planned indiscriminate attacks, as mass-shootings.
 
Hercules56 said:
Mother Jones, a left wing site, only counts pre-planned indiscriminate attacks, as mass-shootings.
Click to expand...

Good for them. Just because they choose to view a thing in a certain way does not make it correct, or even reasonable. Why is "left wing site" even relevant?
 
Hercules56 said:
Mother Jones, a left wing site, only counts pre-planned indiscriminate attacks, as mass-shootings.
Click to expand...

Because those are usually committed by white guys. Focusing on that helps the narrative. No one wants to talk about the carnage in urban areas. Hush, hush.
 
I'm still having trouble getting past the idea that these 4 or more people shot matter, while those 4 or more people don't.
 
Trausti said:
Because those are usually committed by white guys. Focusing on that helps the narrative. No one wants to talk about the carnage in urban areas. Hush, hush.
Click to expand...

Why are you bringing up race, AGAIN?

We're talking about the difference between planned, indiscriminate attacks upon strangers at small targets vs unplanned attacks by armed people at a party that goes wrong.

One is a mass-shooting, the other is not. If you follow the well-established definition.
 
Last edited:
Hercules56 said:
Mother Jones, a left wing site, only counts pre-planned indiscriminate attacks, as mass-shootings.
Click to expand...

I don't care what Mother Jones thinks: a mass shooting is when lots of people get shot. The only debate should really be about what the lower bound should be, although that shouldn't really matter much. If only one person gets shot, they are just as dead.
 
jeremyp said:
I don't care what Mother Jones thinks: a mass shooting is when lots of people get shot. The only debate should really be about what the lower bound should be, although that shouldn't really matter much. If only one person gets shot, they are just as dead.
Click to expand...

Just cause some jerkoff decides that 2 people shot equals a "mass-shooting", doesn't mean we have to pay any mind.
 
it's interesting to see a debate between black people are the problem and black people shouldn't count
 
Hercules56 said:
Naaa, I say 10 or more peeps being shot should be the definition.

There is precedent for this. A "high-capacity" magazine has 11 or more bullets.
Click to expand...

Hercules56 said:
Just cause some jerkoff decides that 2 people shot equals a "mass-shooting", doesn't mean we have to pay any mind.
Click to expand...

Nor do we have to if "some jerkoff decides that a minimum of 10 people shot equals a 'mass-shooting' ".
 
Hercules56 said:
Why are you bringing up race, AGAIN?

We're talking about the difference between planned, indiscriminate attacks upon strangers at small targets vs unplanned attacks by armed people at a party that goes wrong.
One is a mass-shooting, the other is not. If you follow the well-established definition.
Click to expand...

Only because you seem to think there's some important distinction between different kinds of mass shooting. Everybody is just as dead.

This is kind of surreal. People are being slaughtered in America on a daily - almost hourly - basis and a number of the people who live there, and are therefore most likely to be caught up in the slaughter, are bickering about fine definitions instead of what can actually be done to stop it.

There were six separate mass shootings in the USA reported on page five of this thread alone. This is absolutely insane.
 
jeremyp said:
Only because you seem to think there's some important distinction between different kinds of mass shooting. Everybody is just as dead....
Click to expand...

That's like saying the Holocaust is no different than deaths from a volcano or tidal wave. They're all dead, right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom