The Liberal Gun Club Forum

DispositionMatrix wrote:ShootingTracker numbers are being posted here now? The person behind ShootingTracker already admitted to arbitrarily redefining "mass shooting." You can or could find the post on Reddit. Even Mother Jones, one of the most anti-RKBA rags in existence today, admitted ShootingTracker was a propaganda tool. I would need verification of the numbers in the OP.

SilasSoule wrote:

DispositionMatrix wrote:ShootingTracker numbers are being posted here now? The person behind ShootingTracker already admitted to arbitrarily redefining "mass shooting." You can or could find the post on Reddit. Even Mother Jones, one of the most anti-RKBA rags in existence today, admitted ShootingTracker was a propaganda tool. I would need verification of the numbers in the OP.

OK here it is:

"Mother Jones counts a mass shooting as any incident in which a lone gunman kills at least four people in a public place, while also excluding gang violence. But the Mass Shooting Tracker — which is built by members of the social-sharing site Reddit, and which uses news reports as sources — defines a mass shooting as any incident, anywhere, in which at least four people are shot, but not necessarily killed."

Has the U.S. had 4 mass shootings this year or 353? Estimates vary that much
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-san ... story.html

DispositionMatrix wrote:ShootingTracker numbers are being posted here now?

SilasSoule wrote:If 4 or more people are shot in a single incident, I think it is fair to call that a mass shooting, regardless of how many actually die. It even seems plausible to consider 3 a mass shooting. Assuming in both cases that there is only one shooter. If 10 people were shot but no one died, you wouldn't consider that a mass shooting?

The point is that there are a lot of causes of violence. Those causes are what needs to be dealt with or else people will continue to hurt each other by whatever means are available.

Inquisitor wrote:
The trouble isn't the definition. It's the changing definition to gin up fear.

SilasSoule wrote:If 4 or more people are shot in a single incident, I think it is fair to call that a mass shooting, regardless of how many actually die. It even seems plausible to consider 3 a mass shooting. Assuming in both cases that there is only one shooter. If 10 people were shot but no one died, you wouldn't consider that a mass shooting?

DispositionMatrix wrote:With regard to gangs, the GrC approach apparently is to present some shootings as, say, two groups who might happen to be comprised of gang members getting into a gun fight over someone having a bad day or whatever can be deemed not specifically gang-related.

SilasSoule wrote:If 4 or more people are shot in a single incident, I think it is fair to call that a mass shooting, regardless of how many actually die. It even seems plausible to consider 3 a mass shooting. Assuming in both cases that there is only one shooter. If 10 people were shot but no one died, you wouldn't consider that a mass shooting?

355 mass shootings? Five? Four? Some claim that it doesn’t matter if there have been 355 or four, as even four are too many. Some claim that it doesn’t matter because we need to know about all deaths involving firearms, regardless whether they are a rampage shooting/publicity murder in a public place, an abusive husband murdering his wife and children just as she is getting ready to divorce him, or gang warfare in the inner city.

Maybe so, maybe not.

I believe definitions matter.

I believe definitions matter because I believe how we talk about problems matters. “355 mass shootings in 2015” sounds like a middle-class white female is at significant risk of a Sandy Hook- or San Bernardino-type rampage shooting/publicity murder while she sits at Starbucks nursing her Holiday Spice Flat White, when the reality is that the risk of being shot in a rampage shooting/publicity murder is roughly the same as the risk of being struck by lightning.

I believe definitions matter because I believe root cause matters. “355 mass shootings in 2015” doesn’t differentiate among reasons for violence. There is a vast gulf in root cause between a rampage shooting/publicity murder and gang violence. There is a vast gulf in root cause between a domestic violence murder-suicide and a lonely, depressed, desperate person taking his own life. There is a vast gulf in root cause between a Sandy Hook- or Columbine-style school shooting and a drug deal gone wrong on a college campus.

If we lump all “mass shootings” under the same umbrella, we fail to acknowledge root causes.

If we fail to acknowledge root causes, we fail to tackle the causes of violence.

If we fail to tackle the causes of violence, there will be more “mass shootings.”

Of whatever definition.

The point is that there are a lot of causes of violence. Those causes are what needs to be dealt with or else people will continue to hurt each other by whatever means are available.

DispositionMatrix wrote:It's worth noting many popular newstainment organizations--WaPo, NYT, BBC, CBS News, CNN, LA Times, The Guardian, MSNBC, NY Daily News, USA Today, and The Independent to name a few--use Shooting Tracker as a source for stats. Thus they are publishing propaganda.

The Trace uses it as well, of course, as does Esquire and The Economist. The Daily Show, at least when Jon Stewart was at the helm, did, too.

Mission accomplished.

pdoggeth wrote:Not to pile up on you Silas, but things like shooting tracker are like those inflated statistics showing that minorities/poor people/democrats/new black panthers commit voter fraud at an alarming rate. Or "studies" that show that climate change is a hoax.

All it does is push an agenda, and it doesn't really purvey any meaningful information.

SilasSoule wrote:

pdoggeth wrote:Not to pile up on you Silas, but things like shooting tracker are like those inflated statistics showing that minorities/poor people/democrats/new black panthers commit voter fraud at an alarming rate. Or "studies" that show that climate change is a hoax.

All it does is push an agenda, and it doesn't really purvey any meaningful information.

Shooting Tracker is not making up incidents or inflating numbers, they are just categorizing them so that four people shot in a single incident is a "mass shooting".

SilasSoule wrote:

pdoggeth wrote:Not to pile up on you Silas, but things like shooting tracker are like those inflated statistics showing that minorities/poor people/democrats/new black panthers commit voter fraud at an alarming rate. Or "studies" that show that climate change is a hoax.

All it does is push an agenda, and it doesn't really purvey any meaningful information.

Not a fair comparison. The numbers for voter fraud really are very low. Shooting Tracker is not making up incidents or inflating numbers, they are just categorizing them so that four people shot in a single incident is a "mass shooting". Four seems very fair to me.

But the point of my original post was to show the kinds of situations that are connected with mass shootings. I found it very interesting that it is not just, or even mostly, wacked-out loners venting their angst on "society". It's people behaving badly with firearms in a range of situations in which people are prone to exercise of poor judgement.

SilasSoule wrote:

pdoggeth wrote:Not to pile up on you Silas, but things like shooting tracker are like those inflated statistics showing that minorities/poor people/democrats/new black panthers commit voter fraud at an alarming rate. Or "studies" that show that climate change is a hoax.

All it does is push an agenda, and it doesn't really purvey any meaningful information.

Not a fair comparison. The numbers for voter fraud really are very low. Shooting Tracker is not making up incidents or inflating numbers, they are just categorizing them so that four people shot in a single incident is a "mass shooting". Four seems very fair to me.

But the point of my original post was to show the kinds of situations that are connected with mass shootings. I found it very interesting that it is not just, or even mostly, wacked-out loners venting their angst on "society". It's people behaving badly with firearms in a range of situations in which people are prone to exercise of poor judgement.