It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

2000 mass shootings in 6 years?

page: 2
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 9 2019 @ 06:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Asktheanimals

yeah the Japanese cultists sarin attacks wounded more then 1500 in two attacks in the 90s ,not that this would make any of the families victims feel better or worse about it but does help put things in context as we are far from an epidemic, they seem to be on a slight upswing but again no where near an epidemic




posted on Aug, 9 2019 @ 11:43 PM
link   
Remove urban inner city "mass shooting" events from those large numbers, and they drop by better than 90%.

Most shootings that are covered by that "4 or more shot" definition are black on black shootings and homicides.

The media LOVES using the big a** number for the sake of whipping people up emotionally... but they NEVER talk about who it is doing the shooting.

The current narrative, now that the Mueller "Seppuku" of the !RUSSIA! hoax has occurred, has become "racism" and "white supremacy".

Talking about WHO is doing the majority of these shootings does not help the new narrative at all.

Despite 90%+ of these shootings being black on black violence, saying it is "angry black males" commit these crimes is not very honest, and almost as racist as blaming it on angry white males.

Truth is... it is the gang and crime dynamics that drive the violence, and the demographic of these areas and some peculiarities in black social culture merely exacerbate the violence.

it is NOT skin color driving this violence. There are a helluva lot more complexities to the issue.

That said... YES. Mass Media is one lying sack of s**t about all of it. Period.



posted on Aug, 10 2019 @ 04:12 PM
link   
The definition of "mass shooting"/"mass shooter" differs.

The FBI's related [historical] definition/classification:


In the 1980s, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) defined mass murderer as someone who “kills four or more people in a single incident (not including himself), typically in a single location”


What is a mass shooting



posted on Aug, 10 2019 @ 06:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: dug88

Neither is bull. The wiki list is only notable shootings.

The Vox list is every incident they can find that fits their definition of a mass shooting, including domestic violence and gang violence. What’s bull is that they don’t disclose their methodology, and attempt to deceive the reader into believing Pulse nightclub type shootings are happening more than once a day.



Also I heard last night that 97.8 % of all mass shootings since 1950 until 2018 occurred in gun free zones.

If I wanted to get the max bang for my efforts "a gun free zone" would be number one on my hit list.



posted on Aug, 11 2019 @ 02:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Shamrock6

Simple fact, 60% of firearm related deaths in this country are suicides. In my humble opinion, these don't even belong in the conversation on firearms. Simply put, if we're going to live in a country where "her body, her choice" is the law of the land, then "their body, their choice" needs to be the law of the land where suicides are concerned. It's not a public safety or health issue, it's a private choice and if someone wants to die they're going to figure out how to kill themselves, be it with a firearm, razor blade, drugs, asphyxiation, or otherwise. So now we've gone from a rate of 12 deaths per 100,000 Americans to the realistic figure of less than 5 deaths per 100,000 Americans. You are literally more likely to die in a fire than by being shot.



That's a bit if a false assumption. 9 out of 10 people who survive their first attempt at suicide never go on to make a successful suicide attempt later. 1 in 25 attempts at suicide are successful overall, however about 4 out of 5 of suicide attempts by firearm are successful, much higher than any other method. Therefore that single, one off attempt is likely to result in a death when they would more likely have survived if they used another method.

As firearms are the leading method of successful suicide attempts in the US, this means there are a lot of dead people who would likely be alive now if they didn't have access to a gun when they hit that low point.

I'm not anti-gun or anything (I'm a shooter myself) but I feel that this is something that is misrepresented too much.



posted on Aug, 11 2019 @ 02:18 AM
link   
a reply to: PaddyInf

Did you miss the point I made stating that its nobody's business aside from the individual exercising their Right of choice over their own body?



posted on Aug, 11 2019 @ 03:39 AM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Did you miss my point that saying that suicide by firearm should be discounted because they would find another way is a false narrative? Or that easy access to firearms increases actual suicide deaths?



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join