It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

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

# Stop The Sensationalism

page: 1
8
share:

posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 11:00 PM
www.rawstory.com...

1 maniac.

Total count: 1

abcnews.go.com...

1 maniac.

Total count: 2

www.usnews.com...

1 maniac.

Total count: 3

abcnews.go.com...

1 maniac.

Total count: 4

www.cnn.com...

1 maniac.

Total count: 5

www.virginiatechmassacre.com...

1 maniac.

Total count: 6

2 maniacs.

Total count: 8

www.chicagotribune.com...

1 maniac.

Total count: 9

The population of Earth:
opr.princeton.edu...

Over 7,000,000,000 (7 billion)

If we take the total count of shooters (or rampaging ninjas in the Chinese dude's case), 9, and divide it into 7,000,000,000 (I rounded to the nearest billionth) we come up with:

9 / 7,000,000,000 = 1.2857142857142857142857142857143 X 10 to the nth (n = -9)

Let's round that so it is easier to work with:

1.29 X 10 to the nth (n = -9)

That would be: 0.000000000129

Let's put that number in perspective. This is the mass of a particle of dust:

0.000000000753 or 7.53 X 10 to the nth (n = -10)

I would just like to point out that there are 7 billion human beings living on planet Earth, and the above number represents less than 1% of the entire human population.

The news likes to take these stories about mass shootings and sensationalize them. People shake their heads and wonder "what is the world coming to?"

I will tell you what it is coming to: absolutely nothing.

The percentage of people who actually go on killing sprees is so infinitesimally small compared to the rest of the population, it would be ludicrous to question "why is the fabric of society falling apart?" Look at those numbers....it's not.

To really put it into perspective: 1% of 7,000,000,000 is 70,000,000. It would literally take 70 million individuals going on rampages to reach just the 1% mark of the entire human population of Earth. I do believe, that the moral fortitude of the human race is just peachy, and society is not in some decline of values.

Video games are not to blame. Music is not to blame. Entertainment in general is not to blame. Guns are not to blame. It is too easy to find a scapegoat for situations like these. The only "scapegoat" is rightly, poor mental health.

posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 11:04 PM

The absolute best thread that has been created on these shootings since it has happened. What happens now just as after 9/11 is up to the government sad to say.

posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 11:10 PM

you got a good post here and you are right, news reporters tend to exagerate what they report, although its part of their job to get more attention and benefits the news business it also creates a paranoia state on the people. its like the 2012 fever, if you analize the concept well you can notice that it isnt the end of the world mayans talk about but the end of an era like the stone age to clasical age and medieval or so. but again news channels and programming like discovery or history tend to enhance their stories and make up theories in order to make a profit of it. good job on the math.

edit on 14-12-2012 by carlosamado13 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 11:14 PM

Originally posted by LewsTherinThelamon
www.rawstory.com...

1 maniac.

Total count: 1

abcnews.go.com...

1 maniac.

Total count: 2

www.usnews.com...

1 maniac.

Total count: 3

abcnews.go.com...

1 maniac.

Total count: 4

www.cnn.com...

1 maniac.

Total count: 5

www.virginiatechmassacre.com...

1 maniac.

Total count: 6

2 maniacs.

Total count: 8

www.chicagotribune.com...

1 maniac.

Total count: 9

The population of Earth:
opr.princeton.edu...

Over 7,000,000,000 (7 billion)

If we take the total count of shooters (or rampaging ninjas in the Chinese dude's case), 9, and divide it into 7,000,000,000 (I rounded to the nearest billionth) we come up with:

9 / 7,000,000,000 = 1.2857142857142857142857142857143 X 10 to the nth (n = -9)

Let's round that so it is easier to work with:

1.29 X 10 to the nth (n = -9)

That would be: 0.000000000129

Let's put that number in perspective. This is the mass of a particle of dust:

0.000000000753 or 7.53 X 10 to the nth (n = -10)

I would just like to point out that there are 7 billion human beings living on planet Earth, and the above number represents less than 1% of the entire human population.

The news likes to take these stories about mass shootings and sensationalize them. People shake their heads and wonder "what is the world coming to?"

I will tell you what it is coming to: absolutely nothing.

The percentage of people who actually go on killing sprees is so infinitesimally small compared to the rest of the population, it would be ludicrous to question "why is the fabric of society falling apart?" Look at those numbers....it's not.

To really put it into perspective: 1% of 7,000,000,000 is 70,000,000. It would literally take 70 million individuals going on rampages to reach just the 1% mark of the entire human population of Earth. I do believe, that the moral fortitude of the human race is just peachy, and society is not in some decline of values.

Video games are not to blame. Music is not to blame. Entertainment in general is not to blame. Guns are not to blame. It is too easy to find a scapegoat for situations like these. The only "scapegoat" is rightly, poor mental health.

The percentage should be 0... It's not small enough. I don't think this is being sensationalized at all. Families have lost precious young souls...

If the population is 7 billion then we shouldn't think "ehh, we can afford to lose some.." all of those 7 billion should be able to experience life - not die in a classroom.

No sensationalism as far as I see it.

posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 11:21 PM
kinda just goes to show that, YES, one bad apple Can spoil the whole bunch ... for \$200, Alex.

nutters are gonna 'nut'

and the vast majority of the populace are going to continue living their lives in a normal fashion.

It certainly doesn't lessen the severity or impact of these type situations, it just helps to bring them into a better and more accurate perspective, as to the whole.

most people are good. Some ... not so much.

might just need a little mOar bleach in the gene pool, so to speak. (?)

posted on Dec, 15 2012 @ 04:08 AM
OK so its a small percentage of EARTHS population but a much more significant percentage of Americas population.
If the shootings and rampages were happening uniformly across the globe you would have a valid statistic, the question that needs to be asked is why is it so common in the USA compared to the rest of the world?

posted on Dec, 15 2012 @ 08:50 AM

The percentage should be 0... It's not small enough. I don't think this is being sensationalized at all. Families have lost precious young souls...

Should be, but isn't. So you could either cry about it, or do something?

If the population is 7 billion then we shouldn't think "ehh, we can afford to lose some.." all of those 7 billion should be able to experience life - not die in a classroom.

No sensationalism as far as I see it.

That is not the point. Of course the loss of human life is a tragedy, I was not devaluing human life. I merely pointed out that these "lone gunman types" comprise a percentage of the population that is less than 1% of the entire human population; and for that reason it would be absurd to believe that "the fabric of society is falling apart." Or to shake your head and wonder "what is this world coming to?"

It would be akin to freaking out that your coffee table is dirty because its got a dust particle on it. That is sensational.

The really sad part is the fact that the deaths of these children could have easily been avoided, simply by having teachers and staff who actually exercised their 2nd amendment rights.

But the stupidity of the American people has no limits.

posted on Dec, 15 2012 @ 09:19 AM
Originally posted by IkNOwSTuff

OK so its a small percentage of EARTHS population but a much more significant percentage of Americas population.

The population of the United States is 240 million. That would be, 3% of Earth's total population.

So, not counting Breivik or the Chinese guy from above, these rampagers would represent 2.92 X 10 to the nth(n = -8), or 0.00000000292 of our population.

You are SO right. What a significant portion of our population. Wait, is that still less than 1% of the total population of the US?!?! IT IS!!

If the shootings and rampages were happening uniformly across the globe you would have a valid statistic, the question that needs to be asked is why is it so common in the USA compared to the rest of the world?

The media can make anything look "common." The actions of people who represent less than 1% of our population are not "common." And if you believe that this behavior is only concentrated in the United States you are truly deluded.
edit on 15-12-2012 by LewsTherinThelamon because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 15 2012 @ 09:35 AM

Originally posted by 12m8keall2c
kinda just goes to show that, YES, one bad apple Can spoil the whole bunch ... for \$200, Alex.

nutters are gonna 'nut'

and the vast majority of the populace are going to continue living their lives in a normal fashion.

It certainly doesn't lessen the severity or impact of these type situations, it just helps to bring them into a better and more accurate perspective, as to the whole.

most people are good. Some ... not so much.

might just need a little mOar bleach in the gene pool, so to speak. (?)

You are absolutely right on all points. People need to remember that these lone gunman types represent such a small fraction of society, that we cannot objectively say that societies morals are in decline. Doing so, as I have said, would be like claiming your coffee table is dirty because it has a dust particle on it.

Does that mean that the deaths of innocents is any less tragic? Of course not. But we should not allow the media to play their games and fill us with fear. These deaths could have easily been avoided, that is the saddest part of all.

posted on Dec, 15 2012 @ 11:21 AM

Originally posted by LewsTherinThelamon
Originally posted by IkNOwSTuff

OK so its a small percentage of EARTHS population but a much more significant percentage of Americas population.

The population of the United States is 240 million. That would be, 3% of Earth's total population.

So, not counting Breivik or the Chinese guy from above, these rampagers would represent 2.92 X 10 to the nth(n = -8), or 0.00000000292 of our population.

You are SO right. What a significant portion of our population. Wait, is that still less than 1% of the total population of the US?!?! IT IS!!

If the shootings and rampages were happening uniformly across the globe you would have a valid statistic, the question that needs to be asked is why is it so common in the USA compared to the rest of the world?

The media can make anything look "common." The actions of people who represent less than 1% of our population are not "common." And if you believe that this behavior is only concentrated in the United States you are truly deluded.
edit on 15-12-2012 by LewsTherinThelamon because: (no reason given)

You know what your right, it is such a small number so its not that bad

I guess when you break it down like that Hitler wasnt such a bad guy, he only killed roughly .25% of the world population at that time. Not even 1% so its statisically insignificant

1 person walking into a school, mall or cinema and opening fire on a crowd is too many regardless of world population, country population or number killed.
When it happens every year or 3 times in a few weeks for most people it starts being considered common.

What a sick and sad individual you are to be able to break these tragedies down to numbers and brush them off as insignificant

To try and get a straight answer from you Ill speak your sick language, why is it statistically more likely that a gunman will open fire in a crowded public place in the USA?

posted on Dec, 15 2012 @ 11:50 AM

You know what your right, it is such a small number so its not that bad

You are using logical fallacies. My point was that, when crimes like these occur the media likes to tout that "society is deteriorating" and our moral structures are "falling apart."

I was merely pointing out that, since these lone gunman types represent less than 1% of the entire population of both the US, and the world, it is invalid to believe that societies morals are lacking.

If they were, nobody would care about the mass shootings in the first place. If these crimes were "common," nobody would even bother reporting them.

I guess when you break it down like that Hitler wasnt such a bad guy, he only killed roughly .25% of the world population at that time. Not even 1% so its statisically insignificant

You are deflecting. For a superior European who does not have to put up with crime, you certainly enjoy using logical fallacies. I never made the claim that the shooters are good people. In fact, here is the claim that I did make:

My point was that, when crimes like these occur the media likes to tout that "society is deteriorating" and our moral structures are "falling apart."

I was merely pointing out that, since these lone gunman types represent less than 1% of the entire population of both the US, and the world, it is invalid to believe that societies morals are lacking.

If they were, nobody would care about the mass shootings in the first place. If these crimes were "common," nobody would even bother reporting them.

1 person walking into a school, mall or cinema and opening fire on a crowd is too many regardless of world population, country population or number killed.

I agree. Those people should not have had to die.

But Americans have bought in to the fallacy that if we place restrictions on guns, then we can magically make criminals stop using them.

When it happens every year or 3 times in a few weeks for most people it starts being considered common.

If it were common, it would go unreported in the National news. The same way the majority of local gas station robberies go unreported in the National news. You know, because those things are common.

If the American people would actually practice their right to carry a weapon these psychos would not have a chance in hell. But we are caught in a ridiculous situation. Public places like malls, schools, grocery stores, theaters...etc, have made it illegal to carry weapons on their property.

You can see how well that has worked out.

What a sick and sad individual you are to be able to break these tragedies down to numbers and brush them off as insignificant

The deaths are not insignificant. Nice obfuscation. You know very well what my point was. It was in my OP. You know that I was pointing out the relation between the percentage of shooters compared to the population and the conclusions that could be drawn regarding the moral fabric of said societies.

You seem to have an agenda that I do not understand. Why else would you be attacking me? Either that, or your reading comprehension skills are terrible.

To try and get a straight answer from you Ill speak your sick language, why is it statistically more likely that a gunman will open fire in a crowded public place in the USA?

Oh, ok, I see what your agenda is. People kill people with guns in Merrica cause Merrica ain't banned dem guns.

If that is the extent of your intelligence I am going to put you on my ignore list.

Bye bye now

posted on Dec, 15 2012 @ 12:15 PM

I would tend to agree with the media, the 2 most recent shootings are not isolated incidents, Im sure you agree they happen with alarming regularity.

Im not a superior European......... Im a superior Australian

I do see it as a societal issue, if it was a 1 off sure no issue but when its a few times a year!!!!!!
Sure not everyone in the US is a wacko but why does this happen more in your country than anywhere else.
Not talking about drug cartels or governments or terrorists Im talking about a citizen with a gun opening fire on other citizens?

You cant just say they were mental because every country has its share of sick people.

No agenda it was a genuine question, why do these shootings happen more often in the USA than anywhere else?

Your right in that you cant stop criminals using guns but you can make it harder for them to get them.
The weapons on the black market all start out as legally obtained weapons then either through theft or unscrupulous people selling them they end up in the hands of criminals.

posted on Dec, 15 2012 @ 08:47 PM
Originally posted by IkNOwSTuff

I would tend to agree with the media, the 2 most recent shootings are not isolated incidents, Im sure you agree they happen with alarming regularity.

Yes. I agree with your sentiment that one shooting is one too many.

But, this year alone makes it feel as if the crazy is in the air.

Im not a superior European......... Im a superior Australian

Ah, Great Britain's other colony. Or their largest prison base.

I do see it as a societal issue, if it was a 1 off sure no issue but when its a few times a year!!!!!!
Sure not everyone in the US is a wacko but why does this happen more in your country than anywhere else.
Not talking about drug cartels or governments or terrorists Im talking about a citizen with a gun opening fire on other citizens?

You asked me this question earlier and it shocked me because I cannot think of an answer. I honestly don't know. Yes we have guns, and I know that is a contributing factor, but you are right when you say that these types of shootings are more frequent here.

You cant just say they were mental because every country has its share of sick people.

No agenda it was a genuine question, why do these shootings happen more often in the USA than anywhere else?

We have no answer. Other than guns are easily accessible in the States.

Your right in that you cant stop criminals using guns but you can make it harder for them to get them.
The weapons on the black market all start out as legally obtained weapons then either through theft or unscrupulous people selling them they end up in the hands of criminals.

What are the gun laws like in Australia?

I've always felt that, if we banned guns and did away with them, their would be plenty of machinists who wouldn't mind manufacturing them for the underground. So we would be effectively shooting ourselves in the foot.

edit on 15-12-2012 by LewsTherinThelamon because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 15 2012 @ 08:58 PM

I don't mean to seem harsh. But if it were you, or one of your loved ones, staring down the barrel of a spree killers weapon...would the math matter then?

Can you statistically or numerically quantify the value of a life? I don't mean actuarial tables, or lifetime earnings potential charts. I mean can you mathematically represent what the loss of 20 young lives means to their families? Are there equations to address the emotions of those affected by this?

Further. Can you mathematically extrapolate the potential for good that those 26 lost lives possessed? What good they might have done society as a whole? Their offspring who, now, will not be born? Their potential contributions?

Some things are > the equations.

~Heff

posted on Dec, 15 2012 @ 11:55 PM

You asked me this question earlier and it shocked me because I cannot think of an answer. I honestly don't know. Yes we have guns, and I know that is a contributing factor, but you are right when you say that these types of shootings are more frequent here.

Whoa!!!!

Ive asked this question to about 20 people and in most cases multiple times in the last 24hrs and not one of them even acknowledged I asked it let alone attempted an answer.
Thank you for being honest and trying.

I have 2 ideas, Its either your culture is just completely sick and imploding
or
You guys arent that different from us Aussies, Poms and Canucks but the easy access and nonchalant attitude towards guns first of all takes away any taboo with using them and 2nd actually getting hold of them is an option.
Your average kid in Australia unless he lived on a farm wouldnt have a hope in hell of getting a gun.

Im not having a go at Americans, Im having a go at guns and those who will defend having easy access to them regardless the cost or consequences

What are the gun laws like in Australia?

I actually thought they were banned but I was informed in another thread like this one a few months ago that you can get them with a license, the BIG difference is in general Aussies hate guns.
Im not 100% sure but the types of gun you can get seem to be the weaker variety, no auto or semi autos and no scopes or anything. Im not the best person to ask, you probably noticed but I dont really like guns

I've always felt that, if we banned guns and did away with them, their would be plenty of machinists who wouldn't mind manufacturing them for the underground. So we would be effectively shooting ourselves in the foot.

Criminals everywhere will get their hands on guns if they want them, I totally agree with you all on this.
Its Criminals with guns who shoot people in the UK and Australia, we have below 100 gun deaths a year.
You guys have something like 63 a day!!!!!!!! 7 days a week 365 days a year.

Criminals normally have them to protect their drug stash or basically to deter other crims from taking over their business, they are generally quite prudent in their use as killing people is bad for business.
A bullied kid whos frustrated and has feels there is no way out doesnt have this sort of mentality and when they snap they want to take as many of there supposed tormentors with them as they can.
Husbands who find out their wives are cheating snap and in a moment of insanity grab their guns before they can cool off.
Someone gets beat up and they have a gun in the car, instead of retreating after they cop a beating they go to their car to get revenge.
Deny these people access to guns and within a generation or 2 I would suspect your gun deaths with be on par with the rest of the western world.

Im not American so I really dont care about who has guns there or how you use them, but when these tragedies happen the completely contradictory nature of Americans arguments always floors me.

I just cant get my head around how normally sane, logical and intelligent people can think more guns are the answer.

To be totally honest it just makes me sad

posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 12:25 AM

Originally posted by LewsTherinThelamon

You know what your right, it is such a small number so its not that bad

You are using logical fallacies. My point was that, when crimes like these occur the media likes to tout that "society is deteriorating" and our moral structures are "falling apart."

I was merely pointing out that, since these lone gunman types represent less than 1% of the entire population of both the US, and the world, it is invalid to believe that societies morals are lacking.

My only point of contention or argument would be that of the seeming increasing rate of which these type events, situations and scenarios Continue to play out left, right and front/center anymore. (?)

Either 'society' is becoming 'unraveled', per se, OR there's some degree or extent of concerted 'effort' to make it seem so, in the end and grand scheme of things.

Do I, Personally, feel that 'society', as a whole, is not what it used to be, with regards 'value of life' and the like (?) ... damn straight, Skippy.
.. and that's a sad Fact to have to come to terms with, IMO.

People just don't seem to care about their fellow man as much , nor life in general, anymore (?)

A Societal Lapse in Valuing life, if you ask me, Yes. :shk:

... and therin lies the issue and or problem, if you ask me ... it's not the 'guns', 'weapons' or 'means of taking lives' that's increased [though they obviously have] but moar that people, on the whole and in many an aspect, just don't seem to friggin care As much about each other's rights to life, liberty and such anymOar. [sic?].
(?)

Guess we'll see .....
edit on 12/16/2012 by 12m8keall2c because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 01:59 PM

I was not devaluing the victims, please re-read the OP to see my point. I was not saying that because of the number of shooters compared to the rest of society, that these deaths are insignificant. Where did I even imply such a thing?

Tragedies such as these shootings give people the false impression that society is on a downward spiral morally. The media likes to push this position. Given the number of shooters compared to the rest of the human population, such a conclusion is false. Even given the number of killers such as these just compared to the US population, they still represent less than 1% of our total population. Meaning, that the "moral fabric" is still tightly intact.

We are not on some grand, moral decline as many would have us believe. Society is not falling apart. That is what the numbers show, that is what my point was.

posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 03:53 AM

You wanna talk numbers? Six different people responded to this topic and two of them were upper management. You may not draw a big crowd but you drawn an important one.

I agree that sensationalism plays a big part in the aftermath of incidents like this, but you can only put half the blame on the media. The other half comes from how people respond to how the media reports things. If people would actually sit back and think things out while leaving their own personal viewpoints out of the picture people might actually perceive incidents like this in a more educated light. But they don't.

I'm in the same camp as 12m8keall2c on this issue in that people seem to have a "Nothing matters and what if it did" attitude. Couple that with what IkNOwSTuff is talking about and, in my opinion, you have more of a recipe for disasters like this then any other possible scenario. People just don't seem to have the gumption, the drive, to plan things to the point where they implement those plans, whether they be positive or negative. And yes, that includes our politicians. Things seem to be more random these days and based on that, if anything overly positive or negative happens in this society in America it's going to be because it "simply happened."

I fully recognize that this is a big part of how this society functions but, for the life of me, I just can't bring myself to be that way anymore. I've changed drastically in that regard, I've had to, and I really do feel sorry for the people who, when they do make plans and really think things out, it's solely for the purpose of making money. And even then they seem to half-ass it. There are a few people who have a planned out drive and ambition, but they're few and far between.

This, in turn, leads back to the original topic of sensationalism. People seem to be living these drab, grey lives to the point that when they hear the news spin a story like this out of control, they latch onto it and make it more sensational to THEM then it ought to be. For the families involved, yes, it is very traumatic. I have two kids of my own so I can only imagine what those poor people are going through. My heart does go out to them. But that's the thing. If anyone has the right to be overly emotional about this, it's the families involved. How is me getting all worked up about this going to help them in their time of loss? It's not. I'm not so full of myself as to think that my opinion is going to be able to help them. I can sympathize with them, and I do because in a time of loss such as this people do need sympathy from others. I'm not some unfeeling ogre, but since I can't relate to what they're going through I'm not going to insult their intelligence or feelings by pretending that I can.

By the way OP, this is one of the more intelligent discussions on this topic. Good job.

posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 04:57 AM
I would go further and compare the number of spree killers, or all killers, against the number of people who actively go out each day to help others on a volunteer basis and I'm willing to bet it's higher on the good side. No breakdown on a mass scale. More good than bad I think. Add in those who make a living helping and protectinv people and it's gotta knock the bad numbers out of the park. Most don't want to destroy. Most either want to help/fix or remain passive. Overall moral fabric seems ok.

posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 11:35 AM
The numbers of the actual "spree killers" are so low it cannot reflect on society as a whole. Even just taking in to account the population of the United States. The numbers do not even break the 1% threshold. That being said, since the numbers are so low it is near impossible to find some sociological factor that could be playing a role in these acts of violence. Like video games, if such violent entertainment were the cause of mass killings, we would see many more mass killings, but we don't.

That is why, the only "culprit" I can rationally think of to point the finger of blame at, is nothing more than mental illness.

Couple that with the way the media reports on the killers, and as many have pointed out, you have a recipe for disaster. Anyone with a mental illness who wants to make a name for themselves can do so, because the media will turn them into celebrities.

top topics

8