• jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    26
    ·
    1 year ago

    No, my objection is they call normal shootings mass shootings with the agenda of making and keeping people scared.

      • 🤘🐺🤘@monero.town
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        You just made me realize how much I’d love to live in a country where there was no such thing as a “normal shooting”.

        Gun culture in America is absolutely fucked.

      • prole@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        They’re so goddamn brain rotted that they don’t even realize how completely fucked that is.

        • PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The “normal” number of people getting shot is 0.

          They want you to sweep gun violence under the rug. You don’t need to ask why, it’s because gun sales bring in millions in profits for the gun-lobby and the Republicans they purchase.

            • PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I didn’t claim the number could be 0, I claimed the acceptable number is 0.

              Following every one of those shootings you linked, people demanded to know how it happened. Why did they have a gun? Was there warning signs that were missed? Was anybody negligent? How can we stop it from happening again and limiting the damage if it does?

              That is the reaction of a society that finds any number above 0 unacceptable. They treat mass shootings as a failure of the system.

              Meanwhile in America, they don’t bother to ask those questions.

              They had a gun because it’s trivial to get your hands on semi-automatic rifles and handguns, even if you can’t pass a background check, because there are millions of unsecured weapons and no universal background checks.

              The police and politicians are deliberately negligent, staunchly opposing red flag laws despite most mass shooters having multiple red flags.

              No effort is made to prevent it happening again, because the murder of 20 children is shrugged off as some kind of inevitability, no more preventable than an earthquake or tornado – much the same as you’re doing right now.

              Limiting the damage isn’t just staunchly opposed by the pro-gun community, many of them fully support making more dangerous weaponry available.

              These are not the actions of people who find all gun violence unacceptable and the only reason the Ulvade police are criticized and the Newtown police are given a pass is because the Ulvade police didn’t bother to pretend they cared.

              • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                To be clear, I’m not arguing against sensible legislation, there are many things that can and should be done starting with an actual analysis if what could or should have prevented any specific shooting, once you realize that “banning guns” is off the table thanks to the second amendment.

                An example I like to cite is the guy who shot up Michigan State. He had previously been arrested on a felony gun charge, was allowed to plead guilty to a misdemeanor, did his time, did his probation, had a clean background check, bought guns and shot up the school.

                Now, we already prevent felons from owning guns. Maybe, just maybe, if someone is arrested on a felony gun charge, that is something that should not be allowed to be pled down to a misdemeanor? Ya think?

                Alternately, since we block felons from owning guns, as well as domestic abusers, and people charged with crimes that can land them in prison for more than a year, how about we block people with ANY gun charge from owning a gun? Felony OR misdemeanor? They’ve already proven they can’t be trusted with a gun.

                These are the sorts of conversations we need to have but aren’t having because people get so caught up in knee jerk actions that can’t be taken.

                I remember years ago the call was for “common sense gun reform!” and the action was “Did you know, people on the no-fly list can buy guns? How is that common sense??!??” Obama was making that call.

                To which my reaction was “How many of these shooters were on the no-fly list? Oh, right, NONE of them? Good jorb!”

                And there’s no set process for adding or removing people from the no fly list and it, itself, appears to be non-sensical:

                https://www.aclu.org/documents/statement-david-c-nelson

    • zaph@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      So you’ll only care about children dying in school when the numbers go up even higher than they already are?

      • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, a shooting at a school would most likely be a mass shooting, unless it were something like a gang shooting, or a robbery, or some fight that got out of control.

        I’m talking about the Gun Violence Archive posting up stories like this:

        https://www.koin.com/local/clark-county/vancouver-murder-suicide-suspect-victims-identified-by-clark-county-authorities/

        Which, regardless of how many people died, is a murder/suicide, not a mass shooting. The general public was not at risk, the killings weren’t random, and did not happen in a public space. In fact, based on the early reporting, may not have even been a shooting.

        • zaph@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          There is no widely-accepted definition of “mass shooting” and different organizations tracking such incidents use different definitions. Definitions of mass shootings exclude warfare and sometimes exclude instances of gang violence, armed robberies, familicides and terrorism.

          Maybe it has something to do with it not being any kind of official term and your panties are twisted over how the media writes them up ignoring the pain and suffering from others and building your strawman off semantics?

          • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            It’s not that the media writes it up in such sensationalist terms, “if it bleeds, it leads” has been journalism 101 since… well since forever.

            My beef is the unquestioning repetition. Once you see it, you can’t un-see it:

            https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/campus-shooting-2

            “nearly a thousand mass shootings to have taken place since the Newtown shooting in 2009”

            Newtown is the Sandy Hook Elementary school shooting. So when they conflate those two things in the same sentence they want you to believe that there have been nearly 1000 shootings as horrific, deadly, senseless and random as the one that claimed the lives of 20 six and seven year olds, and that is absolutely, patently, false.

            • zaph@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Why are you like this? So since every mass shooting isn’t worse than the worst one they don’t matter? Stop making up excuses. I’m don’t with you.

              • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                No, I’m saying it’s not the same class of crime and the only reason the media conflates them is to scare people.

                I’ll give you an example from my own back yard… one of those “thousand mass shootings since Newtown” was this one:

                A couple of brothers in Portland decided to do an illegal weed operation. Oregon allows you to grow, own, smoke, sell, and buy weed, but only for in state use.

                3 guys fly in from Texas for the illegal weed buy. Words were had, guns were drawn, both brothers shot and killed, 2/3 Texans shot and killed, 3rd Texan arrested sometime later.

                https://www.oregonlive.com/crime/2021/06/two-portland-brothers-two-marijuana-buyers-die-in-gun-battle-during-attempted-drug-ripoff.html

                That is just normal crime. That’s not a mass shooting in the same way Sandy Hook was and to breath it in the same breath as Sandy Hook disresepects each of the 20 kids that died there.

                Gun Violence Archive? 4 people dead = “mass shooting”. No, robbery gone wrong? Sure. Crime? Absolutely. Save the mass shooting shit for when innocent people get killed.

                • zaph@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Read very carefully please. It doesn’t matter what people call it, children dying to gun violence at school should not be happening, one per incident or 50 per incident is irrelevant, and the only difference between the US and first world nations where it doesn’t happen is our gun culture.

                  • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Oh, agreed, which makes it WORSE when they are conflated in the “more mass shootings than days of the year” bullshit.

        • PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          You have no idea how badly you’ve outed yourself as living in a little bubble where you think it will never happen to you, so you don’t care.

          Because you’ll never be in a relationship with a domestic abuser that executes a house full of people will you? You’re the gun owning male, so you get to decide who around you lives or dies.

          4 innocent people were killed – a number that is much more difficult to achieve without a gun – but you don’t want them counted because they knew the gun owner.

          You’ve let the gun lobby turn you into a fucking sociopath.

          • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            That doesn’t make a murder/suicide a “mass shooting”. I’m sorry apporoaching this rationally has you so upset.

            • PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              That doesn’t make a murder/suicide a “mass shooting”. I’m sorry apporoaching this rationally has you so upset

              Thanks, I love this reply. It’s only two sentences, but its so fantastically revealing.

              The first sentences calls your very own example a “murder/suicide”, a term which is unquestionably more misleading than “mass shooting”. The “murder” isn’t even plural, despite there being 4 of them.

              If you gathered up a million people, told half of them it was a murder/suicide and half of them it was a mass shooting, then asked them to guess the number of people killed, the latter would easily be closer to the truth.

              The second sentence just makes it clear you’re a fuckstain.

              • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                And resorting to ad hominem attacks proves you have nothing to actually say on the topic. Congratulations, you lose.

                • PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  This isn’t high school debate class. Ad hominem means you’re not inherently wrong just because you’re a fuckwit. You can still be wrong and you can still be a fuckwit.

                  • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    The thing is, by resorting to childish attacks, you are showing everyone else reading this thread in the future you have no argument. I’m not after you, you’re a lost cause. I’m after them.

        • prole@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t really understand why it fucking matters. It is literally the number one cause of death among young people in this country. This happens nowhere else in the modern world. It’s unacceptable.

          Stop trying to make the conversation about semantics

          • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            It matters because the Gun Violence Archive and the uncritical mass media are inflating the statistic to make people scared so they can push an agenda.

            When you read a headline talking about the UNLV shooting and they go “more mass shootings than days in the year!” they are NOT talking about a random nut with a gun showing up in a public place and killing random people like the UNLV shooter.

            It’s disingenuous to conflate the two together, and I’d argue, disrespectful of the victims of actual mass shootings.

            • PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              It matters because the Gun Violence Archive and the uncritical mass media are inflating the statistic to make people scared so they can push an agenda

              Bullshit. You’re attacking it because it’s counter to your agenda.

              Republicans, right-wing media, the gun lobby and the pro-gun community routinely fearmonger as a way to boost their own profits and power.

              Not only do you not care when they do it, you’ve enthusiastically put yourself and your own family in more danger because of it.

              You’re hopelessly compromised and your thoughts about how gun violence statistics are about as trustworthy as a cops views on police brutality statistics.

              • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                My agenda is “words mean things” and if you’re going to throw around a phrase like “mass shooting” you shouldn’t have a low hanging fruit definition that does not take intent into consideration.

                Here are two scenarios:

                1. You have a party, two groups of people are talking. Words are had, there’s an argument. Punches are thrown. One person pulls a gun, causing another person to pull a gun, multiple shots are fired and 5 people are injured.

                2. You have a party, a disgruntled incel was not invited, shows up with a semiautomatic weapon and shoots 4 people before being dragged to the ground.

                According to the Gun Violence Archive, both of these are “mass shootings” and if you go down their list of shootings of the year, the vast majority of them fall under category 1, not category 2.

                The difference is, in scenario #1, nobody went to the party intending to shoot anyone. You can’t say the same for scenario #2.

                Lumping them together so you can make people think there are more cases of scenario #2 than there actually are is disingenuous.

                • PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  My agenda is “words mean things”

                  If that was actually your agenda, this wouldn’t be your position. You want to lower the statistic using semantics and as an added bonus, take away the vocabulary needed to discuss a huge percentage of gun violence.

                  The difference is, in scenario #1, nobody went to the party intending to shoot anyone. You can’t say the same for scenario #2.

                  5 people were shot. Intentional vs accidental, premeditated vs impulse, none of that changes the fact that 5 people were shot and the event was a mass shooting.

                  Even in your own example that you made as contrived as you needed, 3 innocent people were still shot and swept under the rug.

                  The organizations you’re rallying against are completely open about their definitions, making them far more honest than you’re being.

                  I’m sorry if that hurts your guns feelings.

                  • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    They aren’t being honest because they do not discuss intent and they are intentionally trying to scare people by masking that.

                    I tell you what, starting 1/1 pay attention to what they’re doing. By the end of January I expect you’ll be stunned at the number of “mass shootings” that aren’t what they’re trying to scare people into thinking they are.

                    I should say too, the Gun Violence Archive isn’t alone in this:

                    https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2018/08/27/640323347/the-school-shootings-that-werent

                    "This spring the U.S. Education Department reported that in the 2015-2016 school year, “nearly 240 schools … reported at least 1 incident involving a school-related shooting.” The number is far higher than most other estimates.

                    But NPR reached out to every one of those schools repeatedly over the course of three months and found that more than two-thirds of these reported incidents never happened. Child Trends, a nonpartisan nonprofit research organization, assisted NPR in analyzing data from the government’s Civil Rights Data Collection.

                    We were able to confirm just 11 reported incidents, either directly with schools or through media reports.

                    In 161 cases, schools or districts attested that no incident took place or couldn’t confirm one. In at least four cases, we found, something did happen, but it didn’t meet the government’s parameters for a shooting. About a quarter of schools didn’t respond to our inquiries."

                    So, again, why do they want to keep everyone so afraid?

    • Nudding@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      You don’t think the nra telling people to be scared and that they need a gun to feel safe is more of the issue?

      • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not really, because the vast, vast, number of gun owners don’t use them.

        Let me give you some perspective…

        We don’t REALLY know, but the best estimate is there are around 474 MILLION guns in the United States.

        https://www.thetrace.org/2023/03/guns-america-data-atf-total/

        In 2021, 48,830 people died from gun injuries.

        https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/26/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/

        54% of those were suicides. So 22,462 murders or accidents.

        Gun laws are never going to prevent suicides, only national mental health care can do that. So looking at the murders and accidents:

        22,462 / 474,000,000? 0.0000473878

        That’s not a crisis, it’s a rounding error. And, yes, each one of those 22,000 deaths individually is a tragedy, but that also means 473,978,000 guns sat around collecting dust.

        • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          but that also means 473,978,000 guns sat around collecting dust.

          Nah, many were used for hunting, self defense that didn’t lead to a death, sport shooting, target practice… Etc… Likely orders of magnitude higher than the amount used to commit murders.

        • zaph@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          And, yes, each one of those 22,000 deaths individually is a tragedy, but that also means 473,978,000 guns sat around collecting dust

          So if a gun isn’t being used to kill someone it is collecng dust?

          • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Not necessarily, it could be used for hunting, or target practice, but any gun that isn’t actively being used is, yeah, kind of just sitting around somewhere.

        • Nudding@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          In 2021, 48,830 people died from gun injuries.

          Jesus christ… Let’s compare to other developed nations, wanna do per capita or total?

              • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Oh, I absolutely get it, what folks outside the US don’t get is the 2nd amendment isn’t going anywhere.

                To repeal it, you first have to get 290 votes in the House, which is largely insurmountable. It took George Santos to get that many Congressmen to agree on something.

                Then you need 67 votes in the Senate, the body that can’t get past 60 to disable a filibuster.

                Assuming, miracle of miracles, that happens, then you need ratification by 38 states.

                Biden only won 25, and of those only 19 have Democratic statehouses. You’d need 19 red states to be on board with giving up guns, assuming you didn’t lose any blue states.

                So, yeah, Good Luck!

                • zaph@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  You’ve looped back around to not getting it. Biden isn’t trying to get rid of the second ammendment but keep being scared of your own shadow.

                  • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Biden can’t get rid of the 2nd amendment, he doesn’t have that ability. In fact, nowhere is the Executive involved in the process, it’s ALL in the legislative branch, first at the federal level, and then at the state level.

                    He can call for it all he wants, but that’s not going to get him 290 votes in the House, 67 votes in the Senate, and ratification by 38 states.

                • Nudding@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  So, yeah, Good Luck!

                  My advice to the kids in tomorrow’s mass shooting I guess 🤷

                  • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    They should at least understand the barriers and work towards a solution that isn’t “well, ban guns.” Because that won’t happen.

            • Nudding@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              You’re right, you guys have the right to shoot yourselves and each other. Carry on.