I get tired of anti-gun bullshit, fear mongering and hysteria. If you look at FBI statistics, the overall gun homicide rate has significantly declined since the 1990's. You are safer today than you were in the past.
In the US the term Mass Shooting was originally defined by the US Attorney General as the murder of four or more people with no cooling-off period but redefined by Congress in 2013 as being murder of three or more people. In 2006 the Australian government defined it as 5 or more dead. Now we are calling it a mass shooting if 3 people are injured. Give me a break. You can injure 3 people with a knife. If 3 people injured with a firearm is a mass shooting then they have been happening since the birth of America. Soon it will be defined as a mass shooting if 3 or more heard gunshots.
As for the 50 in Las Vegas, that was a complete anomaly. Kind of like when the guy killed 86 in Nice, France with a truck. When you have so many people penned in you can kill alot of them with any number of things.
I get that you don't like anti-gun bullshit, but I feel like maybe because you don't like it so much you want to down play reality just as the other side may up play it, which id say is equally bad. MYABE you do that, that's your own self reflection to figure out.
idk at what point you can call it an anomaly, both in France and in the USA in the last several years or so have seen several large scale attacks.
Some of the larger ones in recent USA history,
17 killed - February 14, 2018 parkland school shooting
58 killed - October 1, 2017 - Las Vegas, shooting
25 killed - November 5, 2017 texas church
49 killed - June 12, 2016 pulse night club shootiing
14 killed - December 2, 2015
27 killed - December 14, 2012 sandy hook
32 killed - April 16, 2007 virginia tech shooting
Idk want to keep copy and pasting but im counting around 200 deaths not including the ones above, from 2007- 2018 from just 8 and above deaths per shoot out.
idk Im not trying to bring any gun argument, you can still understand that there have been a lot of shootings and be against gun control. i think if you do the math based on 3 deaths or even 5 deaths and above to define a mass shooting, your odds of winning the power ball are still worse. i guess it depends on what slice of time you allocate, like with anything. i don't feel like re-doing the math though. we know that they are both extremely unlikely though... so ya...
It seems as if from my eyes, in recent years both in France and the USA , we hadn't seen as many shoot outs of the same large size anytime before, does that mean we need to change our laws? No. it's just an honest observation and your opinion on what to do about it doesn't have to change because of it.
I'd reckon being the one of 3 people injured in a shooting would obviously fuck up your day and would still have a chance to fuck up your whole life, so while I'm not sure those should be included in the term "mass shooting" it's still more likely to happen than win the power ball and it still would suck.
I always felt like a mass shooting was defined by people who shoot at random or semi random people in the attempts &/or with the motivation to kill a lot of people. like shooting at the "masses" even if he fails to kill people and only severely injures them, I'm just not sure what you'd call it then, like the guy was shooting at random people trying to kill usually as many as possible. shooting at the "masses of people" ...
Have you ever purchased lottery tickets?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
I get tired of anti-gun bullshit, fear mongering and hysteria. If you look at FBI statistics, the overall gun homicide rate has significantly declined since the 1990's. You are safer today than you were in the past.
In the US the term Mass Shooting was originally defined by the US Attorney General as the murder of four or more people with no cooling-off period but redefined by Congress in 2013 as being murder of three or more people. In 2006 the Australian government defined it as 5 or more dead. Now we are calling it a mass shooting if 3 people are injured. Give me a break. You can injure 3 people with a knife. If 3 people injured with a firearm is a mass shooting then they have been happening since the birth of America. Soon it will be defined as a mass shooting if 3 or more heard gunshots.
As for the 50 in Las Vegas, that was a complete anomaly. Kind of like when the guy killed 86 in Nice, France with a truck. When you have so many people penned in you can kill alot of them with any number of things.
--
Anonymous Post Author
4 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
I get that you don't like anti-gun bullshit, but I feel like maybe because you don't like it so much you want to down play reality just as the other side may up play it, which id say is equally bad. MYABE you do that, that's your own self reflection to figure out.
idk at what point you can call it an anomaly, both in France and in the USA in the last several years or so have seen several large scale attacks.
Some of the larger ones in recent USA history,
17 killed - February 14, 2018 parkland school shooting
58 killed - October 1, 2017 - Las Vegas, shooting
25 killed - November 5, 2017 texas church
49 killed - June 12, 2016 pulse night club shootiing
14 killed - December 2, 2015
27 killed - December 14, 2012 sandy hook
32 killed - April 16, 2007 virginia tech shooting
Idk want to keep copy and pasting but im counting around 200 deaths not including the ones above, from 2007- 2018 from just 8 and above deaths per shoot out.
idk Im not trying to bring any gun argument, you can still understand that there have been a lot of shootings and be against gun control. i think if you do the math based on 3 deaths or even 5 deaths and above to define a mass shooting, your odds of winning the power ball are still worse. i guess it depends on what slice of time you allocate, like with anything. i don't feel like re-doing the math though. we know that they are both extremely unlikely though... so ya...
It seems as if from my eyes, in recent years both in France and the USA , we hadn't seen as many shoot outs of the same large size anytime before, does that mean we need to change our laws? No. it's just an honest observation and your opinion on what to do about it doesn't have to change because of it.
I'd reckon being the one of 3 people injured in a shooting would obviously fuck up your day and would still have a chance to fuck up your whole life, so while I'm not sure those should be included in the term "mass shooting" it's still more likely to happen than win the power ball and it still would suck.
I always felt like a mass shooting was defined by people who shoot at random or semi random people in the attempts &/or with the motivation to kill a lot of people. like shooting at the "masses" even if he fails to kill people and only severely injures them, I'm just not sure what you'd call it then, like the guy was shooting at random people trying to kill usually as many as possible. shooting at the "masses of people" ...