Continuation Today's Mass Shooting (2)

[tyr_13]

Originally Posted by Bogative

No need to pretend, it's evident in the numbers. The death toll from right-wing terrorism likely won't reach dozens in numbers this entire year, street violence will surpass that this weekend alone. But you go on believing one is more dangerous than the other.

This is dishonest cherry picking. Number of deaths isn't the metric to use between unlike sets. The shooting deaths you want to focus on are not in support of terrorism or a political movement, where the white nationalist terrorism is. The danger isn't just to the people who were killed directly.

But you support the dangers that are not just black people being shot.

Quote:

Delusional left-wing hysterics.


Left-winger – "concern about demographics changing the political/racial makeup of the US is a racist right wing conspiracy theory!!!"

Also left-winger – "OMG!1!1111!!!11! the white terrorists are overthrowing the country!!11!11!!!1!1!!

Not delusional. The Great Replacement Theory is a racist right wing conspiracy theory. White terrorists are not. The white terrorists aren't trying to use democracy to take over the country, so they don't need to outnumber decent citizens. They're doing it by suppressing votes, giving the GOP the power to nullify elections, and putting people in place who will refuse to certify. And storming the Capitol. And terrorizing non-white people. And criminalizing even teaching about real history.

But yeah, everyone not bending over backwards to give the right wing the never-ending benefit of the doubt, the 'civility' patrol, knows you're giving cover for the great replacement theory. The standard that no call on that can be made if the person doesn't come out and say that's what they're doing isn't a valid standard.

Thread continued from here http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=326633

Posted By:jimbob

[Bogative]

Originally Posted by EaglePuncher

You admitted that you think "Black people are all criminals just because their skin is not white"? Where?

Oh look, more ****** mind reading on a skeptics forum.

[EaglePuncher]

Originally Posted by Bogative

Oh look, more ****** mind reading on a skeptics forum.

What's the point in constantly mentioning "black" crime rate then?

[smartcooky]

Originally Posted by bluesjnr

I think I'm getting it now.

Just to help me clarify your position, what is your stance on known criminal, Floyd George's execution and Ahmaud Arbery, what about him? He had a criminal past.

You OK with those boys gettin' offed? They fit your criteria (the criminal subset) and one wouldn't want to come across as inconsistent now.

Would one?

Oh FFS, you really do know how to over-egg the pudding don't you, aye?

I'M TALKING ABOUT GANG-BANGERS AND ******* DRUG DEALERS! You know, organised criminal gangs. People who make a living preying on the misery of others, peddling **** to teenagers and younger, the kinds of people involved in the types of shootings that Bogative keeps derailing this thread with. If they want to shoot EACH OTHER, I don't ******* care!!

Do you get it yet Bluesjnr, or do you need it explained to you in baby speak, one ******* syllable at at time!!

[Bogative]

Originally Posted by EaglePuncher

What's the point in constantly mentioning "black" crime rate then?

To help the myth-informed who believe the majority of mass shootings in this country are perpetrated by white men. The New York Times ran an analysis of the 2015 data, and according to them, 75% of mass shootings have blacks pulling the trigger. I was called a racist and an idiot by another member after posting the article because it is so ingrained in his mind that he wouldn't even believe the New York Times. Sad.

[bluesjnr]

Originally Posted by smartcooky

Oh FFS, you really do know how to over-egg the pudding don't you, aye?

I'M TALKING ABOUT GANG-BANGERS AND ******* DRUG DEALERS! You know, organised criminal gangs. People who make a living preying on the misery of others, peddling **** to teenagers and younger, the kinds of people involved in the types of shootings that Bogative keeps derailing this thread with. If they want to shoot EACH OTHER, I don't ******* care!!

Do you get it yet Bluesjnr, or do you need it explained to you in baby speak, one ******* syllable at at time!!

You were given the opportunity to draw the line by myself earlier and chose to pontificate instead so it's on you that I struck the line myself.

Lets try one more time to ascertain where you are? A man who has served eight jail terms would surely be termed a gang banger, yes? More so if he was convicted of aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon. More so if he had held a pistol to a woman's stomach and searched for items to steal and eventually was identified by a 7 year old victim who sat through this unspeakable act. This is the kind of person you disregard as unworthy of any consideration if they are executed, am I right?

You, of course, know who I am talking about and I would, respectfully, ask you to clarify your position on the execution of George Floyd.

Is he an example of those you deem unworthy or does he somehow stay on the right side of your currently, arbitrary, line?

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by Bogative

Oh look, more ****** mind reading on a skeptics forum.

Yes person with that avatar, you're such a closed book that it requires mind reading to figure out your game.

[Bogative]

Originally Posted by smartcooky

I'M TALKING ABOUT GANG-BANGERS AND ******* DRUG DEALERS! You know, organised criminal gangs. People who make a living preying on the misery of others, peddling **** to teenagers and younger, the kinds of people involved in the types of shootings that Bogative keeps derailing this thread with. If they want to shoot EACH OTHER, I don't ******* care!!

Back with more race-based prejudice and stereotyping, I see.

The 'But Chicago!' mass shooting I posted earlier, the one with two dead and seven wounded, had a black man pulling the trigger. No mentions of gang affiliation, gang violence or drug dealing. Only that there was an argument at the McDonald's about 30 minutes prior to his arrival where he pulled out a gun and started poppin' caps. There was no white racist pulling the trigger so who gives a ****. Amirite? You may now return to your hidey-hole where you can ignore the dozens and dozens of mass shootings that will occur until you find one that meets your criteria to be butt hurt about.

PS – you were "pilloried" earlier in this thread because you keep repeating the lie that this thread is only about certain types of mass shootings.

[Checkmite]

Originally Posted by bluesjnr

Lets try one more time to ascertain where you are? A man who has served eight jail terms would surely be termed a gang banger, yes?

Does he belong to a gang?

[bluesjnr]

Originally Posted by Checkmite

Does he belong to a gang?

He doesn't now for sure and I've no knowledge of whether he did or not. I do know that he was a violent criminal at one stage of his life and given that fact, despite him largely turning his life around, he fit the criteria laid down earlier.

That's not my criteria, you'll note, it's the criteria laid down by one of our resident white knights.

I did ask them to clarify where the line was but all I got was, "can't you read?" and other such avoidance waffle.

[EaglePuncher]

Originally Posted by Bogative

To help the myth-informed who believe the majority of mass shootings in this country are perpetrated by white men. The New York Times ran an analysis of the 2015 data, and according to them, 75% of mass shootings have blacks pulling the trigger. I was called a racist and an idiot by another member after posting the article because it is so ingrained in his mind that he wouldn't even believe the New York Times. Sad.

You still haven't shown us the connection between skin colour and being a criminal.

A hint: I live in Europe, white skinned people make up the majority of crimes, should I now make hateful posts about white people (like you do with black people)

[EaglePuncher]

Originally Posted by Bogative

Back with more race-based prejudice and stereotyping, I see.

The 'But Chicago!' mass shooting I posted earlier, the one with two dead and seven wounded, had a black man pulling the trigger. No mentions of gang affiliation, gang violence or drug dealing. Only that there was an argument at the McDonald's about 30 minutes prior to his arrival where he pulled out a gun and started poppin' caps. There was no white racist pulling the trigger so who gives a ****. Amirite? You may now return to your hidey-hole where you can ignore the dozens and dozens of mass shootings that will occur until you find one that meets your criteria to be butt hurt about.

PS – you were "pilloried" earlier in this thread because you keep repeating the lie that this thread is only about certain types of mass shootings.

And?

[Warp12]

Originally Posted by smartcooky

Nope, but if they want to, I will not shed a tear nor lose any sleep over it. It doesn't matter whether your skin is white, black, brown, red, yellow or orange...

Being a criminal is a choice!
Taking drugs is a choice!
Murdering others is a choice!

Originally Posted by Warp12

I never hear you talk about "Being a criminal is a choice" when we discuss black murder/crime rates, oddly. You seem to have every reason that "Being a criminal" is often not just a choice, but heavily influenced by external factors such as poverty.

As far as, "Taking drugs is a choice"...pretty much the same. First, there is such a thing as addiction science. Secondly, I can't really picture you promoting that idea with inner city blacks addicted to crack and other substances. It doesn't fit your usual narrative, at all.

But, ok, let's say that you consider mass shootings a choice. Fair enough. How about getting caught in the crossfire? Is that a choice also? How about if you are a gang member? Does that reduce the severity of the injury or death? Does it justify the result? Does it make it less of a real issue? Does it reduce the significance of the statistics? Not to mention, the psychology of why people join gangs in the first place might be of interest to you. Hint: It must not be the reasons that you think.

At any rate, I find these revelations on your stance very enlightening.

Still waiting for your response to this, Smartcooky. I suspect you missed this post when the thread was split. Some clarification, if there is any, would be great. I feel like you are sending conflicting messages on your level of concern for blacks shot in mass shootings.

[EaglePuncher]

Originally Posted by Warp12

Still waiting for your response to this, Smartcooky. I suspect you missed this post when the thread was split. Some clarification, if there is any, would be great. I feel like you are sending conflicting messages on your level of concern for blacks shot in mass shootings.

Wake me up when we get to "Having a darker skin colour means being a criminal"

[Warp12]

Originally Posted by EaglePuncher

Wake me up when we get to "Having a darker skin colour means being a criminal"

Darker skin color doesn't automatically mean "being a criminal". It just so happens that blacks commit 6x more murders per capita than whites, and clearly we can see a correlation to this with the number of blacks involved in mass shootings. As would be expected. Before we can fix the problems we need to acknowledge these facts.

[EaglePuncher]

Originally Posted by Warp12

Darker skin color doesn't automatically mean "being a criminal". It just so happens that blacks commit 6x more murders per capita than whites, and clearly we can see a correlation to this with the number of blacks involved in mass shootings. As would be expected.

How to contradict youself in a few sentences.

[JoeMorgue]

Y'all really think there's some meaningful distinction between "racism" and "thinking one race is worse."

[Warp12]

Originally Posted by EaglePuncher

How to contradict youself in a few sentences.

Weird interpretation, and an incorrect one. Nobody is characterizing all blacks as criminals. I am just presenting the relative murder rates, and how this seems to also carry over to the large representation in mass shootings.

[EaglePuncher]

Originally Posted by Warp12

Weird interpretation, and an incorrect one. Nobody is characterizing all blacks as criminals. I am just presenting the relative murder rates, and how this seems to also carry over to the large representation in mass shootings.

How to contradict yourself in 2 sentences.

[Bogative]

Originally Posted by EaglePuncher

You still haven't shown us the connection between skin colour and being a criminal.

I never claimed there was, that's an incorrect assumption you have arrived at.

Quote:

A hint: I live in Europe, white skinned people make up the majority of crimes, should I now make hateful posts about white people (like you do with black people)

Since you are from Europe you may not be familiar with the current narrative in the US. It goes something like this: OMG!1!!111!1!! duh the white supremeististz are an existential threat to our democracy!!111!11!!! and duh blackses can't leave their house without being mowed down by racistz1!!111!1!

The executive branch, congressional Democrats and most of the major media have a lot of people fooled into believing that white men, like the Buffalo shooter, are regularly pulling off mass shootings and murdering minorities. In fact, what happened in Buffalo is extremely rare when it comes to mass shootings. Right now the ratio for this year is 209:1. In the seven days following the Buffalo shooting there have been 13 mass shootings with 12 killed and 59 wounded. Mostly black on black. With a major US holiday coming up this week expect many more mass shootings and deaths that will be ignored because Republicans and white supremacists won't be pulling the trigger. As I said earlier it's extremely rare when a shooting like the one in Buffalo happens, it's been the opposite so far this year.

How quickly we forgot about the black nationalist who shot 10 people in a New York subway.

Being from Europe, did you hear about the Jewish Democrat mayoral candidate in Louisville, Kentucky who had a gunman walk into his campaign office and attempt to assassinate him? No? That's because he was a black BLM activist who had made an appearance on MSNBC and also espoused communist and socialist beliefs and liked to rag on "gun loving Republicans."

That act of political terrorism didn't even get a thread much less a post on this board, that I'm aware of.

If I wouldn't have mentioned it in this thread earlier, you probably wouldn't know about the Chinese man who walked into a predominantly Taiwanese church and opened fire, an act of political terrorism.

How about the Asian man who fired over 200 rounds from his fifth story Washington DC condo, injuring four including a 12-year-old child. How much have you heard about that one?

There is a narrative being punished and it is a lie.

[EaglePuncher]

Originally Posted by Bogative

I never claimed there was, that's an incorrect assumption you have arrived at.

*snipped unimportant rambling*

Then. what. is. your. point besides. dogwhistles?

[Bogative]

Originally Posted by EaglePuncher

Then. what. is. your. point besides. dogwhistles?

Counter narrative.

[EaglePuncher]

Originally Posted by Bogative

Counter narrative.

Translation: "I never had a point just lots of hate"

[Lurch]

If only I could bellow like a god, such that the whole rotten country should quake.

Squabbling and bickering over who's pulling the triggers? The bottom line is this, and for all sides of the argument: There are too many guns in too many undeserving hands.

[Lurch]

I'm coming to think that the bulk of today's fetishists of the 2nd Amendment are very like a cargo cult. They have no idea of the intention as warranted in its day, and are clueless about its inapplicability a couple centuries later. The rest of them are aware enough, but exploit the vague wording and the long establishment to successfully perpetuate their fetish.

[SuburbanTurkey]

Originally Posted by Lurch

I'm coming to think that the bulk of today's fetishists of the 2nd Amendment are very like a cargo cult. They have no idea of the intention as warranted in its day, and are clueless about its inapplicability a couple centuries later. The rest of them are aware enough, but exploit the vague wording and the long establishment to successfully perpetuate their fetish.

Depends on who you mean. I think a lot of armed Americans rightly understand how effective mass arming is for exerting the power of a pseudo-state through targeted acts of terrorism.

The amount of weapons in this country is probably not great, but unilateral disarming by people who aren't insane right wingers or violent criminals is probably not the way to improve things.

[cmikes]

Originally Posted by EaglePuncher

How to contradict youself in a few sentences.

So your claim is that reality is racist? Simple question, how can we come up with solutions to a problem when even defining the problem is, by your ideology, racist?

Here's a hint to help your cognitive dissonance. The fact that black men commit the majority of murders in this country per capita has nothing to do with the fact that they're black.

[Bogative]

Originally Posted by EaglePuncher

Translation: "I never had a point just lots of hate"

False. My point is, counter to common misconception, when it comes to mass shootings in the US, it's not white men who are the majority pulling the triggers. It's not even close. No hate, just facts.

[tyr_13]

Originally Posted by Bogative

I never claimed there was, that's an incorrect assumption you have arrived at.

Since you are from Europe you may not be familiar with the current narrative in the US. It goes something like this: OMG!1!!111!1!! duh the white supremeististz are an existential threat to our democracy!!111!11!!! and duh blackses can't leave their house without being mowed down by racistz1!!111!1!

The executive branch, congressional Democrats and most of the major media have a lot of people fooled into believing that white men, like the Buffalo shooter, are regularly pulling off mass shootings and murdering minorities. In fact, what happened in Buffalo is extremely rare when it comes to mass shootings. Right now the ratio for this year is 209:1. In the seven days following the Buffalo shooting there have been 13 mass shootings with 12 killed and 59 wounded. Mostly black on black. With a major US holiday coming up this week expect many more mass shootings and deaths that will be ignored because Republicans and white supremacists won't be pulling the trigger. As I said earlier it's extremely rare when a shooting like the one in Buffalo happens, it's been the opposite so far this year.

How quickly we forgot about the black nationalist who shot 10 people in a New York subway.

Being from Europe, did you hear about the Jewish Democrat mayoral candidate in Louisville, Kentucky who had a gunman walk into his campaign office and attempt to assassinate him? No? That's because he was a black BLM activist who had made an appearance on MSNBC and also espoused communist and socialist beliefs and liked to rag on "gun loving Republicans."

That act of political terrorism didn't even get a thread much less a post on this board, that I'm aware of.

If I wouldn't have mentioned it in this thread earlier, you probably wouldn't know about the Chinese man who walked into a predominantly Taiwanese church and opened fire, an act of political terrorism.

How about the Asian man who fired over 200 rounds from his fifth story Washington DC condo, injuring four including a 12-year-old child. How much have you heard about that one?

There is a narrative being punished and it is a lie.

Your lies about what non-Conservatives say about mass shootings aside, none of your examples were terrorist attacks in line with even a meaningful minority of a party's political beliefs. BLM doesn't make up lies about how Jews are bringing in Mexicans to rig the votes; mainstream Republicans do. That's why the Tree of Life shooting matters more (and of course that shooter killed more than none). None of these are supported by the political left. Who exactly was stoking the hatred that lead the Chinese man to attack? It wasn't a US political party.

Meanwhile the difference between the Buffalo terrorist and your politics is what kind of violence and who gets to administer it to solve the 'replacement problem'. You believe it should be normal level state violence while the shooter thought he should deal with it in a direct manner.

As long as you conservatives support the evil nonsense that brown people are taking the place and votes of 'real Americans', white nationalists are going to find you an ally. The GOP is their ally right now. As long as that is true, it will be a larger problem than gang violence or BLM protests. After all, they might storm the Capitol again.

[EaglePuncher]

Originally Posted by cmikes

So your claim is that reality is racist? Simple question, how can we come up with solutions to a problem when even defining the problem is, by your ideology, racist?

Here's a hint to help your cognitive dissonance. The fact that black men commit the majority of murders in this country per capita has nothing to do with the fact that they're black.

Why bring up skin colour then

[EaglePuncher]

Originally Posted by Bogative

False. My point is, counter to common misconception, when it comes to mass shootings in the US, it's not white men who are the majority pulling the triggers. It's not even close. No hate, just facts.

Take a look at your avatar.

[smartcooky]

Originally Posted by tyr_13

As long as you conservatives support the evil nonsense that brown people are taking the place and votes of 'real Americans', white nationalists are going to find you an ally. The GOP is their ally right now. As long as that is true, it will be a larger problem than gang violence or BLM protests. After all, they might storm the Capitol again.

This!

It wasn't a Black man who made a series of pipe bombs and sent them to prominent Democrats, Trump critics and CNN!

It wasn't a Black man who sent and planted bombs, killing and maiming random people like scientists, academics, airline executives and engineers all over the US.

It wasn't Black men that shot up Columbine, Sandy Hook, Virginia Tech, Parklands, Tree-of-Life Synagogue, Poway Synagogue, Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church, and most recently, Tops in Buffalo!

It wasn't a black man who shot and killed six people at a Democrat political rally!

It wasn't a Black man who was caught stockpiling weapons and compiling a hit list of government and media figures whom he was going kill on a rampage.

It wasn't Black men who plotted the kidnap and murder of a state Governor!

It wasn't a Black man who put a bomb in a U-Hire truck and blew up a Federal building, killing hundreds, including babies and children!

It wasn't Black people who stormed the Capitol and threatened to execute members of Congress!

This is why the FBI, the Justice Dept and Homeland Security have all been warning for years, under Presidents from BOTH parties, that White Supremacist terrorism is THE GREATEST CURRENT THREAT to US national security. This has been true since White Supremacist Tim McVeigh blew up the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in downtown Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995, and it is 100% true today!!


ETA: and no, I haven't forgotten about 9/11

[jimbob]

Moved several posts to AAH The topic is not the other posters

Responding to this mod box in thread will be off topic Posted By:jimbob

[Warp12]

NPR article:

It's 19 weeks into the year and America has already seen 198 mass shootings
https://www.npr.org/2022/05/15/10990...2-tally-number

Quote:

We ended 2021 with 693 mass shootings, per the Gun Violence Archive. The year before saw 611. And 2019 had 417.

Quote:

The tally comes from the Gun Violence Archive, an independent data collection organization. The group defines a mass shooting as an incident in which four or more people are shot or killed, excluding the shooter.

I think it is pretty clear that white right-wing terrorists are not anywhere near the top demographic represented in mass shootings...although you'd never gather that from the NPR article, of course (as expected). We can thank Bogative for keeping that front and center, whether you like his politics or not. The point isn't to demonize any particular race; the point is to focus on the facts so that the issues which will prevent the most shootings can be addressed.

The fact of the matter is, if you eliminated all right-wing extremist mass shootings it would hardly make a ding in the statistics.

[EaglePuncher]

Originally Posted by Warp12

NPR article:

It's 19 weeks into the year and America has already seen 198 mass shootings
https://www.npr.org/2022/05/15/10990...2-tally-number






I think it is pretty clear that white right-wing terrorists are not anywhere near the top demographic represented in mass shootings...although you'd never gather that from the NPR article, of course (as expected). We can thank Bogative for keeping that front and center, whether you like his politics or not. The point isn't to demonize any particular race; the point is to focus on the facts so that the issues which will prevent the most shootings can be addressed.

The fact of the matter is, if you eliminated all right-wing extremist mass shootings it would hardly make a ding in the statistics.

Easy solution, paint all the blacks white.

[cmikes]

Originally Posted by EaglePuncher

Why bring up skin colour then

Exactly. Now you're asking the right question. Why is it so important to some people that the vast majority of mass shootings be ignored to laser focus on the few committed by what they consider a disfavored racial group?

You'll notice, as Bogative pointed out above, that even a mass shooting committed by an Asian man just didn't count as a mass shooting for some reason. For some reason, it only counts if it's perpetuated by a white male, any other shootings may as well not have even happened.

If it can't be used as a springboard to hate on the very concept and existence of America, it's of no value to them.

[EaglePuncher]

Originally Posted by cmikes

Exactly. Now you're asking the right question. Why is it so important to some people that the vast majority of mass shootings be ignored to laser focus on the few committed by what they consider a disfavored racial group?

You'll notice, as Bogative pointed out above, that even a mass shooting committed by an Asian man just didn't count as a mass shooting for some reason. For some reason, it only counts if it's perpetuated by a white male, any other shootings may as well not have even happened.

If it can't be used as a springboard to hate on the very concept and existence of America, it's of no value to them.

Quotes a question, nothing he posts is related to the question.

[Checkmite]

At least 2 people are dead and 14 injured after a shooting at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, a small town some 80 miles west of San Antonio. Most of the known victims so far are children, according to the hospitals that have been receiving the patients. Police say the shooter is in custody.

ABC says day after tomorrow would've been the last day of the school year at this school.

[EaglePuncher]

Originally Posted by Checkmite

At least 2 people are dead and 14 injured after a shooting at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, a small town some 80 miles west of San Antonio. Most of the known victims so far are children, according to the hospitals that have been receiving the patients. Police say the shooter is in custody.

ABC says day after tomorrow would've been the last day of the school year at this school.

The article contains a link to another article talking about statistics from the FBI regarding an increase of active shooters. No mention of skin colour. Does the FBI not care about the skin colour of shooters or are they involved in a liberal conspiracy?

I mean according to some people we should look at "those black people" more closely regarding shootings. Why does the FBI not do that?

[alfaniner]

I can't stand it I can't stand it I can't stand it I can't stand it I can't stand it I can't stand it

especially when there are kids involved. I just want to shut down for days.