Mass shooting in Dayton Ohio

jaxxx

Again? Christ. The big issue I have with guns is this: guns weren't built for defending, they were built for killing. No one outside of the army in active service should have guns IMO. But then it's not as simple as that, cos criminals will just get them through the black market, which means armed police need them, and so a huge escalation race sets off in a vicious cycle.

Sweetemotion

jaxxx wrote: »

Again? Christ. The big issue I have with guns is this: guns weren't built for defending, they were built for killing. No one outside of the army in active service should have guns IMO. But then it's not as simple as that, cos criminals will just get them through the black market, which means armed police need them, and so a huge escalation race sets off in a vicious cycle.

Which army? And who chooses, which one is defending and which one is attacking .

lawlolawl

jaxxx wrote: »

Again? Christ. The big issue I have with guns is this: guns weren't built for defending, they were built for killing.

Killing someone is a pretty good way of defending something.


It's pretty much the best way of defending something in fact.

jaxxx

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Which army? And who chooses, which one is defending and which one is protecting.

Humans create guns to use against.. .. .. humans?


UK vs USA vs Iran vs China vs Russia vs.. .. ..


All this money spent on defence and the only threat we face is ourselves?


Until such time as the aliens or robots take over that is.

Sweetemotion

jaxxx wrote: »

Humans create guns to use against.. .. .. humans?


UK vs USA vs Iran vs China vs Russia vs.. .. ..


All this money spent on defence and the only threat we face is ourselves?


Until such time as the aliens or robots take over that is.

Has somebody been watching planet of the apes tonight or just stoned?

hatrickpatrick

banie01 wrote: »

That White men are the primary actors in these attacks, needs to be addressed and dealt with.

Maybe we could start by addressing the fact that if society continues to use certain people as a 'legitimate' and 'allowed' punching bag because of who they are, eventually those people will snap, and those of a certain psychological disposition will snap in ways which are unpredictable, violent, and dangerous?

The alt-right only came into mainstream prominence in 2016 in the context of a three-year campaign from 2013 onwards by vocal commentators and the media to push this toxic agenda that racism and sexism aren't just about bigotry, but collectivist social status as well. As soon as it became "ok" to print flagrantly anti-white, anti-male headlines - and to excuse the behaviour of downright psychotic racists and sexists in a way which would never be excused if their bigotry was targeted towards any other demographic (Sarah Jeong anyone?) - a violent, reactionary movement born out of frustration at being constantly pilloried and mocked with absolutely no recourse to object or retaliate, was the inevitable result.

What's been happening over the last number of years doesn't surprise me in the least. If someone spends their entire childhood or teenage years constantly reading about how sh!t they are as human beings because of who they were born as, coming from the mainstream, "respected" media which would never tolerate such commentary about anyone else, they are going to feel angry, aggrieved, discriminated against, and hopeless. Some proportion of these people will deal with it in dangerous and violent ways - such is always the case when persecution and resentment meet mental illness.

A mainstream culture which tolerates abhorrent cultural phenomena such as #KillAllMen and "cancel white people", while simultaneously battering both of these demographics any time they have the temerity to object, is a f*cking powder keg waiting to be ignited.

JP Liz V1

klaaaz wrote: »

6 of the 9 victims were black. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-49229054

RIP

Kermit.de.frog

FG youth leader attends US right wing conference.




The Fine Gaeler....



https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/anger-as-fg-youth-leader-attends-us-rightwing-conference-38374027.html

I'm just sayin...

Manic Moran

Overheal wrote: »

This is a misconstrued claim based on incomplete data:

More blacks are KILLED with guns than any other demographic.

The majority of SHOOTERS are NEVER caught or identified.

There is no evidence to connect that the ethnicity of the victim directly correlates to the ethnicity of the shooter. QED: the Texas shooter wasn’t Hispanic.

Apparently the FBI has sufficient data for a little under half of all murders where they can list the races of both victim and offender. You are correct to say that there is no direct correlation, but 6,000 cases out of 15,000 is enough to indicate a trend.

https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-09-29/race-and-homicide-in-america-by-the-numbers

banie01

Manic Moran wrote: »

Apparently the FBI has sufficient data for a little under half of all murders where they can list the races of both victim and offender. You are correct to say that there is no direct correlation, but 6,000 cases out of 15,000 is enough to indicate a trend.

https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-09-29/race-and-homicide-in-america-by-the-numbers

Again as I said to a different poster.
That is looking at the overall murder rate.

It is not looking at spree killing in isolation.
Of every spree killing that records are held for, what is the ratio of White perpetrators? To people of colour?

All facets of gun violence are an issue stateside, there is much that needs to be done on every level to address that violence.
However, the thrust of this thread is the preponderance of White Male spree shooters/mass murderers.
The total murder by violence rate plays no real part in a comparison here of black versus white IMO.

banie01

banie01 wrote: »

Again as I said to a different poster.
That is looking at the overall murder rate.

It is not looking at spree killing in isolation.
Of every spree killing that records are held for, what is the ratio of White perpetrators? To people of colour?

All facets of gun violence are an issue stateside, there is much that needs to be done on every level to address that violence.
However, the thrust of this thread is the preponderance of White Male spree shooters/mass murderers.
The total murder by violence rate plays no real part in a comparison here of black versus white IMO.

Some very interesting research on the numbers here
https://centerforinquiry.org/blog/who-are-mass-shooters-mass-shooter-demographics-part-2/

The articles premise is IMO a good one, but its methodology and in particular it's data selection leaves a lot to be desired.

It is important IMO to note the difference between the spree/random attack style of mass public shootings and school shootings, and to sift those particular type of attack from the rest of the murder rate.

Yes, it can be surmised that more blacks are killed violently and that more blacks kill violently than White in either instance.
Extending that surmisation to the specific nature of Spree/Mass killings, quite specifically and deliberately ignores the circumstances that drive those killers IMO.

It does a huge disservice to the victims too.
The least they deserve apart from the actual application of Justice is that the driving motive that drove someone to attack them is investigated and hopefully addressed to reduce the likelihood of it happening to someone else.

banie01

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Maybe we could start by addressing the fact that if society continues to use certain people as a 'legitimate' and 'allowed' punching bag because of who they are, eventually those people will snap, and those of a certain psychological disposition will snap in ways which are unpredictable, violent, and dangerous?

Interesting post HTP.
Not sure I'd immediately agree with your thesis but you have given me food for thought and a research topic for the day.

I will be back

It seems this shooter was an Elizabeth Warren supporting Democrat :

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/dayton-shooter-reportedly-supported-gun-control-elizabeth-warren-and-socialism

Are we to blame Elizabeth Warren for this shooting?

People here seem to mistake the likes of CNN and NBC for news networks where in fact they are simply mouthpieces of the Democratic party. Very interesting watching the Kennedys on RTE last night where I learned the Democrats were the ones backing racial segregation in the South in the 60s.

RTE reports their take verbatim of course.

I'm all for gun control but this knee jerk reaction to blame Trump for mass shootings is nonsense. Its just the same as blaming Islam for terror where its the extremists that are the problem.

I actually think Trump is going to do something in terms of gun control today,.judging by his comments yesterday.

banie01

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It seems this shooter was an Elizabeth Warren supporting Democrat :

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/dayton-shooter-reportedly-supported-gun-control-elizabeth-warren-and-socialism

Are we to blame Elizabeth Warren for this shooting?

Extremism, be it of the left or the right is dangerous if shootings are the outcome.
Without getting into comparing the Rhetoric of Trump v Warren or A.N other.
If Warren spoke in a manner likely to fuel violence or stoke hatred, then of course she should be called out on it.

It's the identification and elimination of what causes this reaction that needs to be looked at IMO.
What drives someone to believe that by grabbing a gun and shooting indiscriminately, that they can effect any change likely to be viewed as positive in their worldview?

Apart from some form of notoriety?
What do those shooters hope to gain?
How can society address those issues in a way that will preclude those with a tendency to it, from actually grabbing a gun and shooting?

Beasty

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Has somebody been watching planet of the apes tonight or just stoned?

Please keep your contributions civil

banie01

banie01 wrote: »

Extremism, be it of the left or the right is dangerous if shootings are the outcome.
Without getting into comparing the Rhetoric of Trump v Warren or A.N other.
If Warren spoke in a manner likely to fuel violence or stoke hatred, then of course she should be called out on it.

It's the identification and elimination of what causes this reaction that needs to be looked at IMO.
What drives someone to believe that by grabbing a gun and shooting indiscriminately, that they can effect any change likely to be viewed as positive in their worldview?

Apart from some form of notoriety?
What do those shooters hope to gain?
How can society address those issues in a way that will preclude those with a tendency to it, from actually grabbing a gun and shooting?

I do think mental illness is a factor here. Racism appears to be the driving motive in the El Paso shooting.

You are always going to have nut jobs - they shouldn't have access to high power semi automatic weapons.

Listening to Trump last night I think he will do something about gun control today.

dodderangler

Love how everyone is blaming trump and white dudes on this.
Here’s one for you. Since the start of the summer there has been over sixty mass shootings in America by the black race.
But you won’t hear about it because it’s not done by whites and we all know how the dems love pinning whites down.

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/chicago.cbslocal.com/2019/08/04/weekend-shootings-chicago-2/amp/

Chicago loses more people in a weekend than Ireland does in almost a full year on guns. And Chicago is a gun free zone.
My point being that strict gun laws do not work. It’s not the guns. It’s the lunatics that get them.
Drugs are illegal here in Ireland yet I could get my hands on coke pretty ****ing quick if I need to.
Bad people will always find a way to get or do something illegally.
In England a Muslim man killed people with a car. Do we look at strict car laws now❓

banie01

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I do think mental illness is a factor here. Racism appears to be the driving motive in the El Paso shooting.

You are always going to have nut jobs - they shouldn't have access to high power semi automatic weapons.

Honestly, I think that the reliance on mental illness as an animus for these incidents in the US is overplayed at this point.

I do not doubt it is a factor, but if a system allows someone with no competency to own a lethal weapon with minimal checks whilst at the same time requiring proof of competency, adequate registration and insurance to operate a vehicle?

Then there really is a flaw in the way the system is set up.

dodderangler

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I do think mental illness is a factor here. Racism appears to be the driving motive in the El Paso shooting.

You are always going to have nut jobs - they shouldn't have access to high power semi automatic weapons.

A semi auto .22 can do the same damage if used by someone who knows what they are doing.
Only difference is range. I can put a half inch group with a .22 semi at hundred yards. No difference than a larger calibration except range
A 22 will end your life same

dodderangler

dodderangler wrote: »

Love how everyone is blaming trump and white dudes on this.
Here’s one for you. Since the start of the summer there has been over sixty mass shootings in America by the black race.
But you won’t hear about it because it’s not done by whites and we all know how the dems love pinning whites down.

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/chicago.cbslocal.com/2019/08/04/weekend-shootings-chicago-2/amp/

Chicago loses more people in a weekend than Ireland does in almost a full year on guns. And Chicago is a gun free zone.
My point being that strict gun laws do not work. It’s not the guns. It’s the lunatics that get them.
Drugs are illegal here in Ireland yet I could get my hands on coke pretty ****ing quick if I need to.
Bad people will always find a way to get or do something illegally.
In England a Muslim man killed people with a car. Do we look at strict car laws now❓

Yeah but we don't make it easy for them. Gun control is clearly needed. Note I say control and not banning. It should be hard to get a gun - if you want one for hunting and pest control then fine but it should be difficult.

dodderangler

dodderangler wrote: »

A semi auto .22 can do the same damage if used by someone who knows what they are doing.
Only difference is range. I can put a half inch group with a .22 semi at hundred yards. No difference than a larger calibration except range
A 22 will end your life same

Yuo cant fire 200 rounds with a. 22. Plus if you have to jump though hoops to get one most of these sad sacks won't bother.

I grew up around guns. We had respect for them - and we didn't have acesss to the kind of guns that could kill 100 people in a minute.

dodderangler

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yuo cant fire 200 rounds with a. 22. Plus if you have to jump though hoops to get one most of these sad sacks won't bother.

You can’t fire two hundred with any rifle unless it’s belt fed with someone beside you holding it.
Bet you think a AR can shoot thirty rounds in half a second like the liberals in murica

banie01

dodderangler wrote: »

A semi auto .22 can do the same damage if used by someone who knows what they are doing.
Only difference is range. I can put a half inch group with a .22 semi at hundred yards. No difference than a larger calibration except range
A 22 will end your life same

How many rounds does your .22 magazine hold?
What is the legal maximum for such a magazine in Ireland?
The damage inflated by a .22lr round versus a HV.223 round are night and day apart
The cavitation and ballistic shock from a .223 round is designed to main and incapacitate soldiers.
A .22lr round is designed and used to kill small game with minimal damage to meat.

Yes a .22 can and will kill someone if the round hits a vital area.
That said, .22 rounds have very low penetration, very little cavitation and the amount of people who have survived multiple hits from a .22 is quite surprising.
I actually know of a person local to me who was shot in the head with a .22 and survived with no Ill effect.

Your attempt to draw an equivalence between .22 ownership on Ireland, and the prevalence of .223 firearms is a false one.

There are plenty of high power semi auto rifles of .223 and higher in public ownership in Ireland.
Yet there is no history of mass shootings
Why?

Given the quite onerous requirements here to gain a license, requirements that include mental health checks?

dodderangler

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yeah but we don't make it easy for them. Gun control is clearly needed. Note I say control and not banning. It should be hard to get a gun - if you want one for hunting and pest control then fine but it should be difficult.

But it is easy that’s the thing. It’s too easy to get your hands on a gun legal or not in America. Laws won’t change it.

dodderangler

dodderangler wrote: »

You can’t fire two hundred with any rifle unless it’s belt fed with someone beside you holding it.
Bet you think a AR can shoot thirty rounds in half a second like the liberals in murica

He had 100 round drum magazines.

dodderangler

dodderangler wrote: »

But it is easy that’s the thing. It’s too easy to get your hands on a gun legal or not in America. Laws won’t change it.

They will! Not right away as America is awash with guns - but do you really think a nerd like this idiot would mix with the gangstas in the hood that could supply him with this kind of firepower if guns like this were illegal? No way Jose.

pjohnson

[Deleted User] wrote: »

He had 100 round drum magazines.

Thats wut de Librals want you to think I'm sure will be the answer.

dodderangler

banie01 wrote: »

How many rounds does your .22 magazine hold?
What is the legal maximum for such a magazine in Ireland?
The damage inflated by a .22lr round versus a HV.223 round are night and day apart
The cavitation and ballistic shock from a .223 round is designed to main and incapacitate soldiers.
A .22lr round is designed and used to kill small game with minimal damage to meat.

Yes a .22 can and will kill someone if the round hits a vital area.
That said, .22 rounds have very low penetration, very little cavitation and the amount of people who have survived multiple hits from a .22 is quite surprising.
I actually know of a person local to me who was shot in the head with a .22 and survived with no Ill effect.

Your attempt to draw an equivalence between .22 ownership on Ireland, and the prevalence of .223 firearms is a false one.

There are plenty of high power semi auto rifles of .223 and higher in public ownership in Ireland.
Yet there is no history of mass shootings
Why?

Given the quite onerous requirements here to gain a license, requirements that include mental health checks?

I have a 223 and you still completely missed my point. The point is I can kill someone with a 22 the same as a 223 with a different bullet and well placed shot. I could use a stinger at hundred yards and drop someone on the spot. Just because the exit hole is larger with a 223 doesn’t mean the result is any different.
And in regards to soldiers the rounds used are full metal jackets. Designed as such to take someone out and also the person behind them. Full metals don’t expand. They continue on I used one without realising on a fox before and the fox ran off dying few Seconds later but the bullet done damage to a fence post behind it and left me speechless
My point is anyone with a good shot can do the same shots with a lower calibre rifle. The size doesn’t matter.
It’s the clown holding it.

dodderangler

[Deleted User] wrote: »

They will! Not right away as America is awash with guns - but do you really think a nerd like this idiot would mix with the gangstas in the hood that could supply him with this kind of firepower if guns like this were illegal? No way Jose.

A nerd❓ So you think his looks will change the fact some hoodrat is getting money❓
That’s all it’s about is money. They don’t care who they sell it to. Do you live under a rock

I'm not a fan of the Democrats or Trump but to knee jerk blame Trump is quite frankly stupid. This has gone on for decades in America.

dodderangler

[Deleted User] wrote: »

He had 100 round drum magazines.

Magazine. Not magazines.
He had a two drum that holds fifty on each side.

pjohnson

dodderangler wrote: »

I have a 223 and you still completely missed my point. The point is I can kill someone with a 22 the same as a 223 with a different bullet and well placed shot. I could use a stinger at hundred yards and drop someone on the spot. Just because the exit hole is larger with a 223 doesn’t mean the result is any different.
And in regards to soldiers the rounds used are full metal jackets. Designed as such to take someone out and also the person behind them. Full metals don’t expand. They continue on I used one without realising on a fox before and the fox ran off dying few Seconds later but the bullet done damage to a fence post behind it and left me speechless
My point is anyone with a good shot can do the same shots with a lower calibre rifle. The size doesn’t matter.
It’s the clown holding it.

That sounds like responsible gun ownership. Do you often not know what exactly you are using?

dodderangler

dodderangler wrote: »

A nerd❓ So you think his looks will change the fact some hoodrat is getting money❓
That’s all it’s about is money. They don’t care who they sell it to. Do you live under a rock

He wouldn't be anywhere near them in his white middle class American life. He'd have to find somewhere to hide it from cops and from mom and pop. All of a sudden its a damn sight harder. And the US cops are nothing like ours.

banie01

banie01 wrote: »

[
That White men are the primary actors in these attacks, needs to be addressed and dealt with.

Racist.

dodderangler

dodderangler wrote: »

Magazine. Not magazines.
He had a two drum that holds fifty on each side.

The report I read said he had several of them.

banie01

dodderangler wrote: »

I have a 223 and you still completely missed my point. The point is I can kill someone with a 22 the same as a 223 with a different bullet and well placed shot. I could use a stinger at hundred yards and drop someone on the spot. Just because the exit hole is larger with a 223 doesn’t mean the result is any different.
And in regards to soldiers the rounds used are full metal jackets. Designed as such to take someone out and also the person behind them. Full metals don’t expand. They continue on I used one without realising on a fox before and the fox ran off dying few Seconds later but the bullet done damage to a fence post behind it and left me speechless
My point is anyone with a good shot can do the same shots with a lower calibre rifle. The size doesn’t matter.
It’s the clown holding it.

How many people were killed and injured in Dayton?
How many of those people injured were due to what a hunter would call overpenetration?
From the high velocity .223 round passing thru the 1st person hit and carrying on?

How much is overpenetration an issue with your .22 and your lethal skills?
If you walk into a pub with your .22 on a spray and pray...
How many shots do you get to fire before a mag change?

Your anyone with a good shot point, is fairly redundant.
Yes a .22 can kill if handled well and with good shot placement.
A .223 however, doesn't need any of those skills
It's a spray and pray weapon designed specifically to kill and main.
One of the reasons the .223 round was adopted was the belief prevalent at the time of its introduction that it's wound capabilities were in excess of the 7.62 round
An army would much rather swamp it's adversary with woundedas well as dead.

Tired Gardener

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Maybe we could start by addressing the fact that if society continues to use certain people as a 'legitimate' and 'allowed' punching bag because of who they are, eventually those people will snap, and those of a certain psychological disposition will snap in ways which are unpredictable, violent, and dangerous?

The alt-right only came into mainstream prominence in 2016 in the context of a three-year campaign from 2013 onwards by vocal commentators and the media to push this toxic agenda that racism and sexism aren't just about bigotry, but collectivist social status as well. As soon as it became "ok" to print flagrantly anti-white, anti-male headlines - and to excuse the behaviour of downright psychotic racists and sexists in a way which would never be excused if their bigotry was targeted towards any other demographic (Sarah Jeong anyone?) - a violent, reactionary movement born out of frustration at being constantly pilloried and mocked with absolutely no recourse to object or retaliate, was the inevitable result.

What's been happening over the last number of years doesn't surprise me in the least. If someone spends their entire childhood or teenage years constantly reading about how sh!t they are as human beings because of who they were born as, coming from the mainstream, "respected" media which would never tolerate such commentary about anyone else, they are going to feel angry, aggrieved, discriminated against, and hopeless. Some proportion of these people will deal with it in dangerous and violent ways - such is always the case when persecution and resentment meet mental illness.

A mainstream culture which tolerates abhorrent cultural phenomena such as #KillAllMen and "cancel white people", while simultaneously battering both of these demographics any time they have the temerity to object, is a f*cking powder keg waiting to be ignited.

A few things to unpack from your argument.

1)
Mass shootings have been happening in the USA long before the media outlets covered the social change of holding some white men accountable for their poor behaviour. Was as before they would get away with it. All the while those who were typically the victims were living in an environment that painted them in a none too favourable light... yet those demographics didn't feel the need to commit acts to this level. 251 mass shootings in 2019 alone.

2)
The real take away from your argument is that there are a lot of white straight men who society needs to handle with kid gloves, tell them that their actions are no longer acceptable or even have a place in modern society, and that could potentially be enough to push them over into an act of mass violence, where as other demographics who have a long history of actual being oppressed and demonised.. don't have the same history or connection with acts of mass violence. Your argument makes white straight men into a joke, and only helps to cause more devision. As it paints them as a demographic that handles criticism of poor behaviour as a legitimate excuse to commit acts of mass violence.

Back on topic.
Sadly I doubt this will make anything change. It has become too normal for the USA. I'd like to think that there are steps that can be made to address this issue, such as strict gun control, better mental health awareness, and the media to stop talking about the shooter (don't even mention their name).

Outside of a miracle, this is going to be an all too common occurrence in the USA.

Cody montana

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I'm not a fan of the Democrats or Trump but to knee jerk blame Trump is quite frankly stupid. This has gone on for decades in America.

I certainly blame him.
He encourages hate and division.

Tired Gardener

Tired Gardener wrote: »

Was as before they would get away with it. All the while those who were typically the victims were living in an environment that painted them in a none too favourable light... yet those demographics didn't feel the need to commit acts to this level. 251 mass shootings in 2019 alone.

A couple of things here :

1. The majority of Americans are white, so it's not surprising they are over represented in the mass shooting stats. In areas with Liberal attitudes to guns I'd say the white ratio is far higher.

2. A lot of the mass shootings were disgruntled employees shooting up their workplaces, nothing to do with white supremacy. The Vegas shooter shot up a country and western festival!

3. How many of these 251 shootings were white men? At least 1 was an Asian woman. Another was a Muslim man.

I am not saying there is no racism or white supremacy in the US. There certainly is. The El Paso shooting is clearly racially motivated. But its incorrect and inflammatory to attribute even a sizeable minority of these shootings to white supremacy.

Harvey Weinstein

One right and one left on the same day. Dayton shooter heavily linked to antifa as per his social media accounts. Also looks like he was itching to kill judging from his twitter ramblings.

While blacks are over represented in gun murders, most of the are gang/drug related.
There is a problem with middle class white men committing mass shootings, it has become a thing. As others have said its been happening long before Trump came along.
I wonder how much SSRIs and anti depressants have to do with it as seemingly the majority of mass shooters are heavily medicated.

dodderangler

pjohnson wrote: »

That sounds like responsible gun ownership. Do you often not know what exactly you are using?

Guess you’re perfect and never make a mistake. How wonderful it must be to sit on a high horse all the time.

InTheShadows

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm not a fan of the Democrats or Trump but to knee jerk blame Trump is quite frankly stupid. This has gone on for decades in America.

Some people will blame Trump for anything the same way some people will blame Muslims for everything. It's these people that are the real problem sowing division and hatred.

dodderangler

Cody montana wrote: »

I certainly blame him.
He encourages hate and division.

Shut up mate. You’re boring. Bet you blame your own faults on your parents aswell

dodderangler

InTheShadows wrote: »

Some people will blame Trump for anything the same way some people will blame Muslims for everything. It's these people that are the real problem sowing division and hatred.

But Muslims do promote hate. It’s in their book to behead those opposed to Mohammed.

dodderangler

dodderangler wrote: »

But Muslims do promote hate. It’s in their book to behead those opposed to Mohammed.

Have you ever read the Old Testament?

dodderangler

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Have you ever read the Old Testament?

Yeah. It’s cool. I like the part with the dude and the wine and then he dies but left the oven on so he came back from the dead to turn it off.

banie01

[Deleted User] wrote: »

A couple of things here :

1. The majority of Americans are white, so it's not surprising they are over represented in the mass shooting stats. In areas with Liberal attitudes to guns I'd say the white ratio is far higher.

So more whites = more white shooters.
Except that's not whats at play here is it?
The vast majority of gun crime is commited by people of colour black/Hispanic.
Surely as there are more whites, by your logic it should be the other way around?

[Deleted User] wrote: »

2. A lot of the mass shootings were disgruntled employees shooting up their workplaces, nothing to do with white supremacy. The Vegas shooter shot up a country and western festival! .

The issue isn't that anyone believes all these spree killings are inherently racist.
Be it that someone goes postal, attacks their school or rocks up to a bar with a semi auto.
What needs answering to my mind at least, is why so many of this particular style of spree is carried out by angry white men?
Why is this course of action seen as a viable choice?
Is it an attempt at suicide by cop?
Is it some twisted desire for notoriety?
Is it that they had a specific target and decided whilst they were out doing that to see how far they could go?
In light of the 8chan posts of recent shooters is there a subculture effort to gameify spree killings and go for "high scores"

[Deleted User] wrote: »

. How many of these 251 shootings were white men? At least 1 was an Asian woman. Another was a Muslim man.

So of 251mass shootings, @0.5% were definitely carried out by people of colour...
So we can ignore that race of the shooter(Note I said of the shooter) may have played any part in the other 99.5% of attacks?
Really?

Would you mind expanding your logic a little bit on this point so I can try and get a handle on it please?

Venom

Harvey Weinstein wrote: »

One right and one left on the same day. Dayton shooter heavily linked to antifa as per his social media accounts. Also looks like he was itching to kill judging from his twitter ramblings

The shooter's links to Antifa, socialism and his support of Warren will somehow not get much coverage from the media I reckon.

MrFresh

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm not a fan of the Democrats or Trump but to knee jerk blame Trump is quite frankly stupid. This has gone on for decades in America.

It's not knee jerk though. People have been warning for a while that his hateful divisive rhetoric would result in violence. Obviously you can't blame his rhetoric for all mass shootings but he did have control of all three branches of government for two years and didn't do anything of note to address the issue.