Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic.
I always see these comments after a shooting. But the data doesn't back it up Mass shootings are not a "white" problem, but it is typically portrayed as one.
Using the FBI definition of a mass shooting of 3 fatalities or more, only 58% are from white shooters.
The number doesn't change by a lot using a different definition.
parse out the gang affiliated shooting from that. what do those numbers look like then?
Moving the goal posts to fit a narrative then is what I'd call that.
to start, mace inferred that Gern was saying all mass shootings are white guys. he didnt say that.
2. breaking down the types of mass shootings are moving the goal posts? Given most of the white guy mass shootings used legal weapons or by those with access to same and most gang mass shootings use illegal guns , I think that becomes an important distinction between the two.
so please explain how you see it as moving the goal posts.
Yes, its been said before that mass shootings is a white person's problem. I interpreted Gern's comment of "Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic." as implying the same thing. If not, then I apologize to Gern for misunderstanding his comment.
And yes, excluding an entire population so that it fits a narrative is exactly that, moving the goal posts. You either agree or not that it's mostly a white problem. If you look at the data, you'd say it's not. If you listen to comments of "another white guy..." and ignore the data, or cherry pick it, then you'd probably say it is. Why exclude anyone? Why not exclude angry white guys then, and claim they are zero percent of the problem?
Post edited by mace1229 on
0
Options
mickeyrat
up my ass, like Chadwick was up his Posts: 35,934
Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic.
I always see these comments after a shooting. But the data doesn't back it up Mass shootings are not a "white" problem, but it is typically portrayed as one.
Using the FBI definition of a mass shooting of 3 fatalities or more, only 58% are from white shooters.
The number doesn't change by a lot using a different definition.
parse out the gang affiliated shooting from that. what do those numbers look like then?
Moving the goal posts to fit a narrative then is what I'd call that.
to start, mace inferred that Gern was saying all mass shootings are white guys. he didnt say that.
2. breaking down the types of mass shootings are moving the goal posts? Given most of the white guy mass shootings used legal weapons or by those with access to same and most gang mass shootings use illegal guns , I think that becomes an important distinction between the two.
so please explain how you see it as moving the goal posts.
Yes, its been said before that mass shootings is a white person's problem. I interpreted Gern's comment of "Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic." as implying the same thing. If not, then I apologize to Gern for misunderstanding his comment.
And yes, excluding an entire population so that it fits a narrative is exactly that, moving the goal posts. You either agree or not that it's mostly a white problem. If you look at the data, you'd say it's not. If you listen to comments of "another white guy..." and ignore the data, or cherry pick it, then you'd probably say it is. Why exclude anyone? Why not exclude angry white guys then, and claim they are zero percent of the problem?
a variety of problems to address.
First we'll go with the illegal gun flow that begin as legal purchases. big problem, no? Seems there are simple things to address this, BUT NRA beholden politicians that pander to a subset of Americans looking at only half of the amendment that grants that right.
Second lets address the disaffected white guy with access to legal guns. This LV shooting in particular, a PROFESSOR got butthurt he didnt get a job there. Now the PD searched his apt. in Henderson. Feels like a sense of entitlement here. So it begs a couple questions, why in the fuck do you move across the country without employment in your chosen field? He left a university in NC. IDK enough of this part to i.e. why he left NC, under what circumstances, when, how long in LV, etc to really comment but on the surface wtf. Cops arent saying type of weapon, but I wonder when purchased etc.
doing nothing isn't tenable imo.
UNLESS you specifically and politicians and others of like mind EXPLICITLY STATE the needless death is acceptable to maintain the Government granted Right.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic.
I always see these comments after a shooting. But the data doesn't back it up Mass shootings are not a "white" problem, but it is typically portrayed as one.
Using the FBI definition of a mass shooting of 3 fatalities or more, only 58% are from white shooters.
The number doesn't change by a lot using a different definition.
parse out the gang affiliated shooting from that. what do those numbers look like then?
Moving the goal posts to fit a narrative then is what I'd call that.
to start, mace inferred that Gern was saying all mass shootings are white guys. he didnt say that.
2. breaking down the types of mass shootings are moving the goal posts? Given most of the white guy mass shootings used legal weapons or by those with access to same and most gang mass shootings use illegal guns , I think that becomes an important distinction between the two.
so please explain how you see it as moving the goal posts.
Yes, its been said before that mass shootings is a white person's problem. I interpreted Gern's comment of "Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic." as implying the same thing. If not, then I apologize to Gern for misunderstanding his comment.
And yes, excluding an entire population so that it fits a narrative is exactly that, moving the goal posts. You either agree or not that it's mostly a white problem. If you look at the data, you'd say it's not. If you listen to comments of "another white guy..." and ignore the data, or cherry pick it, then you'd probably say it is. Why exclude anyone? Why not exclude angry white guys then, and claim they are zero percent of the problem?
a variety of problems to address.
First we'll go with the illegal gun flow that begin as legal purchases. big problem, no? Seems there are simple things to address this, BUT NRA beholden politicians that pander to a subset of Americans looking at only half of the amendment that grants that right.
Second lets address the disaffected white guy with access to legal guns. This LV shooting in particular, a PROFESSOR got butthurt he didnt get a job there. Now the PD searched his apt. in Henderson. Feels like a sense of entitlement here. So it begs a couple questions, why in the fuck do you move across the country without employment in your chosen field? He left a university in NC. IDK enough of this part to i.e. why he left NC, under what circumstances, when, how long in LV, etc to really comment but on the surface wtf. Cops arent saying type of weapon, but I wonder when purchased etc.
doing nothing isn't tenable imo.
UNLESS you specifically and politicians and others of like mind EXPLICITLY STATE the needless death is acceptable to maintain the Government granted Right.
None of that seems to have anything to do with my comment though. I was responding specifically to calling out whites. Why bring race into it if that wasn't the point? So, sounds like the comment was implying white people are at fault more often.
I provided data to support the claim that race is not a factor in mass shootings, it's an all races problem. You said it is, as long as we ignore the gang data. You can't just ignore entire populations to fit your narrative. None of what you just posted has anything to do with that.
Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic.
I always see these comments after a shooting. But the data doesn't back it up Mass shootings are not a "white" problem, but it is typically portrayed as one.
Using the FBI definition of a mass shooting of 3 fatalities or more, only 58% are from white shooters.
The number doesn't change by a lot using a different definition.
parse out the gang affiliated shooting from that. what do those numbers look like then?
Moving the goal posts to fit a narrative then is what I'd call that.
to start, mace inferred that Gern was saying all mass shootings are white guys. he didnt say that.
2. breaking down the types of mass shootings are moving the goal posts? Given most of the white guy mass shootings used legal weapons or by those with access to same and most gang mass shootings use illegal guns , I think that becomes an important distinction between the two.
so please explain how you see it as moving the goal posts.
Yes, its been said before that mass shootings is a white person's problem. I interpreted Gern's comment of "Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic." as implying the same thing. If not, then I apologize to Gern for misunderstanding his comment.
And yes, excluding an entire population so that it fits a narrative is exactly that, moving the goal posts. You either agree or not that it's mostly a white problem. If you look at the data, you'd say it's not. If you listen to comments of "another white guy..." and ignore the data, or cherry pick it, then you'd probably say it is. Why exclude anyone? Why not exclude angry white guys then, and claim they are zero percent of the problem?
a variety of problems to address.
First we'll go with the illegal gun flow that begin as legal purchases. big problem, no? Seems there are simple things to address this, BUT NRA beholden politicians that pander to a subset of Americans looking at only half of the amendment that grants that right.
Second lets address the disaffected white guy with access to legal guns. This LV shooting in particular, a PROFESSOR got butthurt he didnt get a job there. Now the PD searched his apt. in Henderson. Feels like a sense of entitlement here. So it begs a couple questions, why in the fuck do you move across the country without employment in your chosen field? He left a university in NC. IDK enough of this part to i.e. why he left NC, under what circumstances, when, how long in LV, etc to really comment but on the surface wtf. Cops arent saying type of weapon, but I wonder when purchased etc.
doing nothing isn't tenable imo.
UNLESS you specifically and politicians and others of like mind EXPLICITLY STATE the needless death is acceptable to maintain the Government granted Right.
None of that seems to have anything to do with my comment though. I was responding specifically to calling out whites. Why bring race into it if that wasn't the point? So, sounds like the comment was implying white people are at fault more often.
I provided data to support the claim that race is not a factor in mass shootings, it's an all races problem. You said it is, as long as we ignore the gang data. You can't just ignore entire populations to fit your narrative. None of what you just posted has anything to do with that.
The link you provided confirms white people are at fault more often than not.
Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic.
I always see these comments after a shooting. But the data doesn't back it up Mass shootings are not a "white" problem, but it is typically portrayed as one.
Using the FBI definition of a mass shooting of 3 fatalities or more, only 58% are from white shooters.
The number doesn't change by a lot using a different definition.
parse out the gang affiliated shooting from that. what do those numbers look like then?
Moving the goal posts to fit a narrative then is what I'd call that.
to start, mace inferred that Gern was saying all mass shootings are white guys. he didnt say that.
2. breaking down the types of mass shootings are moving the goal posts? Given most of the white guy mass shootings used legal weapons or by those with access to same and most gang mass shootings use illegal guns , I think that becomes an important distinction between the two.
so please explain how you see it as moving the goal posts.
Yes, its been said before that mass shootings is a white person's problem. I interpreted Gern's comment of "Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic." as implying the same thing. If not, then I apologize to Gern for misunderstanding his comment.
And yes, excluding an entire population so that it fits a narrative is exactly that, moving the goal posts. You either agree or not that it's mostly a white problem. If you look at the data, you'd say it's not. If you listen to comments of "another white guy..." and ignore the data, or cherry pick it, then you'd probably say it is. Why exclude anyone? Why not exclude angry white guys then, and claim they are zero percent of the problem?
a variety of problems to address.
First we'll go with the illegal gun flow that begin as legal purchases. big problem, no? Seems there are simple things to address this, BUT NRA beholden politicians that pander to a subset of Americans looking at only half of the amendment that grants that right.
Second lets address the disaffected white guy with access to legal guns. This LV shooting in particular, a PROFESSOR got butthurt he didnt get a job there. Now the PD searched his apt. in Henderson. Feels like a sense of entitlement here. So it begs a couple questions, why in the fuck do you move across the country without employment in your chosen field? He left a university in NC. IDK enough of this part to i.e. why he left NC, under what circumstances, when, how long in LV, etc to really comment but on the surface wtf. Cops arent saying type of weapon, but I wonder when purchased etc.
doing nothing isn't tenable imo.
UNLESS you specifically and politicians and others of like mind EXPLICITLY STATE the needless death is acceptable to maintain the Government granted Right.
None of that seems to have anything to do with my comment though. I was responding specifically to calling out whites. Why bring race into it if that wasn't the point? So, sounds like the comment was implying white people are at fault more often.
I provided data to support the claim that race is not a factor in mass shootings, it's an all races problem. You said it is, as long as we ignore the gang data. You can't just ignore entire populations to fit your narrative. None of what you just posted has anything to do with that.
The link you provided confirms white people are at fault more often than not.
Whites make up about 75% of the country, but less than 75% of mass shootings. That's like saying Bakersfield has less crime because they have fewer murders than LA, but when you look at it per capita, Bakersfield is almost double.
Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic.
I always see these comments after a shooting. But the data doesn't back it up Mass shootings are not a "white" problem, but it is typically portrayed as one.
Using the FBI definition of a mass shooting of 3 fatalities or more, only 58% are from white shooters.
The number doesn't change by a lot using a different definition.
parse out the gang affiliated shooting from that. what do those numbers look like then?
Moving the goal posts to fit a narrative then is what I'd call that.
to start, mace inferred that Gern was saying all mass shootings are white guys. he didnt say that.
2. breaking down the types of mass shootings are moving the goal posts? Given most of the white guy mass shootings used legal weapons or by those with access to same and most gang mass shootings use illegal guns , I think that becomes an important distinction between the two.
so please explain how you see it as moving the goal posts.
Yes, its been said before that mass shootings is a white person's problem. I interpreted Gern's comment of "Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic." as implying the same thing. If not, then I apologize to Gern for misunderstanding his comment.
And yes, excluding an entire population so that it fits a narrative is exactly that, moving the goal posts. You either agree or not that it's mostly a white problem. If you look at the data, you'd say it's not. If you listen to comments of "another white guy..." and ignore the data, or cherry pick it, then you'd probably say it is. Why exclude anyone? Why not exclude angry white guys then, and claim they are zero percent of the problem?
a variety of problems to address.
First we'll go with the illegal gun flow that begin as legal purchases. big problem, no? Seems there are simple things to address this, BUT NRA beholden politicians that pander to a subset of Americans looking at only half of the amendment that grants that right.
Second lets address the disaffected white guy with access to legal guns. This LV shooting in particular, a PROFESSOR got butthurt he didnt get a job there. Now the PD searched his apt. in Henderson. Feels like a sense of entitlement here. So it begs a couple questions, why in the fuck do you move across the country without employment in your chosen field? He left a university in NC. IDK enough of this part to i.e. why he left NC, under what circumstances, when, how long in LV, etc to really comment but on the surface wtf. Cops arent saying type of weapon, but I wonder when purchased etc.
doing nothing isn't tenable imo.
UNLESS you specifically and politicians and others of like mind EXPLICITLY STATE the needless death is acceptable to maintain the Government granted Right.
None of that seems to have anything to do with my comment though. I was responding specifically to calling out whites. Why bring race into it if that wasn't the point? So, sounds like the comment was implying white people are at fault more often.
I provided data to support the claim that race is not a factor in mass shootings, it's an all races problem. You said it is, as long as we ignore the gang data. You can't just ignore entire populations to fit your narrative. None of what you just posted has anything to do with that.
The link you provided confirms white people are at fault more often than not.
Whites make up about 75% of the country, but less than 75% of mass shootings.
You complained that the comment was implying that white people are at fault more often.
Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic.
I always see these comments after a shooting. But the data doesn't back it up Mass shootings are not a "white" problem, but it is typically portrayed as one.
Using the FBI definition of a mass shooting of 3 fatalities or more, only 58% are from white shooters.
The number doesn't change by a lot using a different definition.
parse out the gang affiliated shooting from that. what do those numbers look like then?
Moving the goal posts to fit a narrative then is what I'd call that.
to start, mace inferred that Gern was saying all mass shootings are white guys. he didnt say that.
2. breaking down the types of mass shootings are moving the goal posts? Given most of the white guy mass shootings used legal weapons or by those with access to same and most gang mass shootings use illegal guns , I think that becomes an important distinction between the two.
so please explain how you see it as moving the goal posts.
Yes, its been said before that mass shootings is a white person's problem. I interpreted Gern's comment of "Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic." as implying the same thing. If not, then I apologize to Gern for misunderstanding his comment.
And yes, excluding an entire population so that it fits a narrative is exactly that, moving the goal posts. You either agree or not that it's mostly a white problem. If you look at the data, you'd say it's not. If you listen to comments of "another white guy..." and ignore the data, or cherry pick it, then you'd probably say it is. Why exclude anyone? Why not exclude angry white guys then, and claim they are zero percent of the problem?
a variety of problems to address.
First we'll go with the illegal gun flow that begin as legal purchases. big problem, no? Seems there are simple things to address this, BUT NRA beholden politicians that pander to a subset of Americans looking at only half of the amendment that grants that right.
Second lets address the disaffected white guy with access to legal guns. This LV shooting in particular, a PROFESSOR got butthurt he didnt get a job there. Now the PD searched his apt. in Henderson. Feels like a sense of entitlement here. So it begs a couple questions, why in the fuck do you move across the country without employment in your chosen field? He left a university in NC. IDK enough of this part to i.e. why he left NC, under what circumstances, when, how long in LV, etc to really comment but on the surface wtf. Cops arent saying type of weapon, but I wonder when purchased etc.
doing nothing isn't tenable imo.
UNLESS you specifically and politicians and others of like mind EXPLICITLY STATE the needless death is acceptable to maintain the Government granted Right.
None of that seems to have anything to do with my comment though. I was responding specifically to calling out whites. Why bring race into it if that wasn't the point? So, sounds like the comment was implying white people are at fault more often.
I provided data to support the claim that race is not a factor in mass shootings, it's an all races problem. You said it is, as long as we ignore the gang data. You can't just ignore entire populations to fit your narrative. None of what you just posted has anything to do with that.
The link you provided confirms white people are at fault more often than not.
Whites make up about 75% of the country, but less than 75% of mass shootings.
You complained that the comment was implying that white people are at fault more often.
They are.
Not any more than the percentage they make up the population. If you're going to blame a race for something, I would assume you factor in population. Of course LA has more homicides than Bakersfield. But compare the population of the 2 and Bakersfield is worse. With that logic, for you to admit there is say an Asian crime problem, Asian crime would have to rise to 51% of the overall crime? That makes no sense. Blaming white people for mass shootings doesn't make sense either when they make up more than 70% of the population, but less than 60% of the shootings. So why bring race into it?
Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic.
I always see these comments after a shooting. But the data doesn't back it up Mass shootings are not a "white" problem, but it is typically portrayed as one.
Using the FBI definition of a mass shooting of 3 fatalities or more, only 58% are from white shooters.
The number doesn't change by a lot using a different definition.
parse out the gang affiliated shooting from that. what do those numbers look like then?
Moving the goal posts to fit a narrative then is what I'd call that.
to start, mace inferred that Gern was saying all mass shootings are white guys. he didnt say that.
2. breaking down the types of mass shootings are moving the goal posts? Given most of the white guy mass shootings used legal weapons or by those with access to same and most gang mass shootings use illegal guns , I think that becomes an important distinction between the two.
so please explain how you see it as moving the goal posts.
Yes, its been said before that mass shootings is a white person's problem. I interpreted Gern's comment of "Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic." as implying the same thing. If not, then I apologize to Gern for misunderstanding his comment.
And yes, excluding an entire population so that it fits a narrative is exactly that, moving the goal posts. You either agree or not that it's mostly a white problem. If you look at the data, you'd say it's not. If you listen to comments of "another white guy..." and ignore the data, or cherry pick it, then you'd probably say it is. Why exclude anyone? Why not exclude angry white guys then, and claim they are zero percent of the problem?
a variety of problems to address.
First we'll go with the illegal gun flow that begin as legal purchases. big problem, no? Seems there are simple things to address this, BUT NRA beholden politicians that pander to a subset of Americans looking at only half of the amendment that grants that right.
Second lets address the disaffected white guy with access to legal guns. This LV shooting in particular, a PROFESSOR got butthurt he didnt get a job there. Now the PD searched his apt. in Henderson. Feels like a sense of entitlement here. So it begs a couple questions, why in the fuck do you move across the country without employment in your chosen field? He left a university in NC. IDK enough of this part to i.e. why he left NC, under what circumstances, when, how long in LV, etc to really comment but on the surface wtf. Cops arent saying type of weapon, but I wonder when purchased etc.
doing nothing isn't tenable imo.
UNLESS you specifically and politicians and others of like mind EXPLICITLY STATE the needless death is acceptable to maintain the Government granted Right.
None of that seems to have anything to do with my comment though. I was responding specifically to calling out whites. Why bring race into it if that wasn't the point? So, sounds like the comment was implying white people are at fault more often.
I provided data to support the claim that race is not a factor in mass shootings, it's an all races problem. You said it is, as long as we ignore the gang data. You can't just ignore entire populations to fit your narrative. None of what you just posted has anything to do with that.
The link you provided confirms white people are at fault more often than not.
Whites make up about 75% of the country, but less than 75% of mass shootings.
You complained that the comment was implying that white people are at fault more often.
They are.
Not any more than the percentage they make up the population. If you're going to blame a race for something, I would assume you factor in population. Of course LA has more homicides than Bakersfield. But compare the population of the 2 and Bakersfield is worse. With that logic, for you to admit there is say an Asian crime problem, Asian crime would have to rise to 51% of the overall crime? That makes no sense. Blaming white people for mass shootings doesn't make sense either when they make up more than 70% of the population, but less than 60% of the shootings. So why bring race into it?
You’re looking at the broader label of mass shootings and concluding all the motives are the same. Gang violence is not in the same boat as violence perpetuated by someone who decides they’re going to kill random people in public in response to a trigger event. The latter category is disproportionately done by whites.
Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic.
I always see these comments after a shooting. But the data doesn't back it up Mass shootings are not a "white" problem, but it is typically portrayed as one.
Using the FBI definition of a mass shooting of 3 fatalities or more, only 58% are from white shooters.
The number doesn't change by a lot using a different definition.
parse out the gang affiliated shooting from that. what do those numbers look like then?
Moving the goal posts to fit a narrative then is what I'd call that.
to start, mace inferred that Gern was saying all mass shootings are white guys. he didnt say that.
2. breaking down the types of mass shootings are moving the goal posts? Given most of the white guy mass shootings used legal weapons or by those with access to same and most gang mass shootings use illegal guns , I think that becomes an important distinction between the two.
so please explain how you see it as moving the goal posts.
Yes, its been said before that mass shootings is a white person's problem. I interpreted Gern's comment of "Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic." as implying the same thing. If not, then I apologize to Gern for misunderstanding his comment.
And yes, excluding an entire population so that it fits a narrative is exactly that, moving the goal posts. You either agree or not that it's mostly a white problem. If you look at the data, you'd say it's not. If you listen to comments of "another white guy..." and ignore the data, or cherry pick it, then you'd probably say it is. Why exclude anyone? Why not exclude angry white guys then, and claim they are zero percent of the problem?
No apology necessary....it's more often than not a white man for sure
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic.
I always see these comments after a shooting. But the data doesn't back it up Mass shootings are not a "white" problem, but it is typically portrayed as one.
Using the FBI definition of a mass shooting of 3 fatalities or more, only 58% are from white shooters.
The number doesn't change by a lot using a different definition.
parse out the gang affiliated shooting from that. what do those numbers look like then?
Moving the goal posts to fit a narrative then is what I'd call that.
to start, mace inferred that Gern was saying all mass shootings are white guys. he didnt say that.
2. breaking down the types of mass shootings are moving the goal posts? Given most of the white guy mass shootings used legal weapons or by those with access to same and most gang mass shootings use illegal guns , I think that becomes an important distinction between the two.
so please explain how you see it as moving the goal posts.
Yes, its been said before that mass shootings is a white person's problem. I interpreted Gern's comment of "Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic." as implying the same thing. If not, then I apologize to Gern for misunderstanding his comment.
And yes, excluding an entire population so that it fits a narrative is exactly that, moving the goal posts. You either agree or not that it's mostly a white problem. If you look at the data, you'd say it's not. If you listen to comments of "another white guy..." and ignore the data, or cherry pick it, then you'd probably say it is. Why exclude anyone? Why not exclude angry white guys then, and claim they are zero percent of the problem?
No apology necessary....it's more often than not a white man for sure
Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic.
I always see these comments after a shooting. But the data doesn't back it up Mass shootings are not a "white" problem, but it is typically portrayed as one.
Using the FBI definition of a mass shooting of 3 fatalities or more, only 58% are from white shooters.
The number doesn't change by a lot using a different definition.
parse out the gang affiliated shooting from that. what do those numbers look like then?
Moving the goal posts to fit a narrative then is what I'd call that.
to start, mace inferred that Gern was saying all mass shootings are white guys. he didnt say that.
2. breaking down the types of mass shootings are moving the goal posts? Given most of the white guy mass shootings used legal weapons or by those with access to same and most gang mass shootings use illegal guns , I think that becomes an important distinction between the two.
so please explain how you see it as moving the goal posts.
Yes, its been said before that mass shootings is a white person's problem. I interpreted Gern's comment of "Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic." as implying the same thing. If not, then I apologize to Gern for misunderstanding his comment.
And yes, excluding an entire population so that it fits a narrative is exactly that, moving the goal posts. You either agree or not that it's mostly a white problem. If you look at the data, you'd say it's not. If you listen to comments of "another white guy..." and ignore the data, or cherry pick it, then you'd probably say it is. Why exclude anyone? Why not exclude angry white guys then, and claim they are zero percent of the problem?
a variety of problems to address.
First we'll go with the illegal gun flow that begin as legal purchases. big problem, no? Seems there are simple things to address this, BUT NRA beholden politicians that pander to a subset of Americans looking at only half of the amendment that grants that right.
Second lets address the disaffected white guy with access to legal guns. This LV shooting in particular, a PROFESSOR got butthurt he didnt get a job there. Now the PD searched his apt. in Henderson. Feels like a sense of entitlement here. So it begs a couple questions, why in the fuck do you move across the country without employment in your chosen field? He left a university in NC. IDK enough of this part to i.e. why he left NC, under what circumstances, when, how long in LV, etc to really comment but on the surface wtf. Cops arent saying type of weapon, but I wonder when purchased etc.
doing nothing isn't tenable imo.
UNLESS you specifically and politicians and others of like mind EXPLICITLY STATE the needless death is acceptable to maintain the Government granted Right.
None of that seems to have anything to do with my comment though. I was responding specifically to calling out whites. Why bring race into it if that wasn't the point? So, sounds like the comment was implying white people are at fault more often.
I provided data to support the claim that race is not a factor in mass shootings, it's an all races problem. You said it is, as long as we ignore the gang data. You can't just ignore entire populations to fit your narrative. None of what you just posted has anything to do with that.
The link you provided confirms white people are at fault more often than not.
Whites make up about 75% of the country, but less than 75% of mass shootings.
You complained that the comment was implying that white people are at fault more often.
They are.
Not any more than the percentage they make up the population. If you're going to blame a race for something, I would assume you factor in population. Of course LA has more homicides than Bakersfield. But compare the population of the 2 and Bakersfield is worse. With that logic, for you to admit there is say an Asian crime problem, Asian crime would have to rise to 51% of the overall crime? That makes no sense. Blaming white people for mass shootings doesn't make sense either when they make up more than 70% of the population, but less than 60% of the shootings. So why bring race into it?
You’re looking at the broader label of mass shootings and concluding all the motives are the same. Gang violence is not in the same boat as violence perpetuated by someone who decides they’re going to kill random people in public in response to a trigger event. The latter category is disproportionately done by whites.
What difference does the motive make if its part of a gang or just and angry dude?
Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic.
I always see these comments after a shooting. But the data doesn't back it up Mass shootings are not a "white" problem, but it is typically portrayed as one.
Using the FBI definition of a mass shooting of 3 fatalities or more, only 58% are from white shooters.
The number doesn't change by a lot using a different definition.
parse out the gang affiliated shooting from that. what do those numbers look like then?
Moving the goal posts to fit a narrative then is what I'd call that.
to start, mace inferred that Gern was saying all mass shootings are white guys. he didnt say that.
2. breaking down the types of mass shootings are moving the goal posts? Given most of the white guy mass shootings used legal weapons or by those with access to same and most gang mass shootings use illegal guns , I think that becomes an important distinction between the two.
so please explain how you see it as moving the goal posts.
Yes, its been said before that mass shootings is a white person's problem. I interpreted Gern's comment of "Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic." as implying the same thing. If not, then I apologize to Gern for misunderstanding his comment.
And yes, excluding an entire population so that it fits a narrative is exactly that, moving the goal posts. You either agree or not that it's mostly a white problem. If you look at the data, you'd say it's not. If you listen to comments of "another white guy..." and ignore the data, or cherry pick it, then you'd probably say it is. Why exclude anyone? Why not exclude angry white guys then, and claim they are zero percent of the problem?
No apology necessary....it's more often than not a white man for sure
Yes, but you're missing the point that whites make up 71% of the population, but only 58% of mass shootings. Therefore, whites are not proportionally more likely to commit a mass shooting. In fact, they are less likely according to this data.
Like I said before, it like saying Finland has a white crime problem, 99.9% of their crime is probably white.
Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic.
I always see these comments after a shooting. But the data doesn't back it up Mass shootings are not a "white" problem, but it is typically portrayed as one.
Using the FBI definition of a mass shooting of 3 fatalities or more, only 58% are from white shooters.
The number doesn't change by a lot using a different definition.
parse out the gang affiliated shooting from that. what do those numbers look like then?
Moving the goal posts to fit a narrative then is what I'd call that.
to start, mace inferred that Gern was saying all mass shootings are white guys. he didnt say that.
2. breaking down the types of mass shootings are moving the goal posts? Given most of the white guy mass shootings used legal weapons or by those with access to same and most gang mass shootings use illegal guns , I think that becomes an important distinction between the two.
so please explain how you see it as moving the goal posts.
Yes, its been said before that mass shootings is a white person's problem. I interpreted Gern's comment of "Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic." as implying the same thing. If not, then I apologize to Gern for misunderstanding his comment.
And yes, excluding an entire population so that it fits a narrative is exactly that, moving the goal posts. You either agree or not that it's mostly a white problem. If you look at the data, you'd say it's not. If you listen to comments of "another white guy..." and ignore the data, or cherry pick it, then you'd probably say it is. Why exclude anyone? Why not exclude angry white guys then, and claim they are zero percent of the problem?
a variety of problems to address.
First we'll go with the illegal gun flow that begin as legal purchases. big problem, no? Seems there are simple things to address this, BUT NRA beholden politicians that pander to a subset of Americans looking at only half of the amendment that grants that right.
Second lets address the disaffected white guy with access to legal guns. This LV shooting in particular, a PROFESSOR got butthurt he didnt get a job there. Now the PD searched his apt. in Henderson. Feels like a sense of entitlement here. So it begs a couple questions, why in the fuck do you move across the country without employment in your chosen field? He left a university in NC. IDK enough of this part to i.e. why he left NC, under what circumstances, when, how long in LV, etc to really comment but on the surface wtf. Cops arent saying type of weapon, but I wonder when purchased etc.
doing nothing isn't tenable imo.
UNLESS you specifically and politicians and others of like mind EXPLICITLY STATE the needless death is acceptable to maintain the Government granted Right.
None of that seems to have anything to do with my comment though. I was responding specifically to calling out whites. Why bring race into it if that wasn't the point? So, sounds like the comment was implying white people are at fault more often.
I provided data to support the claim that race is not a factor in mass shootings, it's an all races problem. You said it is, as long as we ignore the gang data. You can't just ignore entire populations to fit your narrative. None of what you just posted has anything to do with that.
The link you provided confirms white people are at fault more often than not.
Whites make up about 75% of the country, but less than 75% of mass shootings.
You complained that the comment was implying that white people are at fault more often.
They are.
Not any more than the percentage they make up the population. If you're going to blame a race for something, I would assume you factor in population. Of course LA has more homicides than Bakersfield. But compare the population of the 2 and Bakersfield is worse. With that logic, for you to admit there is say an Asian crime problem, Asian crime would have to rise to 51% of the overall crime? That makes no sense. Blaming white people for mass shootings doesn't make sense either when they make up more than 70% of the population, but less than 60% of the shootings. So why bring race into it?
You’re looking at the broader label of mass shootings and concluding all the motives are the same. Gang violence is not in the same boat as violence perpetuated by someone who decides they’re going to kill random people in public in response to a trigger event. The latter category is disproportionately done by whites.
I skipped the ones that were targeted, they were not random like you said. I didn't have time to go through the whole list, but out of the first 16 random shooters on this list, 10 of them were not white (4 of them were one single incident "working" together).
Some people focus on race when its a white guy, and ignore it when its not. I'm not convinced the angry random shooter is mostly white.
But but wait we’ve been down this road a hundred f’n times at this point I don’t give two fucks who’s perpetrating this massacres I just want them stopped 🤷♂️
Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic.
I always see these comments after a shooting. But the data doesn't back it up Mass shootings are not a "white" problem, but it is typically portrayed as one.
Using the FBI definition of a mass shooting of 3 fatalities or more, only 58% are from white shooters.
The number doesn't change by a lot using a different definition.
parse out the gang affiliated shooting from that. what do those numbers look like then?
Moving the goal posts to fit a narrative then is what I'd call that.
to start, mace inferred that Gern was saying all mass shootings are white guys. he didnt say that.
2. breaking down the types of mass shootings are moving the goal posts? Given most of the white guy mass shootings used legal weapons or by those with access to same and most gang mass shootings use illegal guns , I think that becomes an important distinction between the two.
so please explain how you see it as moving the goal posts.
Yes, its been said before that mass shootings is a white person's problem. I interpreted Gern's comment of "Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic." as implying the same thing. If not, then I apologize to Gern for misunderstanding his comment.
And yes, excluding an entire population so that it fits a narrative is exactly that, moving the goal posts. You either agree or not that it's mostly a white problem. If you look at the data, you'd say it's not. If you listen to comments of "another white guy..." and ignore the data, or cherry pick it, then you'd probably say it is. Why exclude anyone? Why not exclude angry white guys then, and claim they are zero percent of the problem?
a variety of problems to address.
First we'll go with the illegal gun flow that begin as legal purchases. big problem, no? Seems there are simple things to address this, BUT NRA beholden politicians that pander to a subset of Americans looking at only half of the amendment that grants that right.
Second lets address the disaffected white guy with access to legal guns. This LV shooting in particular, a PROFESSOR got butthurt he didnt get a job there. Now the PD searched his apt. in Henderson. Feels like a sense of entitlement here. So it begs a couple questions, why in the fuck do you move across the country without employment in your chosen field? He left a university in NC. IDK enough of this part to i.e. why he left NC, under what circumstances, when, how long in LV, etc to really comment but on the surface wtf. Cops arent saying type of weapon, but I wonder when purchased etc.
doing nothing isn't tenable imo.
UNLESS you specifically and politicians and others of like mind EXPLICITLY STATE the needless death is acceptable to maintain the Government granted Right.
None of that seems to have anything to do with my comment though. I was responding specifically to calling out whites. Why bring race into it if that wasn't the point? So, sounds like the comment was implying white people are at fault more often.
I provided data to support the claim that race is not a factor in mass shootings, it's an all races problem. You said it is, as long as we ignore the gang data. You can't just ignore entire populations to fit your narrative. None of what you just posted has anything to do with that.
The link you provided confirms white people are at fault more often than not.
Whites make up about 75% of the country, but less than 75% of mass shootings.
You complained that the comment was implying that white people are at fault more often.
They are.
Not any more than the percentage they make up the population. If you're going to blame a race for something, I would assume you factor in population. Of course LA has more homicides than Bakersfield. But compare the population of the 2 and Bakersfield is worse. With that logic, for you to admit there is say an Asian crime problem, Asian crime would have to rise to 51% of the overall crime? That makes no sense. Blaming white people for mass shootings doesn't make sense either when they make up more than 70% of the population, but less than 60% of the shootings. So why bring race into it?
You’re looking at the broader label of mass shootings and concluding all the motives are the same. Gang violence is not in the same boat as violence perpetuated by someone who decides they’re going to kill random people in public in response to a trigger event. The latter category is disproportionately done by whites.
What difference does the motive make if its part of a gang or just and angry dude?
It’s important to the law enforcement response. The gang task force isn’t going to get involved in the situations where guys are randomly shooting people.
I wonder what the majority race of gun store owners might be? Straw purchases and all that end up in those gang plagued neighborhoods in the inner city, right? Maybe look at the demographics of NRA membership as well?
I'm not sure that using the white population as a % of total population even makes sense. I could see looking as a % of gun owners that are so motivated by hate that they will commit a mass shooting maybe.
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
0
Options
mickeyrat
up my ass, like Chadwick was up his Posts: 35,934
Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic.
I always see these comments after a shooting. But the data doesn't back it up Mass shootings are not a "white" problem, but it is typically portrayed as one.
Using the FBI definition of a mass shooting of 3 fatalities or more, only 58% are from white shooters.
The number doesn't change by a lot using a different definition.
parse out the gang affiliated shooting from that. what do those numbers look like then?
Moving the goal posts to fit a narrative then is what I'd call that.
to start, mace inferred that Gern was saying all mass shootings are white guys. he didnt say that.
2. breaking down the types of mass shootings are moving the goal posts? Given most of the white guy mass shootings used legal weapons or by those with access to same and most gang mass shootings use illegal guns , I think that becomes an important distinction between the two.
so please explain how you see it as moving the goal posts.
Yes, its been said before that mass shootings is a white person's problem. I interpreted Gern's comment of "Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic." as implying the same thing. If not, then I apologize to Gern for misunderstanding his comment.
And yes, excluding an entire population so that it fits a narrative is exactly that, moving the goal posts. You either agree or not that it's mostly a white problem. If you look at the data, you'd say it's not. If you listen to comments of "another white guy..." and ignore the data, or cherry pick it, then you'd probably say it is. Why exclude anyone? Why not exclude angry white guys then, and claim they are zero percent of the problem?
a variety of problems to address.
First we'll go with the illegal gun flow that begin as legal purchases. big problem, no? Seems there are simple things to address this, BUT NRA beholden politicians that pander to a subset of Americans looking at only half of the amendment that grants that right.
Second lets address the disaffected white guy with access to legal guns. This LV shooting in particular, a PROFESSOR got butthurt he didnt get a job there. Now the PD searched his apt. in Henderson. Feels like a sense of entitlement here. So it begs a couple questions, why in the fuck do you move across the country without employment in your chosen field? He left a university in NC. IDK enough of this part to i.e. why he left NC, under what circumstances, when, how long in LV, etc to really comment but on the surface wtf. Cops arent saying type of weapon, but I wonder when purchased etc.
doing nothing isn't tenable imo.
UNLESS you specifically and politicians and others of like mind EXPLICITLY STATE the needless death is acceptable to maintain the Government granted Right.
None of that seems to have anything to do with my comment though. I was responding specifically to calling out whites. Why bring race into it if that wasn't the point? So, sounds like the comment was implying white people are at fault more often.
I provided data to support the claim that race is not a factor in mass shootings, it's an all races problem. You said it is, as long as we ignore the gang data. You can't just ignore entire populations to fit your narrative. None of what you just posted has anything to do with that.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic.
I always see these comments after a shooting. But the data doesn't back it up Mass shootings are not a "white" problem, but it is typically portrayed as one.
Using the FBI definition of a mass shooting of 3 fatalities or more, only 58% are from white shooters.
The number doesn't change by a lot using a different definition.
parse out the gang affiliated shooting from that. what do those numbers look like then?
Moving the goal posts to fit a narrative then is what I'd call that.
to start, mace inferred that Gern was saying all mass shootings are white guys. he didnt say that.
2. breaking down the types of mass shootings are moving the goal posts? Given most of the white guy mass shootings used legal weapons or by those with access to same and most gang mass shootings use illegal guns , I think that becomes an important distinction between the two.
so please explain how you see it as moving the goal posts.
Yes, its been said before that mass shootings is a white person's problem. I interpreted Gern's comment of "Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic." as implying the same thing. If not, then I apologize to Gern for misunderstanding his comment.
And yes, excluding an entire population so that it fits a narrative is exactly that, moving the goal posts. You either agree or not that it's mostly a white problem. If you look at the data, you'd say it's not. If you listen to comments of "another white guy..." and ignore the data, or cherry pick it, then you'd probably say it is. Why exclude anyone? Why not exclude angry white guys then, and claim they are zero percent of the problem?
a variety of problems to address.
First we'll go with the illegal gun flow that begin as legal purchases. big problem, no? Seems there are simple things to address this, BUT NRA beholden politicians that pander to a subset of Americans looking at only half of the amendment that grants that right.
Second lets address the disaffected white guy with access to legal guns. This LV shooting in particular, a PROFESSOR got butthurt he didnt get a job there. Now the PD searched his apt. in Henderson. Feels like a sense of entitlement here. So it begs a couple questions, why in the fuck do you move across the country without employment in your chosen field? He left a university in NC. IDK enough of this part to i.e. why he left NC, under what circumstances, when, how long in LV, etc to really comment but on the surface wtf. Cops arent saying type of weapon, but I wonder when purchased etc.
doing nothing isn't tenable imo.
UNLESS you specifically and politicians and others of like mind EXPLICITLY STATE the needless death is acceptable to maintain the Government granted Right.
None of that seems to have anything to do with my comment though. I was responding specifically to calling out whites. Why bring race into it if that wasn't the point? So, sounds like the comment was implying white people are at fault more often.
I provided data to support the claim that race is not a factor in mass shootings, it's an all races problem. You said it is, as long as we ignore the gang data. You can't just ignore entire populations to fit your narrative. None of what you just posted has anything to do with that.
The link you provided confirms white people are at fault more often than not.
Whites make up about 75% of the country, but less than 75% of mass shootings.
You complained that the comment was implying that white people are at fault more often.
They are.
Not any more than the percentage they make up the population. If you're going to blame a race for something, I would assume you factor in population. Of course LA has more homicides than Bakersfield. But compare the population of the 2 and Bakersfield is worse. With that logic, for you to admit there is say an Asian crime problem, Asian crime would have to rise to 51% of the overall crime? That makes no sense. Blaming white people for mass shootings doesn't make sense either when they make up more than 70% of the population, but less than 60% of the shootings. So why bring race into it?
You’re looking at the broader label of mass shootings and concluding all the motives are the same. Gang violence is not in the same boat as violence perpetuated by someone who decides they’re going to kill random people in public in response to a trigger event. The latter category is disproportionately done by whites.
I skipped the ones that were targeted, they were not random like you said. I didn't have time to go through the whole list, but out of the first 16 random shooters on this list, 10 of them were not white (4 of them were one single incident "working" together).
Some people focus on race when its a white guy, and ignore it when its not. I'm not convinced the angry random shooter is mostly white.
Dis you see how big the list is? There’s 27 entries just for this year.
Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic.
I always see these comments after a shooting. But the data doesn't back it up Mass shootings are not a "white" problem, but it is typically portrayed as one.
Using the FBI definition of a mass shooting of 3 fatalities or more, only 58% are from white shooters.
The number doesn't change by a lot using a different definition.
parse out the gang affiliated shooting from that. what do those numbers look like then?
Moving the goal posts to fit a narrative then is what I'd call that.
to start, mace inferred that Gern was saying all mass shootings are white guys. he didnt say that.
2. breaking down the types of mass shootings are moving the goal posts? Given most of the white guy mass shootings used legal weapons or by those with access to same and most gang mass shootings use illegal guns , I think that becomes an important distinction between the two.
so please explain how you see it as moving the goal posts.
Yes, its been said before that mass shootings is a white person's problem. I interpreted Gern's comment of "Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic." as implying the same thing. If not, then I apologize to Gern for misunderstanding his comment.
And yes, excluding an entire population so that it fits a narrative is exactly that, moving the goal posts. You either agree or not that it's mostly a white problem. If you look at the data, you'd say it's not. If you listen to comments of "another white guy..." and ignore the data, or cherry pick it, then you'd probably say it is. Why exclude anyone? Why not exclude angry white guys then, and claim they are zero percent of the problem?
a variety of problems to address.
First we'll go with the illegal gun flow that begin as legal purchases. big problem, no? Seems there are simple things to address this, BUT NRA beholden politicians that pander to a subset of Americans looking at only half of the amendment that grants that right.
Second lets address the disaffected white guy with access to legal guns. This LV shooting in particular, a PROFESSOR got butthurt he didnt get a job there. Now the PD searched his apt. in Henderson. Feels like a sense of entitlement here. So it begs a couple questions, why in the fuck do you move across the country without employment in your chosen field? He left a university in NC. IDK enough of this part to i.e. why he left NC, under what circumstances, when, how long in LV, etc to really comment but on the surface wtf. Cops arent saying type of weapon, but I wonder when purchased etc.
doing nothing isn't tenable imo.
UNLESS you specifically and politicians and others of like mind EXPLICITLY STATE the needless death is acceptable to maintain the Government granted Right.
None of that seems to have anything to do with my comment though. I was responding specifically to calling out whites. Why bring race into it if that wasn't the point? So, sounds like the comment was implying white people are at fault more often.
I provided data to support the claim that race is not a factor in mass shootings, it's an all races problem. You said it is, as long as we ignore the gang data. You can't just ignore entire populations to fit your narrative. None of what you just posted has anything to do with that.
The link you provided confirms white people are at fault more often than not.
Whites make up about 75% of the country, but less than 75% of mass shootings.
You complained that the comment was implying that white people are at fault more often.
They are.
Not any more than the percentage they make up the population. If you're going to blame a race for something, I would assume you factor in population. Of course LA has more homicides than Bakersfield. But compare the population of the 2 and Bakersfield is worse. With that logic, for you to admit there is say an Asian crime problem, Asian crime would have to rise to 51% of the overall crime? That makes no sense. Blaming white people for mass shootings doesn't make sense either when they make up more than 70% of the population, but less than 60% of the shootings. So why bring race into it?
You’re looking at the broader label of mass shootings and concluding all the motives are the same. Gang violence is not in the same boat as violence perpetuated by someone who decides they’re going to kill random people in public in response to a trigger event. The latter category is disproportionately done by whites.
I skipped the ones that were targeted, they were not random like you said. I didn't have time to go through the whole list, but out of the first 16 random shooters on this list, 10 of them were not white (4 of them were one single incident "working" together).
Some people focus on race when its a white guy, and ignore it when its not. I'm not convinced the angry random shooter is mostly white.
Dis you see how big the list is? There’s 27 entries just for this year.
Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic.
I always see these comments after a shooting. But the data doesn't back it up Mass shootings are not a "white" problem, but it is typically portrayed as one.
Using the FBI definition of a mass shooting of 3 fatalities or more, only 58% are from white shooters.
The number doesn't change by a lot using a different definition.
parse out the gang affiliated shooting from that. what do those numbers look like then?
Moving the goal posts to fit a narrative then is what I'd call that.
to start, mace inferred that Gern was saying all mass shootings are white guys. he didnt say that.
2. breaking down the types of mass shootings are moving the goal posts? Given most of the white guy mass shootings used legal weapons or by those with access to same and most gang mass shootings use illegal guns , I think that becomes an important distinction between the two.
so please explain how you see it as moving the goal posts.
Yes, its been said before that mass shootings is a white person's problem. I interpreted Gern's comment of "Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic." as implying the same thing. If not, then I apologize to Gern for misunderstanding his comment.
And yes, excluding an entire population so that it fits a narrative is exactly that, moving the goal posts. You either agree or not that it's mostly a white problem. If you look at the data, you'd say it's not. If you listen to comments of "another white guy..." and ignore the data, or cherry pick it, then you'd probably say it is. Why exclude anyone? Why not exclude angry white guys then, and claim they are zero percent of the problem?
a variety of problems to address.
First we'll go with the illegal gun flow that begin as legal purchases. big problem, no? Seems there are simple things to address this, BUT NRA beholden politicians that pander to a subset of Americans looking at only half of the amendment that grants that right.
Second lets address the disaffected white guy with access to legal guns. This LV shooting in particular, a PROFESSOR got butthurt he didnt get a job there. Now the PD searched his apt. in Henderson. Feels like a sense of entitlement here. So it begs a couple questions, why in the fuck do you move across the country without employment in your chosen field? He left a university in NC. IDK enough of this part to i.e. why he left NC, under what circumstances, when, how long in LV, etc to really comment but on the surface wtf. Cops arent saying type of weapon, but I wonder when purchased etc.
doing nothing isn't tenable imo.
UNLESS you specifically and politicians and others of like mind EXPLICITLY STATE the needless death is acceptable to maintain the Government granted Right.
None of that seems to have anything to do with my comment though. I was responding specifically to calling out whites. Why bring race into it if that wasn't the point? So, sounds like the comment was implying white people are at fault more often.
I provided data to support the claim that race is not a factor in mass shootings, it's an all races problem. You said it is, as long as we ignore the gang data. You can't just ignore entire populations to fit your narrative. None of what you just posted has anything to do with that.
The link you provided confirms white people are at fault more often than not.
Whites make up about 75% of the country, but less than 75% of mass shootings.
You complained that the comment was implying that white people are at fault more often.
They are.
Not any more than the percentage they make up the population. If you're going to blame a race for something, I would assume you factor in population. Of course LA has more homicides than Bakersfield. But compare the population of the 2 and Bakersfield is worse. With that logic, for you to admit there is say an Asian crime problem, Asian crime would have to rise to 51% of the overall crime? That makes no sense. Blaming white people for mass shootings doesn't make sense either when they make up more than 70% of the population, but less than 60% of the shootings. So why bring race into it?
You’re looking at the broader label of mass shootings and concluding all the motives are the same. Gang violence is not in the same boat as violence perpetuated by someone who decides they’re going to kill random people in public in response to a trigger event. The latter category is disproportionately done by whites.
I skipped the ones that were targeted, they were not random like you said. I didn't have time to go through the whole list, but out of the first 16 random shooters on this list, 10 of them were not white (4 of them were one single incident "working" together).
Some people focus on race when its a white guy, and ignore it when its not. I'm not convinced the angry random shooter is mostly white.
Dis you see how big the list is? There’s 27 entries just for this year.
Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic.
I always see these comments after a shooting. But the data doesn't back it up Mass shootings are not a "white" problem, but it is typically portrayed as one.
Using the FBI definition of a mass shooting of 3 fatalities or more, only 58% are from white shooters.
The number doesn't change by a lot using a different definition.
parse out the gang affiliated shooting from that. what do those numbers look like then?
Moving the goal posts to fit a narrative then is what I'd call that.
to start, mace inferred that Gern was saying all mass shootings are white guys. he didnt say that.
2. breaking down the types of mass shootings are moving the goal posts? Given most of the white guy mass shootings used legal weapons or by those with access to same and most gang mass shootings use illegal guns , I think that becomes an important distinction between the two.
so please explain how you see it as moving the goal posts.
Yes, its been said before that mass shootings is a white person's problem. I interpreted Gern's comment of "Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic." as implying the same thing. If not, then I apologize to Gern for misunderstanding his comment.
And yes, excluding an entire population so that it fits a narrative is exactly that, moving the goal posts. You either agree or not that it's mostly a white problem. If you look at the data, you'd say it's not. If you listen to comments of "another white guy..." and ignore the data, or cherry pick it, then you'd probably say it is. Why exclude anyone? Why not exclude angry white guys then, and claim they are zero percent of the problem?
a variety of problems to address.
First we'll go with the illegal gun flow that begin as legal purchases. big problem, no? Seems there are simple things to address this, BUT NRA beholden politicians that pander to a subset of Americans looking at only half of the amendment that grants that right.
Second lets address the disaffected white guy with access to legal guns. This LV shooting in particular, a PROFESSOR got butthurt he didnt get a job there. Now the PD searched his apt. in Henderson. Feels like a sense of entitlement here. So it begs a couple questions, why in the fuck do you move across the country without employment in your chosen field? He left a university in NC. IDK enough of this part to i.e. why he left NC, under what circumstances, when, how long in LV, etc to really comment but on the surface wtf. Cops arent saying type of weapon, but I wonder when purchased etc.
doing nothing isn't tenable imo.
UNLESS you specifically and politicians and others of like mind EXPLICITLY STATE the needless death is acceptable to maintain the Government granted Right.
None of that seems to have anything to do with my comment though. I was responding specifically to calling out whites. Why bring race into it if that wasn't the point? So, sounds like the comment was implying white people are at fault more often.
I provided data to support the claim that race is not a factor in mass shootings, it's an all races problem. You said it is, as long as we ignore the gang data. You can't just ignore entire populations to fit your narrative. None of what you just posted has anything to do with that.
The link you provided confirms white people are at fault more often than not.
Whites make up about 75% of the country, but less than 75% of mass shootings.
You complained that the comment was implying that white people are at fault more often.
They are.
Not any more than the percentage they make up the population. If you're going to blame a race for something, I would assume you factor in population. Of course LA has more homicides than Bakersfield. But compare the population of the 2 and Bakersfield is worse. With that logic, for you to admit there is say an Asian crime problem, Asian crime would have to rise to 51% of the overall crime? That makes no sense. Blaming white people for mass shootings doesn't make sense either when they make up more than 70% of the population, but less than 60% of the shootings. So why bring race into it?
You’re looking at the broader label of mass shootings and concluding all the motives are the same. Gang violence is not in the same boat as violence perpetuated by someone who decides they’re going to kill random people in public in response to a trigger event. The latter category is disproportionately done by whites.
I skipped the ones that were targeted, they were not random like you said. I didn't have time to go through the whole list, but out of the first 16 random shooters on this list, 10 of them were not white (4 of them were one single incident "working" together).
Some people focus on race when its a white guy, and ignore it when its not. I'm not convinced the angry random shooter is mostly white.
Dis you see how big the list is? There’s 27 entries just for this year.
Yes, I saw that. That's why I said I only went through the first 16 shooters on the list I keep hearing white people are the problem for mass shootings. I've provided evidence for the contrary. I'm all open to seeing anything that supports they are. But the fact remains, despite being reminded it was a white shooter every time they are white, whites make up a smaller percentage of mass shootings than they do of the public population. Therefore I don't see it as a white problem. Its a problem that effects everyone, so I don't know why race keeps being brought up when it is not a factor.
Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic.
There's nothing wrong with this comment.
It is only because it implies whites ar more to blame, when they are not. Why keep bringing race into it?
It's a factual statement. There's nothing wrong with it.
You can infer all you want, that's how infer and imply work.
I think I understand what you're saying, and I agree that at face value there is nothing wrong with calling a mass shooter pathetic and referring to him by his race. But it's not inferring when Gern confirms that's what he meant. And nothing against Gern, because every time it is a white guy that seems to be a focus. But whits are no more responsible for mass shootings than any other group. Do we say whites are horrible drivers because they make up 70% of car accidents? No, they make up 70% of the population so it makes sense they are involved in 70% of accidents. But when they make up 58% of mass shootings, they are more at fault? Race is not a factor, we don't need to keep bringing race into it. Guns are a problem. Access to guns is a problem. White people are not.
Comments
I interpreted Gern's comment of "Another white guy who had been "wronged" who takes it out on society. Pathetic." as implying the same thing. If not, then I apologize to Gern for misunderstanding his comment.
And yes, excluding an entire population so that it fits a narrative is exactly that, moving the goal posts. You either agree or not that it's mostly a white problem. If you look at the data, you'd say it's not. If you listen to comments of "another white guy..." and ignore the data, or cherry pick it, then you'd probably say it is.
Why exclude anyone? Why not exclude angry white guys then, and claim they are zero percent of the problem?
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
I was responding specifically to calling out whites. Why bring race into it if that wasn't the point? So, sounds like the comment was implying white people are at fault more often.
I provided data to support the claim that race is not a factor in mass shootings, it's an all races problem. You said it is, as long as we ignore the gang data. You can't just ignore entire populations to fit your narrative. None of what you just posted has anything to do with that.
That's like saying Bakersfield has less crime because they have fewer murders than LA, but when you look at it per capita, Bakersfield is almost double.
They are.
With that logic, for you to admit there is say an Asian crime problem, Asian crime would have to rise to 51% of the overall crime? That makes no sense.
Blaming white people for mass shootings doesn't make sense either when they make up more than 70% of the population, but less than 60% of the shootings. So why bring race into it?
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
Like I said before, it like saying Finland has a white crime problem, 99.9% of their crime is probably white.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States
I skipped the ones that were targeted, they were not random like you said. I didn't have time to go through the whole list, but out of the first 16 random shooters on this list, 10 of them were not white (4 of them were one single incident "working" together).
Some people focus on race when its a white guy, and ignore it when its not. I'm not convinced the angry random shooter is mostly white.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
A WHITE GUY. Singular.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
https://apple.news/AgiRvWnyqTsWxIZXEHQPJ0A
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
I keep hearing white people are the problem for mass shootings. I've provided evidence for the contrary. I'm all open to seeing anything that supports they are.
But the fact remains, despite being reminded it was a white shooter every time they are white, whites make up a smaller percentage of mass shootings than they do of the public population. Therefore I don't see it as a white problem. Its a problem that effects everyone, so I don't know why race keeps being brought up when it is not a factor.
You can infer all you want, that's how infer and imply work.
And nothing against Gern, because every time it is a white guy that seems to be a focus. But whits are no more responsible for mass shootings than any other group.
Do we say whites are horrible drivers because they make up 70% of car accidents? No, they make up 70% of the population so it makes sense they are involved in 70% of accidents. But when they make up 58% of mass shootings, they are more at fault?
Race is not a factor, we don't need to keep bringing race into it.
Guns are a problem. Access to guns is a problem. White people are not.