The perpetrator was a Trump supporter. (and he isn't even the first)
Please name any other mass murderer that was a supporter of the current sitting president when doing something like this.
Shooting in El Paso, Texas | 3rd August 2019
- Thread starter Pexbo
- Start date
Please name any other mass murderer that was a supporter of the current sitting president when doing something like this.
I don't disagree with this but do we know for sure that this translates into more mass shooting/terrorists attack vs minorities ?
People speak more loosely for sure
I don't know tbh. I'm gonna pretend to invent an answer. I'm just trying to see this from a different perspective.
Trump will be gone one day and sadly there will always be mass shootings in America
Last edited:
It's the weapons, there are sick and dangerous people everywhere, in every country. Difference is their easy access to weapons.
Yes, and should union members one day go on a rampage at a meeting of fortune 500 ceo's we'll discuss if Bernie had any role in it.
But until then I'll be blaming the xenophobic president for xenophobic acts of his supporters.
I agree with this. Access to mass murdering rifles is too easy
Ok
Guardian said:
Yes, there will be. But that would not be like these terrorist incidents. There are two different things at play here, the likes of Columbine and parkland are mass shootings, yet have little political motivation and he has to take blame for it.
Full VDO: Trump condemns racism and white supremacy
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-49240310
#WhiteSupremacistinChief
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-49240310
#WhiteSupremacistinChief
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Last edited:
weren't the columbine shooters also white supremacists?
I mean, the number terrorist attacks in the USA from white supremacist numb nuts are clearly on the increase and they appear to be increasingly invoking Trump's rhetoric, so there's that. You can also use the FBI hate crime figures to find out who the perpetrators and victims are and compare it by year and election cycle. Racial and religious violence over the last decade or so looks like it correlates pretty well with the election cycle but had an overall falling trend under Obama up until 2015. From 2009 - 14 victims of religious and racial hate crime fell by 35%. Since that time they have increased for all ethnic and religious categories. From 2015 - 2017 the number of official hate crime victims have increased by 77% for Muslims, 57% for Jews, 41% for Hispanics, 22% for blacks, and 18% for whites. Hate crime perpetrated by whites has increased by 21%, by blacks 13%. The FBI figures only go to 2017, but reports from city data indicate that 2018 (and so far 2019) will do nothing to reverse these nascent trends.
It's also true to say that the way the FBI derives its figures is itself likely an under-report. What counts as a hate crime differs by location as does the method of reporting as well as the desire to do so. Any %age increase in the collated figures probably hides an even more serious problem.
Now obviously this doesn't prove cause, but it does implicate Trump and the current political rhetoric of the right as a suspect in further inflaming an already endemic issue.
Last edited:
Nope. Bullying, social isolation and other social disorders.
Mr Hotwheels could have easily shut it down himself. Trying to palm off responsibility.
This is very informative. Cheers.
I also heard on CNN that the number of incidents against jewish people have been on the rise. Any possible link with Trump ?
Is there a reputable list of rankings of number of mass shootings on a reputable website? I can't seem to find any other than one listing the death rates, which I think is misleading. Where are the rankings of total mass shootings?
This was posted yesterday. Goes back to 1982.
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data/
I think indirectly, yes. Trump himself seems to be at pains to frame himself as the pal of Israel and of Jews but he and particularly the faces of right wing cable news also push the notion of a foreign invasion and the replacement of the white race by a complicit liberal, globalist elite. To many of these fascists and supremacists this elite is code for Jew. If the notion of an organised invasion of alien peoples is now mainstream and the backbone of actual policy then it follows that the adjacent notion that "its the Jew who's behind it" is also being indirectly bolstered. If you go on Stormfront for instance (not saying you should) you'll see that there is a great deal of frustration on the right with Trump being besties with Netenyahu while railing against immigration. The hive mind is split on whether Trump is the would be saviour of the white race, complicit in failing to so far deliver, or a dumb fly who's better than nothing but still been trapped in the web of international Jewry.
They're at once motivated by him and dismayed that it's not 1936.
Although an interesting article, I forgot to specify that I was looking for a rankings list of number of mass shootings by each country. The only one source that I could find references some per capita statistic and has Norway among some other European countries as number one in mass shootings, which seems very off.
Ahhh.. yeah I can’t find anything definitive on that either. I did find what you’re talking about with Norway though... which, yeah, is weird.
And you already know which papers and sources are running with that list as some indisputable source of truth against gun restrictions.
Was the data collected in 2011? That would be 22 July attacks. 77 killed (by a white supremacist, far-right terrorist), essentially quadrupling the entire country's murder rate for that year (0.6 in 2010, 2.2 in 2011, 0.5 in 2012). Other than that, we simply do not have mass shootings.
Sometimes data from that year will show up in maps on the MapPorn subreddit on Reddit, and everyone will be surprised at Norway's high murder rate.
I'd be kinda worried if I worked for them
It says it is from 2009 to 2015, which I mean, I figured the Brevik attack would throw things off a bit, but it seems that somewhere someone is playing with the numbers.
I can't think of a single other mass shooting. I guess a few might have snuck in, depending on how you define mass shooting, but even when it comes to gang violence there really isn't all that much involving guns. Certainly I think the 2011 attack must be the only one in living memory of someone just shooting random people. So either they just had data from 2011 for Norway, or there's something fishy going on, as you say.
After some minor digging I found that...
The numbers come from a libertarian think tank called the Foundation for Economic Education, based in Atlanta, GA who are trumpeting a study by the Crime Prevention Research Center headed by John Lott... a discredited “academic” that published More Guns, Less Crime which got lambasted by Freakonomics.
More on Lott being a fraud...
https://thinkprogress.org/debunking-john-lott-5456e83cf326/
Mystery solved!
I also googled a bit, and one of the top results was also this Wall Street Journal article, which has this graphic:
The data itself isn't fudged, but the conclusion is obviously incredibly misleading, particularly if someone misses the "1" and just sees that the data covers 15 years. Norway does not have a fatality rate of 1.3 per 100 000 from mass shootings per year, we just had a fatality rate of 1.3 per 100 000 from the single mass shooting in... well, possibly forever?
I did remember seeing 2011 quite frequently when browsing around. I was VERY surprised to see Norway there at top spot.
Some right winger on Instagram tried to use that as a source in an argument with me about how Medicare for All would lower healthcare quality as if it was some indisputable data. Even funnier when he complained about my response which referenced the World Health Organization in a comprehensive study they did with over 20 pages of analysis that had the US ranked 37th. Said something to me along the lines of "so you get to decide what is a legitimate source and I can't?". Umm yeah, I'll take the WHO over some right wing think tank any day.
Not the final product I'm looking for but we're getting closer. And yeah, 133 mass shootings in the US compared to single digits elsewhereMystery solved!
I also googled a bit, and one of the top results was also this Wall Street Journal article, which has this graphic:
The data itself isn't fudged, but the conclusion is obviously incredibly misleading, particularly if someone misses the "1" and just sees that the data covers 15 years. Norway does not have a fatality rate of 1.3 per 100 000 from mass shootings per year, we just had a fatality rate of 1.3 per 100 000 from the single mass shooting in... well, possibly forever?
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
This is the very shit study being referenced. It's so shit it thinks Breivik only took 67 lives. This is the table of the shootings it covered in Europe:
The minimum for a mass shooting in this study seems to be 4 deaths and doesn't include the perpetrator. Its efforts at compiling the figures are laughable. in the American figures it either fraudulently omits or is so incompetent as to overlook the murder of 10 people at the Geneva County Massacre from 2009. It omits the Grand Rapids Massacre and Copley Township shooting from 2011 in both of which 8 people lost their lives. The Santa Monica and Christopher Dorner shootings are absent from 2013 - with 11 combined fatalities. Spring, Isla Vista and Montgomery are missing from 2014. Tyrone, Waco and Harris County are missing from 2015. God knows what other weirdly shaped holes the author attempted to ram the figures through.
It's a hideous warping of data designed to provide a shield for arseholes.
The minimum for a mass shooting in this study seems to be 4 deaths and doesn't include the perpetrator. Its efforts at compiling the figures are laughable. in the American figures it either fraudulently omits or is so incompetent as to overlook the murder of 10 people at the Geneva County Massacre from 2009. It omits the Grand Rapids Massacre and Copley Township shooting from 2011 in both of which 8 people lost their lives. The Santa Monica and Christopher Dorner shootings are absent from 2013 - with 11 combined fatalities. Spring, Isla Vista and Montgomery are missing from 2014. Tyrone, Waco and Harris County are missing from 2015. God knows what other weirdly shaped holes the author attempted to ram the figures through.
It's a hideous warping of data designed to provide a shield for arseholes.
Last edited:
It probably excludes the deaths from the Oslo bombing, and also apparently 2 deaths at Utøya which were not gun related. It's a nonsense way of looking at it, of course; that was all part of the same terrorist action.
Exactly the sort of sleight of hand that leads him to leave out Geneva County. That guy killed 10 people, but 7 of them were at private residences - the 3 murdered at the gas station and 4 he injured there don't count.
Good. Speak out and be candid about it. It's about time people in positions of influence did this.
Yep. When your “source” is a piece of shit, yeah, I do get to call it out.
When people like that guy get elected you start to think maybe the problem is deeper than that.Candice Keller, Republican State Representative for Ohio:
Another fun one is when you ask someone to back up a ridiculous claim with facts, and they go "why should I do your research for you?" or "just google it, the information's out there." Not the way it works, dipshit. You made the claim, the onus is on you to provide data that supports said claim. If you're not prepared to do so, don't make the fecking claim. If it's on the internet, that's the point where they usually start ignoring you.
Should you succeed, and they do provide data, it's usually bad and/or misleading data from a garbage source. When you point that out to them and provide data that disproves their claim, you invariably get the "who are you to decide what sources are legit?!"
Great article on the BBC.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-49227590
Finally referring to it for what it is. Far right terrorism.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-49227590
Finally referring to it for what it is. Far right terrorism.
It's weird seeing a politician write in a professional manner and with sense these days.