(11-06-2017 03:38 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 03:33 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 03:32 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 03:25 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 03:24 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  It's true. When the shooter is white, he doesn't seem to say much about them.

If the shooter is black or Muslim, he quickly makes it about the shooter.

You got some examples of this?

His responses on Twitter in each of the killings is well documented.

Which killings?

And you know the standard here. You make a claim, you back it up.

Well with the Vegas shooitng he spoke only of the victiims. The same with the Texas victims.

With New York however, he called for the death penalty and immediate change in immigration policy.

I find it quit interesting that with the other shootins, it's always "well ther eis nothing we can do about it" "now is not the time to act emotionally."

But when it was the New York killer he immediately called for immigration reform.

You are aware that in both the Vegas and Texas shootings the shooter died right and the NYC attacker was captured alive. It's kind of redundant to call for the death penalty when the perpetrator is dead don't you think?

Also both the Vegas and Texas shooters were both natural born US citizens and the NYC attacker was an immigrant who achieved citizenship by way of an asinine policy right? So explain exactly what purpose it would have made for him to call for immigration reform in the two instances where the shooter was not an immigrant?

I mean those two differences alone account for your entire argument being moot but I'm intrigued to see the ways you try to deflect from those differences in your continued attempt to hijack this thread in a direction that protects your precious leftist media and celebrities from the public ridicule they deserve over their hate speech. I mean a leopard doesn't change his spots so a troll is going to troll.

(11-06-2017 03:48 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 03:38 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 03:33 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 03:32 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 03:25 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  You got some examples of this?

His responses on Twitter in each of the killings is well documented.

Which killings?

And you know the standard here. You make a claim, you back it up.

Well with the Vegas shooitng he spoke only of the victiims. The same with the Texas victims.

With New York however, he called for the death penalty and immediate change in immigration policy.

I find it quit interesting that with the other shootins, it's always "well ther eis nothing we can do about it" "now is not the time to act emotionally."

But when it was the New York killer he immediately called for immigration reform.

You are aware that in both the Vegas and Texas shootings the shooter died right and the NYC attacker was captured alive. It's kind of redundant to call for the death penalty when the perpetrator is dead don't you think?

Also both the Vegas and Texas shooters were both natural born US citizens and the NYC attacker was an immigrant who achieved citizenship by way of an asinine policy right? So explain exactly what purpose it would have made for him to call for immigration reform in the two instances where the shooter was not an immigrant?

I mean those two differences alone account for your entire argument being moot but I'm intrigued to see the ways you try to deflect from those differences in your continued attempt to hijack this thread in a direction that protects your precious leftist media and celebrities from the public ridicule they deserve over their hate speech. I mean a leopard doesn't change his spots so a troll is going to troll.

It has to do with the notion that changing laws could have changed a future outcome.

With the Texas and Vegas shooters, anyone who suggests that we change laws is quickly silenced with things like the president said.

But with the New York killer, suddenly changing the laws is the best thing we can do to prevent another terrorist attack.

You can't have it both ways. Either changing laws can or cannot change the outcome of future events.

I don't care which . Just make up your mind and be consistent Mr. President.

(11-06-2017 02:38 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 02:31 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 02:19 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:22 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  It would seem that most people simply want to say, " my thoughts and prayers............." and then they can turn around and move on with their lives.

It's the same thing when you see a soldier and you say " Thank you for serving our country" It's as if it excuses us from getting involved and doing something.

Maybe we need to stop just saying stuff and do something.

Yep, as someone said above, it's a response out of exasperation to the "thoughts and prayers" posts, like a friend I have who always shares the Onion article: "‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens" after a mass shooting.

https://www.theonion.com/no-way-to-preve...1820163660

Sadly, they have to share it way more than anyone would care to see.

The problem with using The Onion to make a point is you end up looking like a fool when you do so.

For example the idea that this is the "only nation where this regularly happens"

https://crimeresearch.org/2015/06/compar...nd-europe/



Considering that we rank 11th in death rate per million people in mass shootings it seems your asinine point derived from an Onion article is moot.

I think these statistics are misleading. Many of those countries have such small populations that their numbers are inflated.

The United States has over 300 million people so they could have a mass shooing every month and still not rank in the top ten.

A mass shooing?

(11-06-2017 04:01 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  It has to do with the notion that changing laws could have changed a future outcome.

With the Texas and Vegas shooters, anyone who suggests that we change laws is quickly silenced with things like the president said.

But with the New York killer, suddenly changing the laws is the best thing we can do to prevent another terrorist attack.

You can't have it both ways. Either changing laws can or cannot change the outcome of future events.

I don't care which . Just make up your mind and be consistent Mr. President.

Sure you can. Name a realistic law that would have prevented the Texas and Vegas shootings.


I can name one that would have prevented the NYC attack. You can only immigrate to this country if you would provide a benefit to society. You are a doctor, or teacher, or scientist, etc. Had we had that law in place Saipov wouldn't have been in the US and he would have been unable to carry out his attack as there isn't a pressing societal need for us to import Uber drivers.

(11-06-2017 03:38 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 03:33 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 03:32 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 03:25 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 03:24 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  It's true. When the shooter is white, he doesn't seem to say much about them.

If the shooter is black or Muslim, he quickly makes it about the shooter.

You got some examples of this?

His responses on Twitter in each of the killings is well documented.

Which killings?

And you know the standard here. You make a claim, you back it up.

Well with the Vegas shooitng he spoke only of the victiims. The same with the Texas victims.

With New York however, he called for the death penalty and immediate change in immigration policy.

I find it quit interesting that with the other shootins, it's always "well ther eis nothing we can do about it" "now is not the time to act emotionally."

But when it was the New York killer he immediately called for immigration reform.

The NY killer was an immigrant, no?

Why would he have called for immigration reform specifically as a reaction to yesterday's events? That doesn't even make any sense.

(11-06-2017 04:21 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 03:38 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 03:33 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 03:32 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 03:25 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  You got some examples of this?

His responses on Twitter in each of the killings is well documented.

Which killings?

And you know the standard here. You make a claim, you back it up.

Well with the Vegas shooitng he spoke only of the victiims. The same with the Texas victims.

With New York however, he called for the death penalty and immediate change in immigration policy.

I find it quit interesting that with the other shootins, it's always "well ther eis nothing we can do about it" "now is not the time to act emotionally."

But when it was the New York killer he immediately called for immigration reform.

The NY killer was an immigrant, no?

Why would he have called for immigration reform specifically as a reaction to yesterday's events? That doesn't even make any sense.

(11-06-2017 02:52 PM)Dynamos Wrote:  Im not going to mock the victims but I do wonder sometimes how things like this happen. If God is all powerful and all good why does bad things happens. Why do children sitting in a church get gunned down?

I don't know, was God wearing a mask and dressed in black? It's sad that God is always faulted for what we do. The sins I've committed weren't committed by God. I very well knew that I was committing them and no one pushed me into it. Perhaps if y'all were as smart as you say perhaps you could see that God gives us free rein in our lives that's why we sin and that's why we try not to. WE HAVE A CHOICE!

Don't blame God for OUR actions. If we want we can always refrain from doing something sinful. We know what it is that we shouldn't be committing but it's more fun doing it. That's why it's pushed by MSM and the music industry, it's just that we don't care to do right.

DON'T blame God for your selfish, sinful acts. Blame yourselves.

(11-06-2017 04:31 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 04:21 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 03:38 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 03:33 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 03:32 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  His responses on Twitter in each of the killings is well documented.

Which killings?

And you know the standard here. You make a claim, you back it up.

Well with the Vegas shooitng he spoke only of the victiims. The same with the Texas victims.

With New York however, he called for the death penalty and immediate change in immigration policy.

I find it quit interesting that with the other shootins, it's always "well ther eis nothing we can do about it" "now is not the time to act emotionally."

But when it was the New York killer he immediately called for immigration reform.

The NY killer was an immigrant, no?

Why would he have called for immigration reform specifically as a reaction to yesterday's events? That doesn't even make any sense.

I also don't think the death penalty is appropriate for yesterday's events as that would mean reviving the killer. Very appropriate for NY!

(11-06-2017 03:34 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  **** if I know, I dont keep tract of the President whenever he speaks.

Well, you don't suffer from TDS and worry about things like him feeding fish in Japan.

(11-06-2017 03:22 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  Real question; do you not think Trump has a history of noticeably different reaction, especially immediately, to white terrorists compared to Islamic ones?

Oh look another ironic statement from a leftist.

The reaction by leftist / liberals is far different when a white person does something awful compared to when a non-white person does something awful.

(11-06-2017 03:10 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 02:45 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 02:31 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 02:19 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:22 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  It would seem that most people simply want to say, " my thoughts and prayers............." and then they can turn around and move on with their lives.

It's the same thing when you see a soldier and you say " Thank you for serving our country" It's as if it excuses us from getting involved and doing something.

Maybe we need to stop just saying stuff and do something.

Yep, as someone said above, it's a response out of exasperation to the "thoughts and prayers" posts, like a friend I have who always shares the Onion article: "‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens" after a mass shooting.

https://www.theonion.com/no-way-to-preve...1820163660

Sadly, they have to share it way more than anyone would care to see.

The problem with using The Onion to make a point is you end up looking like a fool when you do so.

For example the idea that this is the "only nation where this regularly happens"

https://crimeresearch.org/2015/06/compar...nd-europe/


Considering that we rank 11th in death rate per million people in mass shootings it seems your asinine point derived from an Onion article is moot.

Onion = Satire. A little license is always taken with them.

Regardless, you have some very selective stats pulled. Norway had a mass shooting in 2011 that killed 80, so taking into consideration their population, skews those numbers completely out of whack.

Here are the numbers from 2000-2014, which is a more comprehensive view:



So yes; Norway has experienced more than almost any other country listed on there, but they still pale in comparison to the US.

You don't have a grasp of statistics, do you? The table showing the U.S. ranking of 11 is a way to standardize the numbers to give a better understanding of what is actually happening. Using raw numbers that show just total number of shootings actually skews the data. In my book, seeing 100 people killed/wounded via mass shootings when your population is 10 million people is a whole lot worse than 900 people wounded/killed when your population is 300 million.

It means that the U.S. is actually SAFER than 10 other countries when it comes to shootings. The U.S. needs to improve - no doubt about it; however, it is far from the worst place when you take the whole picture into account.

Yes; I have a grasp of statistics, which is why I said he was using those stats to make us look not so bad based around one horrific event in Norway, when we hands down have more of these events happening than other countries. It would be like using data based solely around the timeframe of 9/11 to prove a point about terrorism.

Even if we only had 50 mass shooting events, could you imagine how far down on the list we would fall? But instead we are looking at over 20 times more of this crap than the next closest country. The US makes up under 5% of the world's population, but owns 42% of the world's guns. Yes, mass shootings happen everywhere, but they're only a matter of routine in the US.

FWIW, the full chart looked like this - it places us at #4 when you look at a larger number of years, which makes sense, since our mass shootings have increased exponentially as time has gone by:



Side note: the US homicide rate is double that of outlier Norway, and almost 4 times that of everyone else.

(11-06-2017 11:49 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 10:49 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 10:09 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 09:59 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  And still no leftist on the board has disavow these sick people...

And you, specifically, still believe literal fake news. There is nothing tying this person to the left except for fake news.

still no disavow...

Still no reason for anyone here to disavow anything they have no control over or connection to.

Got it, you are ok with the mass murder.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(11-06-2017 01:50 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:49 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:40 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:39 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:32 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  Sure, it's just that these things are happening with such frequency, saying "we need to wait for cooler heads" becomes prohibitive.

Based on what I've heard in the news, this case was a failure of the system itself. He should have had multiple flags in his file preventing him from purchasing firearms. However, those flags never show up. The laws were there to help prevent this. The military, law enforcement, the service that runs the background checks, etc... someone or some group screwed up.

For this specific case, the solution is to make the system more robust so that the flags are read properly and not missed. IMHO, it's an IT problem.

I'm not sure that is in fact the case. I heard on the radio this morning that he was in fact denied a license to carry.

Conceal carry is not the same as buying a gun.

No it isn't but I don't think anyone in here would say that this man should not have been allowed to own a gun right?

Lol

Yes, I would bet everyone.

Good grief...

(11-06-2017 01:55 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:54 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:50 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:49 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 01:40 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  I'm not sure that is in fact the case. I heard on the radio this morning that he was in fact denied a license to carry.

Conceal carry is not the same as buying a gun.

No it isn't but I don't think anyone in here would say that this man should not have been allowed to own a gun right?

I would. He should not have been allowed to own a gun because of the crime he was convicted of.

Wow I'm surprised?

I thought for sure gun advocates would have felt the opposite.

What crime was he convicted of?

Oh, FFS.

Spouting off again not knowing basic facts.

Geeeeeeez...

For those of you who like to send your "Thoughts & Prayers" like it's an email and care package would like this game.

Thoughts and Prayers the Game

(11-06-2017 05:17 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 03:10 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 02:45 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 02:31 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(11-06-2017 02:19 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  Yep, as someone said above, it's a response out of exasperation to the "thoughts and prayers" posts, like a friend I have who always shares the Onion article: "‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens" after a mass shooting.

https://www.theonion.com/no-way-to-preve...1820163660

Sadly, they have to share it way more than anyone would care to see.

The problem with using The Onion to make a point is you end up looking like a fool when you do so.

For example the idea that this is the "only nation where this regularly happens"

https://crimeresearch.org/2015/06/compar...nd-europe/


Considering that we rank 11th in death rate per million people in mass shootings it seems your asinine point derived from an Onion article is moot.

Onion = Satire. A little license is always taken with them.

Regardless, you have some very selective stats pulled. Norway had a mass shooting in 2011 that killed 80, so taking into consideration their population, skews those numbers completely out of whack.

Here are the numbers from 2000-2014, which is a more comprehensive view:



So yes; Norway has experienced more than almost any other country listed on there, but they still pale in comparison to the US.

You don't have a grasp of statistics, do you? The table showing the U.S. ranking of 11 is a way to standardize the numbers to give a better understanding of what is actually happening. Using raw numbers that show just total number of shootings actually skews the data. In my book, seeing 100 people killed/wounded via mass shootings when your population is 10 million people is a whole lot worse than 900 people wounded/killed when your population is 300 million.

It means that the U.S. is actually SAFER than 10 other countries when it comes to shootings. The U.S. needs to improve - no doubt about it; however, it is far from the worst place when you take the whole picture into account.

Yes; I have a grasp of statistics, which is why I said he was using those stats to make us look not so bad based around one horrific event in Norway, when we hands down have more of these events happening than other countries. It would be like using data based solely around the timeframe of 9/11 to prove a point about terrorism.

Even if we only had 50 mass shooting events, could you imagine how far down on the list we would fall? But instead we are looking at over 20 times more of this crap than the next closest country. The US makes up under 5% of the world's population, but owns 42% of the world's guns. Yes, mass shootings happen everywhere, but they're only a matter of routine in the US.

FWIW, the full chart looked like this - it places us at #4 when you look at a larger number of years, which makes sense, since our mass shootings have increased exponentially as time has gone by:



Side note: the US homicide rate is double that of outlier Norway, and almost 4 times that of everyone else.

Sure the U.S. has a higher homicide rate than European countries. It's 5 times lower than Mexico's homicide rate - which amazingly is almost not affected by mass shootings at all. Interestingly enough, if you compare the homicide rate in the U.S. vs the fatalities due to mass shootings (4.7 to 0.15), you see that the mass shootings make up only 3.2% of total homicides per 100K.

Mass shootings are an attention grabber - I get it. However, if your ultimate goal is to reduce homicides (total murders), you can spend your time on more fruitful endeavors than focusing on mass shootings.