- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: 11 shot and 1 dead in Myrtle Beach mass shooting over the weekend. No news coverage.
Posted on 4/30/25 at 7:43 am to Vacherie Saint
Posted on 4/30/25 at 7:43 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
Either the data source excludes gang shootings (like yours), or excludes race (like the FBI), or it parses shootings by ambiguous criteria.
So I have presented data that you don’t like. The fact that we are this deep into the convo and you haven’t provided data to support what you are saying tells me all I need to know—clearly you can’t find any.
quote:
At minimum, there’s not even a universal definition for mass shooting. Your own source uses three+ deaths while most use four+ shot.
So why don’t YOU define mass shooting however YOU would like, and then YOU find the data that looks at mass shootings, as YOU define them, by race and present them here.
All you have brought to this discussion is “UH OH, it’s not true bc anyone with a brain knows it’s not!!!!!!!”
3
Posted on 4/30/25 at 7:45 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
So I have presented data that you don’t like. The fact that we are this deep into the convo and you haven’t provided data to support what you are saying tells me all I need to know—clearly you can’t find any.
If gang violence is excluded from any of these stats, they are invalid
Posted on 4/30/25 at 7:46 am to FredBear
I hijacked nothing. I simply made a factual statement that disrupted yalls little safe space echo chamber, and it threw all of you into a tizzy. Sad to see.
Posted on 4/30/25 at 7:47 am to djsdawg
“Anything that doesn’t affirm my preconceived notions is invalid”
Posted on 4/30/25 at 7:52 am to onmymedicalgrind
I don’t “dislike” your data. With a touch of intellectual honesty and some math, it validates almost everything the board is saying. Even from agenda-driven Marxists like Mother Jones.
I’m simply pointing out that mass shooting data is poorly organized and often biased . Sorry if that hurts your kill Whitey feelings or your “mass shootings are inherently white” false narratives.
I’m simply pointing out that mass shooting data is poorly organized and often biased . Sorry if that hurts your kill Whitey feelings or your “mass shootings are inherently white” false narratives.
Posted on 4/30/25 at 7:57 am to onmymedicalgrind
Again. For the fourth time.
Who gets to define it? Because the only way it even sniffs “white” is when you remove gang mass shootings or exclude gunshot survivors. Now ask yourself why a researcher would exclude those. How are those exclusions statistically “valid”?
Who gets to define it? Because the only way it even sniffs “white” is when you remove gang mass shootings or exclude gunshot survivors. Now ask yourself why a researcher would exclude those. How are those exclusions statistically “valid”?
This post was edited on 4/30/25 at 8:00 am
Posted on 4/30/25 at 8:01 am to onmymedicalgrind
You do realize that the definition you quote for what a mass shooting requires eliminates most mass shootings? Tell me why you think that is? Could it be to get a desired outcome? Why not just leave it at a certain number instead of throwing in crap like motivation and location?
Posted on 4/30/25 at 8:06 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
Gotta love the poliboard, where we hate blacks so much that we can't even admit that mass shooters are more likely to be white....
You sure you’re not thinking about serial killers? Black folks don’t have the patience for that shite.
Posted on 4/30/25 at 8:07 am to omegaman66
He doesn’t care.
Whitey=evil
Black=good
Whitey=evil
Black=good
Posted on 4/30/25 at 8:28 am to bhtigerfan
I’d like to solve the puzzle!
Posted on 4/30/25 at 8:43 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
where we hate blacks so much that we can't even admit that mass shooters are more likely to be white....
I have enjoyed our conversations in the past. You're an educated professional. You don't seriously believe this, do you?
It's like white cops killing unarmed black suspects. We know it isn't an "epidemic" because when it happens, it is international news for weeks. But the press and their "agenda" (hell, maybe it is just because it gets ratings - I'm not giving them a pass, but let's merely concede that, it does get ratings and it is at least part of the reason they overdo their coverage) amplifies the effect.
Likewise, for every Dylan Roof there are literally dozens (if not hundreds) of black kids, mostly teenagers or early 20s, involved in mass shootings every month. But Dylan Roof gets extraordinary press coverage, massive guilt trips on the people who didn't do it, changes to statues, memorials, laws, military base names, etc., and literally no one gives a shite about the huge loss of (mostly) young black lives in the urban hellholes that (mostly) single party rule in the vast majority of American cities have created.
FFS, use that giant brain G-d gave you...
This post was edited on 4/30/25 at 8:48 am
Posted on 4/30/25 at 8:47 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
The Congressional Research Service has defined a public mass shooting as a “a multiple homicide incident in which four or more victims are murdered with firearms”, not including the shooter(s), “within one event, and [where] at least some of the murders occurred in a public location or locations in close geographical proximity (e.g., a workplace, school, restaurant, or other public settings), and the murders are not attributable to any other underlying criminal activity or commonplace circumstance (armed robbery, criminal competition, insurance fraud, argument, or romantic triangle).”
Ah - the "we define everything away except a mentally ill person off their meds".
This post was edited on 4/30/25 at 8:48 am
Posted on 4/30/25 at 9:50 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
I’m simply pointing out that mass shooting data is poorly organized and often biased .
And I'm simply asking for data that supports your assertions.
quote:
Sorry if that hurts your kill Whitey feelings or your “mass shootings are inherently white” false narratives.
You're too emotional about this. No one said "kill whitey." I thought you were one of the few on here who can handle debate without resorting to that.
Posted on 4/30/25 at 9:52 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
Who gets to define it?
I literally just told you to define it however you want.
Once you define it how you see fit, let me know what the data shows. Links are helpful. You haven't provided anything to support your position.
Posted on 4/30/25 at 9:52 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
He doesn’t care.
Whitey=evil
Black=good
Tell tale sign of someone who can't debate.
Posted on 4/30/25 at 9:55 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
So why don’t YOU define mass shooting however YOU would like, and then YOU find the data that looks at mass shootings, as YOU define them, by race and present them here.
The 4+ victims (injured or dead) of a shooting seems to be a relatively safe definition of mass shooting. And it accounts for advances in medical care where many shooting victims don’t die. The ability of a shooting victim to survive shouldn’t artificially limit the definition of a mass shooting.
Posted on 4/30/25 at 10:10 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
LA, none of what you posted has anything to do with my argument. Of course if you only look at big cities with large black populations…..there will be increased numbers. Numbers also would be different if I select out major cities and look at rural data.
It does have to do with your argument, but you're not seeing it yet.
The stats you posted show that whites have a higher total number of mass shootings while blacks have a higher per capita number of mass shootings.
But the statistics you provided omit mass shootings involving gang members. No reason is given for this omission. It seems arbitrary. But I thought, let's add that data to get a clearer overall picture of who is killing whom. But guess what? The data on mass shootings by gang members is not available. I did about 5 different searches. Zip. Nada
Why isn't it available? My hunch is that the numbers paint a picture that is not flattering to POC. The media, who are about 95% Left-leaning, are fond of this type of propaganda by omission. The federal govt is too. So they keep the statistics from public view. And we are left to speculate on what the numbers would be if we add mass shootings by gang members to the total picture. Leaving the true picture fuzzy is probably the best you're going to do
Reminds me of what Mark Twin said. There are three kinds of lies: "Lies, damned lies, and statistics"
`
This post was edited on 4/30/25 at 10:24 am
Posted on 4/30/25 at 10:15 am to onmymedicalgrind
What you don’t understand is there is no accurate data on mass shootings because they all have different criteria which excludes certain elements of mass shootings like number of people shot, number of people killed, location, gang affiliation, intent, relationship to the shooter, race, etc.
All kinds of stupid shite which shouldn’t matter as far as the true definition of a “mass shooting.”
Logically, a mass shooting should be defined as a shooting that involves a minimum of 2 or 3 gunshot victims (excluding the perpetrator and regardless of fatalities) and regardless of intent except clear cut self defense. (If a homeowner shoots 3 home intruders, it should not be counted.)
If 5 people are shot a house party, it shouldn’t matter if it was in a private residence, was gang related and only one died. It was 5 people shot in one incident! End of story. No special circumstances needed.
All kinds of stupid shite which shouldn’t matter as far as the true definition of a “mass shooting.”
Logically, a mass shooting should be defined as a shooting that involves a minimum of 2 or 3 gunshot victims (excluding the perpetrator and regardless of fatalities) and regardless of intent except clear cut self defense. (If a homeowner shoots 3 home intruders, it should not be counted.)
If 5 people are shot a house party, it shouldn’t matter if it was in a private residence, was gang related and only one died. It was 5 people shot in one incident! End of story. No special circumstances needed.
Posted on 4/30/25 at 10:16 am to onmymedicalgrind
Oh! Awesome. Please share with me a master data set that’ll allow me to define it however I want then filter data accordingly.
I’ll wait
I’ll wait
This post was edited on 4/30/25 at 10:17 am
Posted on 4/30/25 at 10:22 am to bhtigerfan
He knows this. And he also knows why mass shooting data, despite being the cause du jour of the modern left, is so laughably curated.
He would rather pretend it’s a white problem than deal with the realities in his community. Which is a sentiment shared across a spectrum of issues wrt race. It leads to division and smothers meaningful progress.
He would rather pretend it’s a white problem than deal with the realities in his community. Which is a sentiment shared across a spectrum of issues wrt race. It leads to division and smothers meaningful progress.
This post was edited on 4/30/25 at 10:24 am
Page 10 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News