re: John Stossel destroys mass shooting myth

The media today is no better than Russian media in the 1980s.

No attempt at the truth, just spewing propaganda.

quote:

---

Langford defined what he considered as a mass shooting. And that definition didn't include Taliban attacked in Afghanistan. 

---

He cherry picked what he wanted to be a mass shooting in order to arrive at a certain conclusion.

It’s not devotion. It’s delusion, or she’s a paid shill.

There isn’t a bigger partisan on this board, and that’s saying something.

quote:

---

No. I read Langford's study.

---

Where did you find LanKford's study? I can't find a free PDF of it online via Google Scholar, though I didn't try using the public library.

And for fricks sake...you read his study but keep calling him Langford in this thread.

People are saying he won't release his methodology because he's failed to answer exactly how he searched these 171 countries covering multiple languages over a time span of 46 years. Releasing his data would probably take care of that huge question regarding methodology. Not to mention, according to the abstract I can find online, he includes suicide rates, homicide rates, and gun ownership rates for these countries as well.

And for the folks saying this is scientific...it was published in the journal "Violence and Victims." Which, according to Wikipedia, covers:

quote:

---

Violence and Victims is a bimonthly peer-reviewed academic journal covering theory, research, policy, and clinical practice in the area of interpersonal violence and victimization, touching diverse disciplines such as psychology, sociology, criminology, law, medicine, nursing, psychiatry, and social work.

The journal's scope includes original research on violence-related victimization within, and outside of, the family; the etiology and perpetration of violent behavior; health care research related to interpersonal violence and to trauma; legal issues; and implications for clinical interventions. Occasionally, there are special issues dealing with specific topics and relevant books are often reviewed.

---

More of a humanities journal than a science journal.

quote:

---

When the claim is made that the US leads the World in mass shootings and data is ignored that clearly shows that the US is far from such a distinction, it's bull shite propaganda. Poorly educated, dishonest, willfully ignorant little turds like you are so easy to flush out of these threads.

---

Langford didn't ignore the data. He clearly defined what his study used as a delineation was the Department of Homeland Security’s
definition of “active shooter” for mass shootings. He specifically stated that his study was of public mass shootings where 4 or more were killed.

Lott said that his study used the same criteria as Langford's, to discredit Langford's study, which is a flat out lie. The data Lott used consisted of reported acts of terrorism which are defined as

quote:
"the threatened or actual use of illegal force and violence by a non-state actor to attain a political, economic, religious, or social goal through fear, coercion, or intimidation."

It's clear that Lott attached Langford's study by disingenuously inferring that his study was using the same parameters as Langford's.

Lott's deceitful actions are in keeping with his history of advocating policies favored by the sponsor of much of his research, the Olin Corporation, which is one of the largest ammunition manufacturers in the U.S.

It was not an apples-to-apples comparison as Lott claimed it was. For you to blindly ignore that fact shows your willful ignorance.

quote:

---

Lott's deceitful actions are in keeping with his history of advocating policies favored by the sponsor of much of his research, the Olin Corporation, which is one of the largest ammunition manufacturers in the U.S.

---

That is straight out of the book for clueless dishonest gun-control loons. You morons have made a cottage industry in attacking Lott and still use the same tired, easily discredited talking points.

The Olin Foundation is a completely separate entity from the Olin Corporation and the funding came directly through the University of Chicago. Reducing yourself to VPC talking points is the surest way to demonstrate your ignorance and low-grade education here...

Go away child, gun-control trolls get boring very quickly.

quote:

---

by texridder
Lott's study has been posted and commented on here before.

I don't know about Langford's study, but the study that Lott did is obviously totally bogus. He's an out-and-out liar.

A significant number of the incidents reported in Lott's data occurred in areas where longstanding political and social struggles have been and are occurring. For example, 38 of the 451 pages of Lott's data were incidents involving Taliban attacks in Afghanistan. 25 pages of Lott's data were reporting incidents involving the Armed Islamic Group (AIG) and other rebel extremist groups in Algeria.

Lott saying that he used the same parameters as Langford is just a lie.

It's also obvious that either Stossel didn't look at Lott's data, or is too thick to figure out how Lott deliberately distorted his data.

---

^^^ Why do these idiots mostly show either TCU, Aggie or Hog icons? Alts?

I’m old SWC and Big 12 and have noticed this. Maybe I’m wrong but normally all 3 schools used to be very conservative so this surprises me