36 Mass shootings in less than 2 weeks but no coverage - wrong race of shooter?

a reply to: dubiousatworst

he is Iranian / Italian, perhaps jumping on the "he is white" bandwagon is a bit quick.

Iran is a country not a race. Italy is a country not a race. Believe it or not, other countries have different races living in them as well.

originally posted by: DigginFoTroof
We saw how much coverage there was with the shooting in Gilroy and the media was sure quick and happy to announce the race of the shooter, some even seemed to be ecstatic to be able to point to a white person for the horrible crime. So, as usual, the media ignores the dozens of other mass shootings in the country, some with 3-4x the number of victims as that in Gilroy, but the media (besides local media) remains silent.

We also have to ask about the national statistics regarding deaths by gun violence where they rank gun violence as one of the leading causes of death in the US (other than medical or natural reasons) with about 40,000 and that would seem like a lot of deaths if the statistics weren't padded with suicides from firearms or death by police shootings (which is almost always a criminal threatening someone else with a gun, or suicide by cop). If these numbers were removed that number would drop by about 75% or more which puts the level of gun violence in a country of ~325 million, in a different light.

So why does the media and government decide not to include these shootings, which are perpetrated by blacks in about 90% of the cases, not included in mass shootings? This seems racist in many aspects - one for only highlighting white shooters and villainizing them and the other is ignoring the victims of the black shooters, which is largely black victims, so they ignore these victims while they cover the "REAL" mass shootings where the victims are often white.

There's also another aspect in these uncovered shootings and that is the weapon used usually isn't the big scary black gun or the AR15. The weapons used in these shootings are usually hand guns, small carbines or "hybrid" pistols.

So as the media continues to push the narrative that 90% of mass shootings are committed by white people when the exact opposite is true, with the shooters actually being blacks, be aware of the level of crime being hidden from the public while trying to make the majority population look like terrorists. The level of black violence in many of the US cities is at an epidemic level and it's impossible to be hidden, even though they try many different ways with their manipulated statistics.

Look at 9:45 in the video to get an idea why these shootings aren't looked at the same as the Gilroy shooting and you'll get a quote from NYC mayor De'Blasio.

Maybe because many of those other shootings were that on gang cfimes, drug related, were related to some other crime. Innocent people being gunned down by a crazed white loner make better headlines than one jacked up black guy killing another jacked up black guy over some weed.

a reply to: DigginFoTroof

EMail:

Interesting statistics! This jives with the research of Prof. John Lott at the University of Chicago, who is a noted expert on gun laws and stats.



Here are some facts.



There are 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed. The U.S. population is 324,059,091 as of June 22, 2016. Do the math: 0.00925% of the population dies from gun related actions each year. Statistically speaking, this is insignificant. What is never told, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths, to put them in perspective as compared to other causes of death: 65% of those deaths are by suicide, which would never be prevented by gun laws.



15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and justified.



17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug related or mentally ill persons – better known as gun violence.



3% are accidental discharge deaths.



So technically, “gun violence” is not 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100. Still too many? Now lets look at how those deaths spanned across the nation.



480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago

344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore

333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit

119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington D.C. (a 54% increase over prior years)



So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities. All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws, so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.



This basically leaves 3,825 for the entire rest of the nation, or about 75 deaths per state. That is an average because some States have much higher rates than others. For example, California had 1,169 and Alabama had 1.



Now, who has the strictest gun laws by far? California, of course, but understand, it is not guns causing this. It is a crime rate spawned by the number of criminal persons residing in those cities and states. So, if all cities and states are not created equal, then there must be something other than the tool causing the gun deaths.



Are 5,100 deaths per year horrific? How about in comparison to other deaths? All death is sad and especially so when it is in the commission of a crime but that is the nature of crime. Robbery, death, rape, assaults are all done by criminals. It is ludicrous to think that criminals will obey laws. That is why they are called criminals.



But what about other deaths each year?



40,000+ die from a drug overdose–THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THAT!



36,000 people die per year from the flu, far exceeding the criminal gun deaths.

34,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities(exceeding gun deaths even if you include suicide).



Here’s a surprise:

200,000+ people die each year (and growing) from preventable medical errors. You are safer walking in the worst areas of Chicago than you are when you are in a hospital!



710,000 people die per year from heart disease. It’s time to stop the double cheeseburgers! So, what is the point? If the liberals and the anti-gun movement focused their attention on heart disease, even a 10% decrease in cardiac deaths would save twice the number of lives annually of all gun-related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.).



A 10% reduction in medical errors would be 66% of the total number of gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides ……………. Simple, easily preventable 10% reductions! So, you have to ask yourself, in the grand scheme of things, why the focus on guns?



It’s simple:

Taking away guns gives control to governments. The founders of this nation knew that regardless of the form of government, those in power may become corrupt and seek to rule as the British did by trying to disarm the populace of the colonies. It is not difficult to understand that a disarmed populace is a controlled populace.



Thus, the second amendment was proudly and boldly included in the U.S. Constitution.

Some people sure did something.

At high vein: No, a country is a race.

Because it was RACIST when newly elected DJ Trump tried to get a travel ban from 7 terror-countries.


But I know what you mean, though. Iran has over 50 distinct ethnic minorities, with the Kurds leading the way. And if you are ever around any ethnic farsi/persians, you will notice that they pronounce "Iran" so that is sounds like "AIR-yan".

Almost like it was a race and not a country....

a reply to: DigginFoTroof

We also have to ask about the national statistics regarding deaths by gun violence where they rank gun violence as one of the leading causes of death in the US (other than medical or natural reasons) with about 40,000 and that would seem like a lot of deaths if the statistics weren't padded with suicides from firearms or death by police shootings (which is almost always a criminal threatening someone else with a gun, or suicide by cop). If these numbers were removed that number would drop by about 75% or more which puts the level of gun violence in a country of ~325 million, in a different light.

Because the cause of death was by a gun, hence "Gun Violence". They do a lot of shady ish and deserve a fifteenth look, but this is mustard.

So why does the media and government decide not to include these shootings, which are perpetrated by blacks in about 90% of the cases, not included in mass shootings? This seems racist in many aspects

See, i'm stopping right there, I already know where this is going. Already, you saying that because the numbers don't reflect what you want to see, you want to change the calculation so you can get a result that allows you to say...

So as the media continues to push the narrative that 90% of mass shootings are committed by white people when the exact opposite is true, with the shooters actually being blacks, be aware of the level of crime being hidden from the public while trying to make the majority population look like terrorists. The level of black violence in many of the US cities is at an epidemic level and it's impossible to be hidden, even though they try many different ways with their manipulated statistics.

HAHA! I knew it! I admit you had me going with...

one for only highlighting white shooters and villainizing them and the other is ignoring the victims of the black shooters, which is largely black victims, so they ignore these victims while they cover the "REAL" mass shootings where the victims are often white.

But you pulled through, with this gem

So as the media continues to push the narrative that 90% of mass shootings are committed by white people when the exact opposite is true, with the shooters actually being blacks, be aware of the level of crime being hidden from the public while trying to make the majority population look like terrorists. The level of black violence in many of the US cities is at an epidemic level and it's impossible to be hidden, even though they try many different ways with their manipulated statistics.

My niggah.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

There is a huge difference between gangbangers shooting at gangbangers and a crazed gunman shooting innocent people indiscriminately. The murder rate in the u.s is about 50% less than it was in the 70s, 80s and nineties. While a murder rate of 0 would be ideal and we have a long way to go to achieve that but the fact of the matter is the murder rate is 5 out of 100000 compared to 10 out of 100000 that peaked in 1980.

The media covers the mass shootings by crazed gunmen because 99% of victims are innocent bystanders. I'm not sure the statistics of crazed gunmen going on murder sprees but they do seem to be on the rise while others are on the decline after seeing a spike from 2014-2017.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

Maybe because many of those other shootings were that on gang cfimes, drug related, were related to some other crime. Innocent people being gunned down by a crazed white loner make better headlines than one jacked up black guy killing another jacked up black guy over some weed

Wtf? Really? lol

Idk any one that's "jacked up" or will kill someone

over some WEED!!!???

Lmfao what a dumb thing to say

It’s all about divide and rule, this type of race-baiting identity politics politics of the radical far left doing it Need Eradication from western politics by which ever means possible, everybody can be united under one identity it’s called nationalism

a reply to: Archivalist

All's I know is, I end like 100 million innocent lives every time I watch porn.

a reply to: DigginFoTroof

I don't know why it is the way it is. All I can comment on is what I see. Past that it is speculation on my part.

You would think, as victim hierarchy obsessed as the media is, some poor black kids in a poor neighborhood in Chicago should be news. It's not. As a human being, I think any senseless deaths should be news.

I cannot figure out the picture of competing agendas. I can see 'Trump Bad' there. That's a given. I can see 'Guns Bad'. I can see what I can only interpret as 'Dead Black Kids' not news and 'Upscale White People Dead' as big news. Maybe it helps drive the first two better with MSM viewers. This assumes, of course, the media assumes racism on the part of their products consumers. OR, they themselves have strong racist streaks and this is how it manifests.

originally posted by: 727Sky
a reply to: DigginFoTroof

EMail:

Interesting statistics! This jives with the research of Prof. John Lott at the University of Chicago, who is a noted expert on gun laws and stats.

Here are some facts.

There are 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed. The U.S. population is 324,059,091 as of June 22, 2016. Do the math: 0.00925% of the population dies from gun related actions each year. Statistically speaking, this is insignificant. What is never told, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths, to put them in perspective as compared to other causes of death: 65% of those deaths are by suicide, which would never be prevented by gun laws.

15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and justified.

17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug related or mentally ill persons – better known as gun violence.

3% are accidental discharge deaths.

So technically, “gun violence” is not 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100. Still too many? Now lets look at how those deaths spanned across the nation.

480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago

344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore

333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit

119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington D.C. (a 54% increase over prior years)

So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities. All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws, so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.

This basically leaves 3,825 for the entire rest of the nation, or about 75 deaths per state. That is an average because some States have much higher rates than others. For example, California had 1,169 and Alabama had 1.

Now, who has the strictest gun laws by far? California, of course, but understand, it is not guns causing this. It is a crime rate spawned by the number of criminal persons residing in those cities and states. So, if all cities and states are not created equal, then there must be something other than the tool causing the gun deaths.

Are 5,100 deaths per year horrific? How about in comparison to other deaths? All death is sad and especially so when it is in the commission of a crime but that is the nature of crime. Robbery, death, rape, assaults are all done by criminals. It is ludicrous to think that criminals will obey laws. That is why they are called criminals.

But what about other deaths each year?

40,000+ die from a drug overdose–THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THAT!

36,000 people die per year from the flu, far exceeding the criminal gun deaths.

34,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities(exceeding gun deaths even if you include suicide).

Here’s a surprise:

200,000+ people die each year (and growing) from preventable medical errors. You are safer walking in the worst areas of Chicago than you are when you are in a hospital!

710,000 people die per year from heart disease. It’s time to stop the double cheeseburgers! So, what is the point? If the liberals and the anti-gun movement focused their attention on heart disease, even a 10% decrease in cardiac deaths would save twice the number of lives annually of all gun-related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.).

A 10% reduction in medical errors would be 66% of the total number of gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides ……………. Simple, easily preventable 10% reductions! So, you have to ask yourself, in the grand scheme of things, why the focus on guns?

It’s simple:

Taking away guns gives control to governments. The founders of this nation knew that regardless of the form of government, those in power may become corrupt and seek to rule as the British did by trying to disarm the populace of the colonies. It is not difficult to understand that a disarmed populace is a controlled populace.

Thus, the second amendment was proudly and boldly included in the U.S. Constitution.

Thanks for the info! That is a good breakdown of the numbers and really puts the "gun violence" numbers in perspective! Only a fool would look at these numbers and say there is a problem with legal gun ownership. It's obvious after looking at these numbers that the agenda isn't to save people from gun related deaths, but to disarm and control the populace. I can't imagine that the legislators don't know this and it is clear that anyone pushing for the gun control is anti-constitution - it can't get much clearer. But what does that mean?

What does it mean if your representatives are actively fighting against your constitutional rights? Is that treason? Could it be considered sedition? They are rebelling through action against the legal rights of the citizens of the country. Sedition is usually reserved for action against the state or monarch, but in a Republic, the people are the ones who are supposed to be in power and protected, and there are people actively fighting to remove their ability to protect themselves. IMO this is a seditious act as it removes there ability to defend or uphold the laws - the government is a mere extension of the people, a representative, and a crime against the whole of the people (constitution) , should be considered treason or sedition.

originally posted by: Graysen
Some people sure did something.

At high vein: No, a country is a race.

Because it was RACIST when newly elected DJ Trump tried to get a travel ban from 7 terror-countries.


But I know what you mean, though. Iran has over 50 distinct ethnic minorities, with the Kurds leading the way. And if you are ever around any ethnic farsi/persians, you will notice that they pronounce "Iran" so that is sounds like "AIR-yan".

Almost like it was a race and not a country....

IDK if you are replying to me, but I hadn't really mentioned the above topics. As far as Iran, I do think it stems form Aryan and that is what is meant when it is pronounced the way it is in that country. From what I see, people there are proud of it, but that may be a smaller sub-set of people besides the arabs who have migrated/bred into the area over the centuries

originally posted by: DigginFoTroof

originally posted by: Graysen
Some people sure did something.

At high vein: No, a country is a race.

Because it was RACIST when newly elected DJ Trump tried to get a travel ban from 7 terror-countries.


But I know what you mean, though. Iran has over 50 distinct ethnic minorities, with the Kurds leading the way. And if you are ever around any ethnic farsi/persians, you will notice that they pronounce "Iran" so that is sounds like "AIR-yan".

Almost like it was a race and not a country....

IDK if you are replying to me, but I hadn't really mentioned the above topics. As far as Iran, I do think it stems form Aryan and that is what is meant when it is pronounced the way it is in that country. From what I see, people there are proud of it, but that may be a smaller sub-set of people besides the arabs who have migrated/bred into the area over the centuries

Yes Persia was Persia. Then Hitler visited Persia, told them about the Aryan race in Germany, the Persian shah liked the idea of a superior master race, and renamed his country after it.

www.iranchamber.com...

If the media isn't covering it it's because it doesn't benefit Democrats and liberals. Plain and simple.

originally posted by: DigginFoTroof

originally posted by: KansasGirl
THIRTY-SIX MASS shootings in less than two weeks??

Where did you get that number? Do you have a link?

Where and when did these take place, and what makes an incident a "mass" shooting?

Also, your numbers about if they removed suicides by gun from the death statistics, death by gun would be down 75% or more?! Again- where did you get those numbers? Link, please?

Because basically you are saying that 75 percent of gun deaths are due to suicide, and I don't think that's correct. You sure threw around a lot of unsubstantiated stats and numbers in your OP.

Gun violence

en.wikipedia.org...

The shootings - did you watch the video? I'm not tracking down all 36 shootings. They are covered in the video more or less. I If you don't want to beleive what's there, that's your choice. I've spent enough time checking his video's and still do randomly, but I'm not tracking all these down. Feel free to post what you find.

So you require people to watch a video to know what you are talking about? Intellectual laziness is behind many of these shootings as well.

a reply to: DigginFoTroof

The left in this country hates whites.

Democrats have always been racist. The mistake was to believe they were racist because they ONLY hated black people. They hate everyone and use that hatred as a wedge. So when they discovered they could make a minority coalition and highlight their hatred of white people, they hopped on board with vigor, leaving their hatred of black people on the back burner and bringing their hatred of white people to the forefront. It's all about the power. They use their hatred to amass power to perpetrate terror upon their underlings.

The Wikipedia article “Race and crime in the United States” really puts violence inflicted with firearms into perspective.

“There were a total of 603,000 emergency department visits in the US for non-fatal firearm assaults in the 10 year period between 2007–2016. For non-fatal firearm assaults with recorded race, 77,000 victims were white non-Hispanic, 261,000 were black and 94,000 were Hispanic, 8,500 were other non-Hispanic and for 162,000 the race was not recorded. Despite gun injuries only accounting for about 3.5% of serious assault injuries between 2007-2016 they accounted for nearly 70% of overall homicides.[58]”


That means for the 10-year period from 2007-2016, out of all the victims treated in emergency rooms for non-fatal firearm injuries in which the victim’s race was identified, 43.4 percent of the victims were black. In almost 27 percent of non-fatal firearm injuries in that time period the race of the victim was not recorded; it would seem safe to assume that a large number of these victims were also black, very possibly making half or more of all such victims black. Unquestionably, the vast majority of firearm injuries involving black victims were black-on-black shootings.

From the same article: “Of the 9,468 murder arrests in the US in 2017, 53.5% were black and 20.8% Hispanic. Of the 822,671 arrests for non-aggravated assault, 31.4% were black and 18.4% hispanic.[59]”

Year after year, the FBI’s uniform crime report shows that blacks are arrested for more than half of all murders in America. It’s even worse for black juveniles, arrested for 58 percent of all murders committed by juveniles. Blacks and Hispanics combined are arrested for 74.3 percent of all murders while comprising only 30 percent of the population. I concede that the percentage of all arrests for murder committed by Hispanics (20.8 percent) is only slightly higher than the Hispanic percentage of the population (17 percent). Blacks comprise about 13 percent of the population. Whites comprise about 61 percent of the populace.

In 2017, 223 blacks were killed by police. In 2018,
209 blacks were killed by police. Blacks were arrested for more than 5,000 murders in 2017; the vast majority of their victims were almost certainly black.

Back in 1995+ in Richmond Virginia during the heat of the summer the blacks would be killing each other in genocide. It was the I 95 drug route town from Miami to New York City. I imagine they are still doing it. We need strict gun laws. People need jobs to keep educated and busy.

a reply to: DigginFoTroof

A lot of the stories you have highlighted seem to have started as altercations between a couple people or couple small groups of people, that escalated and turned violent, or some of it is gang related activity.

People who are wary can usually feel confident, their good sense is strong enough to avoid such altercations.

But when somebody decides to just shoot people at random and there was no apparent altercation that triggered this desire, it's warranted to give this kind of incident greater attention. How can you avoid being shot if the desire to shoot you is random?

If you want to highlight an instance where the media did focus a lot of attention on a couple African Americans you can recall the DC Sniper attacks perpetrated by Muhammad and Malvo in 2002.

Make that 37 😎