Current Active Shooter in San Bernardino

[Auburn4life 24]

http://truthinmedia.com/fact-check-355-mass-shootings-far-2015/

[homersapien 11,625]

Serious Question: How many times has an armed citizen stopped one of these mass murders?

that is a statistic that isn't kept or hard to find...it doesn't fit the agenda...

Yet traffic deaths are relevant? :-\

Just as relevant as guns deaths.

Everyone for more guns laws should also be fighting for more vehicle laws. You only care about those dying from guns? not those who die in vehicles?

That's a really stupid post.

More effective gun laws is not a zero sum game with more effective vehicle laws. I support both.

And equating empathy for gun deaths as implying disregard for traffic deaths is just really, really dumb. Never studied logic, huh?

And the fact is, we do institute new vehicle laws from time to time, such as driving while using cell phones and more strict drunk driving laws.

Meanwhile, our NRA-intimidated congress votes to prevent the CDC from even gathering data on gun deaths.

You are out of your league coming at me with that sort of crap post.

False dilemma logical fallacies are worn around here like some badge of honor. My debate and rhetoric professors in college would have torn about 80% of the people in here a new hiney hole over their failure to grasp such basics.

As far as I can tell, you are the only conservative on this forum that is capable of actual debate. I used to think Japan had it in him, but he's just gotten careless it seems.

You need to set up an "Introductory to Debate and Logical Thought class for your side of the political isle.

[TitanTiger 20,572]

As far as I can tell, you are the only conservative on this forum that is capable of actual debate. I used to think Japan had it in him, but he's just gotten careless it seems.

You need to set up an "Introductory to Debate and Logical Thought class for your side of the political isle.

You overestimate my patience.

[AUUSN 823]

http://truthinmedia....tings-far-2015/

And? Stats are awesome.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Some stats are for losers.

[AURaptor 1,129]

What in the hell does the confederate flag have to do with anything concerning THIS story? My God, how bizarre, twisted, and absurd do you have to be to ignore Islamic violence, that you must feel compelled to interject the most inane, obscure and nonsensical comparison of the Confederate flag having one iota to do with militant Islam?

I'm serious, before that one lone drugged out idiot shot up a church, nobody in the world was fearful of the Confederate flag. It was and is a relic, and at worst, and annoyance. But it's been 60 years or more since anyone actually feared the damn thing.

That was random.

Alexva was simply adding a category eligible for surveillance. He implied no connection between the two groups, much less that it means we should ignore one or the other.

You truly do have a reading comprehension issue.

No connection ?

i agree all Muslims should be under unrestricted surveillance. Also anyone who displays a confederate flag.

ANYONE who displays a confederate flag ? ANYONE who does that should be put under surveillance ? How does something as innocuous as the confederate flag even remotely grade out to being on par w/ some militant Muslim Jihadist ????

Answer me that.

Never mind. It can't be done, not by anyone who is sane.

What was random was the interjection of any association of the confederate flag into the issue of this attack.

It's YOU who is failing to comprehend.

[alexava 6,974]

What in the hell does the confederate flag have to do with anything concerning THIS story? My God, how bizarre, twisted, and absurd do you have to be to ignore Islamic violence, that you must feel compelled to interject the most inane, obscure and nonsensical comparison of the Confederate flag having one iota to do with militant Islam?

I'm serious, before that one lone drugged out idiot shot up a church, nobody in the world was fearful of the Confederate flag. It was and is a relic, and at worst, and annoyance. But it's been 60 years or more since anyone actually feared the damn thing.

That was random. :dunno:/>

Alexva was simply adding a category eligible for surveillance. He implied no connection between the two groups, much less that it means we should ignore one or the other.

You truly do have a reading comprehension issue.

No connection ?

i agree all Muslims should be under unrestricted surveillance. Also anyone who displays a confederate flag.

ANYONE who displays a confederate flag ? ANYONE who does that should be put under surveillance ? How does something as innocuous as the confederate flag even remotely grade out to being on par w/ some militant Muslim Jihadist ????

Answer me that.

Never mind. It can't be done, not by anyone who is sane.

What was random was the interjection of any association of the confederate flag into the issue of this attack.

It's YOU who is failing to comprehend.

also put Raptor under surveillance.

[AURaptor 1,129]

Yes, put everyone under surveillance, and then just ignore the militant muslims, who have stated clearly what they want to do, and have actually done it, time and time again.

Let's not be insensitive. Must be politically correct, and not dare state the obvious.

[TitanTiger 20,572]

http://truthinmedia....tings-far-2015/

And? Stats are awesome.

I think there may be a point to this questioning of the "most mass shootings than days this year" meme. I mean, if Mother Jones (via the NYT) is calling out the number, you have to admit something is off:

How Many Mass Shootings Are There, Really?

On Wednesday, a Washington Post article announced that “The San Bernardino shooting is the second mass shooting today and the 355th this year.” Vox, MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow, this newspaper and others reported similar statistics. Grim details from the church in Charleston, a college classroom in Oregon and a Planned Parenthood clinic in Colorado are still fresh, but you could be forgiven for wondering how you missed more than 300 other such attacks in 2015.

At Mother Jones, where I work as an editor, we have compiled an in-depth, open-source database covering more than three decades of public mass shootings. By our measure, there have been four “mass shootings” this year, including the one in San Bernardino, and at least 73 such attacks since 1982.

What explains the vastly different count? The answer is that there is no official definition for “mass shooting.” Almost all of the gun crimes behind the much larger statistic are less lethal and bear little relevance to the type of public mass murder we have just witnessed again. Including them in the same breath suggests that a 1 a.m. gang fight in a Sacramento restaurant, in which two were killed and two injured, is the same kind of event as a deranged man walking into a community college classroom and massacring nine and injuring nine others. Or that a late-night shooting on a street in Savannah, Ga., yesterday that injured three and killed one is in the same category as the madness that just played out in Southern California.

While all the victims are important, conflating those many other crimes with indiscriminate slaughter in public venues obscures our understanding of this complicated and growing problem. Everyone is desperate to know why these attacks happen and how we might stop them — and we can’t know, unless we collect and focus on useful data that filter out the noise.

For at least the past decade, the F.B.I. regarded a mass shooting as a single attack in which four or more victims were killed. (In 2013, a mandate from President Obama for further study of the problem lowered that threshold to three victims killed.) When we began compiling our database in 2012, we used that criteria of four or more killed in public attacks, but excluded mass murders that stemmed from robbery, gang violence or domestic abuse in private homes. Our goal with this relatively narrow set of parameters was to better understand the seemingly indiscriminate attacks that have increased in recent years, whether in movie theaters, elementary schools or office parks.

The statistics now being highlighted in the news come primarily from shootingtracker.com, a website built by members of a Reddit forum supporting gun control called GunsAreCool. That site aggregates news stories about shooting incidents — of any kind — in which four or more people are reported to have been either injured or killed.

It’s not clear why the Redditors use this much broader criteria. The founder of the “shooting tracker” project, who currently goes by the handle “Billy Speed,” told me it was his choice: “Three years ago I decided, all by myself, to change the United States’ definition of mass shooting.” It’s also not clear how many of those stories — many of them from local outlets, including scant detail — are accurate.

There is value in collecting those stories as a blunt measure of gun violence involving multiple victims. But as those numbers gain traction in the news media, they distort our understanding. According to our research at Mother Jones — subsequently corroborated by the F.B.I. — the more narrowly defined mass shootings have grown more frequent, and overwhelmingly involve legally obtained firearms. Experts in the emerging field of threat assessment believe that this is a unique phenomenon that must be understood on its own.

One thing we all need is better data. Since 1996, Congress and the gun lobby have prevented the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from conducting comprehensive research into gun violence. In the wake of the latest horror, and the confusion that followed, will that finally change?

http://www.nytimes.c...l?smid=tw-share

[alexava 6,974]

Yes, put everyone under surveillance, and then just ignore the militant muslims, who have stated clearly what they want to do, and have actually done it, time and time again.

Let's not be insensitive. Must be politically correct, and not dare state the obvious.

actually i suggested put all Muslims under surveillance. Then you have a better chance to pluck out the militant ones. My comment about the confederate flag flyers was somewhat tongue in cheek, but still probably not a bad idea. You associate yourself with factions that kill for secularism you put yourself in the spotlight. Is it fair to non- militants? No but it is not fair to the victims of terrorism either.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Yes, put everyone under surveillance, and then just ignore the militant muslims, who have stated clearly what they want to do, and have actually done it, time and time again.

Let's not be insensitive. Must be politically correct, and not dare state the obvious.

actually i suggested put all Muslims under surveillance. Then you have a better chance to pluck out the militant ones. My comment about the confederate flag flyers was somewhat tongue in cheek, but still probably not a bad idea. You associate yourself with factions that kill for secularism you put yourself in the spotlight. Is it fair to non- militants? No but it is not fair to the victims of terrorism either.

Somewhat tongue in cheek? If it was you should have said so. If not, as I asked you, give me some examples.

[AURaptor 1,129]

Yes, put everyone under surveillance, and then just ignore the militant muslims, who have stated clearly what they want to do, and have actually done it, time and time again.

Let's not be insensitive. Must be politically correct, and not dare state the obvious.

actually i suggested put all Muslims under surveillance. Then you have a better chance to pluck out the militant ones. My comment about the confederate flag flyers was somewhat tongue in cheek, but still probably not a bad idea. You associate yourself with factions that kill for secularism you put yourself in the spotlight. Is it fair to non- militants? No but it is not fair to the victims of terrorism either.

Then it wasn't tongue in cheek. Because it's a insane , ridiculous comparison.

The confederate flag isn't a religion. It's not a devotion. It's not a daily routine where by anyone must convert, or die.

Seriously, what synapse in your brain refuses to fire ? How is your mind so twisted and depraved that you'd equate one thing w/ another ? Why invent ghost enemies when real , actual ones are killing , right now ???

[alexava 6,974]

Yes, put everyone under surveillance, and then just ignore the militant muslims, who have stated clearly what they want to do, and have actually done it, time and time again.

Let's not be insensitive. Must be politically correct, and not dare state the obvious.

actually i suggested put all Muslims under surveillance. Then you have a better chance to pluck out the militant ones. My comment about the confederate flag flyers was somewhat tongue in cheek, but still probably not a bad idea. You associate yourself with factions that kill for secularism you put yourself in the spotlight. Is it fair to non- militants? No but it is not fair to the victims of terrorism either.

Then it wasn't tongue in cheek. Because it's a insane , ridiculous comparison.

The confederate flag isn't a religion. It's not a devotion. It's not a daily routine where by anyone must convert, or die.

Seriously, what synapse in your brain refuses to fire ? How is your mind so twisted and depraved that you'd equate one thing w/ another ? Why invent ghost enemies when real , actual ones are killing , right now ???

you suggest our president created this FAKE massacre as a way to confiscate guns and insult MY intelligence for linking two different types of terrorists in the same category? Again if you don't use crazy pills you should. Just show your shrink this forum.

[AUUSN 823]

Round and round...

Suspect taken into custody after active shooter situation in Wis.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/262222-active-shooter-situation-in-wis-one-hospitalized

[AURaptor 1,129]

you suggest our president created this FAKE massacre as a way to confiscate guns and insult MY intelligence for linking two different types of terrorists in the same category? Again if you don't use crazy pills you should. Just show your shrink this forum.

Don't have a shrink, nor do I need one.

I merely stated it wouldn't surprise me if Obama had a hand in something like that, as he's pulled a govt run operation to SPECIFICALLY sway public opinion on the gun issue before. THAT ISN'T EVER UP FOR DEBATE.

Would he go the next step ? I don't know. I'm not making the charge, just saying it's not a zero % chance. I'm just floating the idea, not making any formal charges or claims.

Remember the claims by many prominent folks who said W blew up the levees in NOLA ? I'm not even going that far here, so spare me your faux outage.

So, where is all this 'confederate flag ' based terrorism of which you speak ? Show it . You bring up something which is basically non existent , in light of a GLOBAL MUSLIM ASSAULT on humanity.

From where is this coming ? WHY are you trying to inflate one thing which has ZERO ties with what took place in San Bernadino ?

[AUUSN 823]

you suggest our president created this FAKE massacre as a way to confiscate guns and insult MY intelligence for linking two different types of terrorists in the same category? Again if you don't use crazy pills you should. Just show your shrink this forum.

Don't have a shrink, nor do I need one.

I merely stated it wouldn't surprise me if Obama had a hand in something like that, as he's pulled a govt run operation to SPECIFICALLY sway public opinion on the gun issue before. THAT ISN'T EVER UP FOR DEBATE.

Would he go the next step ? I don't know. I'm not making the charge, just saying it's not a zero % chance. I'm just floating the idea, not making any formal charges or claims.

Remember the claims by many prominent folks who said W blew up the levees in NOLA ? I'm not even going that far here, so spare me your faux outage.

So, where is all this 'confederate flag ' based terrorism of which you speak ? Show it . You bring up something which is basically non existent , in light of a GLOBAL MUSLIM ASSAULT on humanity.

From where is this coming ? WHY are you trying to inflate one thing which has ZERO ties with what took place in San Bernadino ?

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Geez I had no idea you were such a scrawny nerd of a kid.

[AUUSN 823]

Geez I had no idea you were such a scrawny nerd of a kid.

You're the one who worships the confederate flag. I think it's a symbol of terror.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Geez I had no idea you were such a scrawny nerd of a kid.

You're the one who worships the confederate flag. I think it's a symbol of terror.

I worship no symbol, only my God. You should try that and quit worshiping yourself.

[AURaptor 1,129]

Now a cute cartoon from USN...

[AUUSN 823]

Now a cute cartoon from USN...

[japantiger 4,058]

Why has Global Warming only made the Muslims terrorits?

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Now a cute cartoon from USN...

We know you don't get it. Glad you finally realized it.

[aujeff11 6,243]

you suggest our president created this FAKE massacre as a way to confiscate guns and insult MY intelligence for linking two different types of terrorists in the same category? Again if you don't use crazy pills you should. Just show your shrink this forum.

Don't have a shrink, nor do I need one.

I merely stated it wouldn't surprise me if Obama had a hand in something like that, as he's pulled a govt run operation to SPECIFICALLY sway public opinion on the gun issue before. THAT ISN'T EVER UP FOR DEBATE.

Would he go the next step ? I don't know. I'm not making the charge, just saying it's not a zero % chance. I'm just floating the idea, not making any formal charges or claims.

Remember the claims by many prominent folks who said W blew up the levees in NOLA ? I'm not even going that far here, so spare me your faux outage.

So, where is all this 'confederate flag ' based terrorism of which you speak ? Show it . You bring up something which is basically non existent , in light of a GLOBAL MUSLIM ASSAULT on humanity.

From where is this coming ? WHY are you trying to inflate one thing which has ZERO ties with what took place in San Bernadino ?

Take that plant!

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Looks like you are out of bullets so put your gun away