• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Another mass shooting

It's not racially motivated, so there isn't a (hopefully white) villain for us to hate. Murder has to cross racial lines for us to take serious notice.
 
Greenman said:
It's not racially motivated, so there isn't a (hopefully white) villain for us to hate. Murder has to cross racial lines for us to take serious notice.
Click to expand...
Yes, you're right.. whites are the real victims here. /s
 
I wonder if the OP realizes that if there are gun law reforms that they will also affect Chicago. Or is he so stupid that he doesn't know Chicago is in the USA?
 
With all of the shooting going on in Chicago, Illinois ought to be right up there in the number of gun deaths per 100,000 people, right? Let's see... #1? Nope, that's Alaska. How about #2 in gun deaths per 100,000 people? Hmmmm... nope, that's Alabama! Maybe they are #3 in the country? Ummmm.... nope, that's Louisiana! In the top 10 states for gun deaths per 100,000 people? Again, nope! Those states are Mississippi, Oklahoma, Montana, Missouri, New Mexico, Arkansas and South Carolina. Maybe Illinois is in the top 20? Nope. How about top 30 states? Nope. So where are they? Well, Illinois is at 34th in gun deaths per 100,000 people. Now look carefully at the states I named. If you care to notice, these states are largely Republican controlled states.

There's a reason Republicans like to point and shoot at Illinois and Chicago... that's because they are doing much better than the Republican states and they don't want you to notice that.
 
DrDoug said:
With all of the shooting going on in Chicago, Illinois ought to be right up there in the number of gun deaths per 100,000 people, right? Let's see... #1? Nope, that's Alaska. How about #2 in gun deaths per 100,000 people? Hmmmm... nope, that's Alabama! Maybe they are #3 in the country? Ummmm.... nope, that's Louisiana! In the top 10 states for gun deaths per 100,000 people? Again, nope! Those states are Mississippi, Oklahoma, Montana, Missouri, New Mexico, Arkansas and South Carolina. Maybe Illinois is in the top 20? Nope. How about top 30 states? Nope. So where are they? Well, Illinois is at 34th in gun deaths per 100,000 people. Now look carefully at the states I named. If you care to notice, these states are largely Republican controlled states.

There's a reason Republicans like to point and shoot at Illinois and Chicago... that's because they are doing much better than the Republican states and they don't want you to notice that.
Click to expand...

You and your alt-facts. You don't care at all.
 
DrDoug said:
Facts have a well known liberal bias. 😀



That explains why Alaska has the highest rate of violent crime per capita...lol!

#fuckofftroll
Click to expand...

Your *facts* seem to have a liberal bias and that explains why you stopped reading or understanding the data when you got to the answer you wanted to see rather than the real one.

Alaska has the highest per capita rate of gun deaths, not of violent crimes or gun crimes. Gun deaths factor in all deaths involving a firearm including killing in self defense and suicide. It's not a shock to anyone with a brain that places with a higher per capita gun ownership rate will also have a higher gun suicide rate and a higher gun self-defense rate. The real answer is that the highest rate of violent crime and gun homicides the District of Columbia blows away all the states and remind me which way they lean, red or blue?

The one fundamental truth is that anyone that tries to spin gun violence as a red or blue, left or right issue, like you, is either stupid, a liar, a fucktard or possibly all three. There are huge pockets of gun violence in liberal areas like DC, Chicago, Oakland, Newark, St Louis etc and there are huge pockets of gun violence in right-wing nutjob areas like Louisiana, Alaska, Alabama, Mississippi, etc. People are scumbags regardless of their political leanings, a whole lot them should not be allowed to own anything more lethal than a super soaker and none have any legitimate reason to own a military rifle. Gun violence tends to skew with gun ownership, the more guns there are, the more they get used. That's true for red and blue, leftie and rightie.
 
Greenman said:
It's not racially motivated, so there isn't a (hopefully white) villain for us to hate. Murder has to cross racial lines for us to take serious notice.
Click to expand...

That's bullshit. It wasn't true at Newtown, Marjorie Stoneman, Las Vegas or Dayton.
 
OccamsToothbrush said:
Your *facts* seem to have a liberal bias and that explains why you stopped reading or understanding the data when you got to the answer you wanted to see rather than the real one.

Alaska has the highest per capita rate of gun deaths, not of violent crimes or gun crimes. Gun deaths factor in all deaths involving a firearm including killing in self defense and suicide. It's not a shock to anyone with a brain that places with a higher per capita gun ownership rate will also have a higher gun suicide rate and a higher gun self-defense rate. The real answer is that the highest rate of violent crime and gun homicides the District of Columbia blows away all the states and remind me which way they lean, red or blue?

The one fundamental truth is that anyone that tries to spin gun violence as a red or blue, left or right issue, like you, is either stupid, a liar, a fucktard or possibly all three. There are huge pockets of gun violence in liberal areas like DC, Chicago, Oakland, Newark, St Louis etc and there are huge pockets of gun violence in right-wing nutjob areas like Louisiana, Alaska, Alabama, Mississippi, etc. People are scumbags regardless of their political leanings, a whole lot them should not be allowed to own anything more lethal than a super soaker and none have any legitimate reason to own a military rifle. Gun violence tends to skew with gun ownership, the more guns there are, the more they get used. That's true for red and blue, leftie and rightie.
Click to expand...

At least put on your big honking red nose before you start your clown show.
 
True enough. So why isn't it a headline? Why aren't there candlelight vigils and congress critters calling for more gun laws? What's the difference between people getting shot down in the street every single day or at a garlic festival? Is it simply that in Chicago they're being killed in ones and twos and we have a threshold that has to be met? Tell me why it's different, tell me why it's business as usual in that city and a massacre everywhere else.
 
DrDoug said:
With all of the shooting going on in Chicago, Illinois ought to be right up there in the number of gun deaths per 100,000 people, right? Let's see... #1? Nope, that's Alaska. How about #2 in gun deaths per 100,000 people? Hmmmm... nope, that's Alabama! Maybe they are #3 in the country? Ummmm.... nope, that's Louisiana! In the top 10 states for gun deaths per 100,000 people? Again, nope! Those states are Mississippi, Oklahoma, Montana, Missouri, New Mexico, Arkansas and South Carolina. Maybe Illinois is in the top 20? Nope. How about top 30 states? Nope. So where are they? Well, Illinois is at 34th in gun deaths per 100,000 people. Now look carefully at the states I named. If you care to notice, these states are largely Republican controlled states.

There's a reason Republicans like to point and shoot at Illinois and Chicago... that's because they are doing much better than the Republican states and they don't want you to notice that.
Click to expand...

And they like to mention Chicago because Obama.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top