You know the minority of the shooters were white?

[needtoknow.news]

Also I don't follow your assumption that this is a social issue, simply because there are too many unaccounted for factors to consider. For example, what if the reason all these young men are violently lashing out is because society is sexist and unfair to them, either by expecting them to be something they are not or them desiring to be something denied to them?

@Happy_Killbot the cases of unmotivated mass murders of large groups of strangers are pretty much all white dudes.

And those are social issues

@A2Jennifer Your opinion directly contridicts presented evidence. White shooters just get all the media coverage because the Democrats don't want to alienate their fan base. Either that or they are racist.

@Happy_Killbot yes the epidemic of guns violence is a “social issue.” But the social causes of this particular phenomenon of random mass murders of strangers in public places are unique. Gang violence, murders committed in the commission of other crimes, those have a different set of social causes. Clumping all gun deaths together so you can pretend that this isn’t a problem specific to white males is disingenuous.

@A2Jennifer And picking and choosing data points is not disingenuous? That's like saying all swans are black because the white ones don't count. Or saying when I roll dice, I always get 6's because the times I don't get 6's I roll again.

@Happy_Killbot I didn’t say they don’t count.
I said they are separate phenomenon, with different social causes. And seriously, black folks aren’t going around randomly mowing down as many strangers as they can murder just for the sake of murdering as many people as possible.

@A2Jennifer I don't think white people are killing just for the hell of it, and I can find no evidence to support that assumption or the slightly racist assumption that all black shooters only target specific people for gang related reasons.

In fact, the police don't collect this information unless it is tied to evidence that they are the shooter. For example, The El Paso shooter posted his manifesto online that was used to help identify him, but at no point was it analyzed by the police to try and find a motive, because the police don't care about why they did it, that isn't their job.

I don't think there is enough data to say this is a social issue, and subdividing the category based on skin color seems like an over generalization and does the opposite of help the problem. Especially since race is just technology.

@Happy_Killbot wow you are twisting my words all over the place.
I did not say that all violence committed by black people is gang violence. YOU said that “the minority of shooters are white.” But This SPECIFIC phenomenon that is the topic of this discussion - these mass shootings where people go into public places with high capacity magazines and the goal of murdering as many people as possible are exclusively committed by white men. Women are not doing this. People of color are not doing this.
There is gun violence committed by other people besides white men, but they are the result of other social conditions and contexts - FOR EXAMPLE related to poverty rather than simply wanting to murder as many people as possible. (Excuse me for not writing a dissertation on every possible cause of gun violence.)

Gun violence is ABSOLUTELY a social issue. The volume and types of gun violence vary in different communities and no other developed country has anywhere near the gun deaths that we have in the US.

@A2Jennifer "These mass murders have a common theme of white males"

"the cases of unmotivated mass murders of large groups of strangers are pretty much all white dudes"

"Clumping all gun deaths together so you can pretend that this isn’t a problem specific to white males is disingenuous"

Those are all your quotes, if I didn't know any better, I would say you just hate white people. Also, lets look at some data and actually think about it, instead of jumping to conclusions. All of this data was obtained from this link, which is the most unbiased ( left of center ) and comprehensive source I could find. You can download their Excel spreadsheet and do analysis for yourself if you like.

[motherjones.com]

First, lets get the easy one out of the way. The claim: all mass shooters are men. The attached data shows that of 114 mass shootings recorded since 1982, only 3 were female perpetrators, and 1 instance of a man and a woman working together, keeping the Bonnie and Clyde myth alive. It is scientific to say that Men are significantly more likely to commit acts of violence, and there is significant evidence for this to be the case on account of humans are a sexually dimorphic species.

Now the next claim requires some actual analysis. The majority of these shooters are white. At first glance, one might be tempted to claim that white individuals are the most dangerous, accounting for 63 of the 114 recorded shootings. However, we must also consider the fact that white individuals account for a much higher percentage of Americans. When you take this into consideration, the deviation from the expected paints a very different picture. White shooters account for a much smaller percentage than expected, with the largest error by far. This data suggests that white individuals are actually the least likely to commit acts of violence, but this fact is masked by the fact that they are the largest race. Blaming white individuals is a bias that is not scientifically accurate, in fact he opposite is true!

Now I'm going to put this data into a perspective that shows some other interesting biases. Although you didn't mention it here, a lot of sources will throw "young" in with white and male. The scatter plot shows the distribution of age compared to total number of victims. As you can see, the age of 64 is the most deadly ( a severe outlier, over 25% of all shooting deaths in the data set ) This plot also shows the distribution of shooters, ( number of points to each age) and seems to indicate that age is more or less not statistically relevant, the median age for mass shooters is 34.18.

And finally to put all these numbers into perspective the final graph shows something else killing people that deserve more attention.

[thebureauinvestigates.com]

Your assumption which I have already rebutted but still you insist, that these white men are killing for the sake of killing, still has no evidence supporting it. I will list some specifics anyways:

• no information on motive is collected by law enforcement
• personal testimony of motive is likely to withhold significant relevant information, or distort facts.
• Information on potential motive touted by the media is highly speculative, and likely biased.
• No concrete framework for classifying motive exists.
• any testimony by friends, family, and coworkers may be subject to bias and distortion of facts based on conflict of interest.

@Happy_Killbot If a person walks into a public place with a rapid fire gun and a high capacity magazine and indiscriminately shoots as many people as they can until they are stopped, how do you dispute that their intent is to shoot as many strangers as possible? Is it possible that they were trying to do anything else?

@A2Jennifer I'm not arguing that their intent was not to kill people, that is self-evident. I'm arguing that there motive, meaning the circumstances that drove them to do what they did is unknown. If you try to classify motive, it becomes immediately apparent that this is no easy task, given the limited data and diversity of potential causes.

For example, maybe it was personal, then the shooter got carried away. A lot of the shootings at schools and workplaces seem to have this as a motive. The key difference here is that the shooter isn't just trying to kill everyone, only specific people.

There are a few instances which seem to have political motivation. The shooter has fallen under hard times or feels persecuted due to policies or unfavorable political conditions.

Mental health is often listed as a general cause, and a lot of those people who committed mass shootings have a history of mental health issues that were either untreated or unresolved.

And of course, for the overwhelming majority of the cases, no motive is discernible.

Yeah wouldn’t it be crazy if you had to demonstrate that you know how to safely operate a vehicle, get a license to do so, comply with safety restrictions like wearing a seatbelt, register your vehicle with the state, and carry insurance in case you cause harm to another person with it?

@A2Jennifer No, what's crazy is that all of that combined with safety features, safe road construction, and mass transit isn't nearly enough to stop all the vehicle related accidents.

@Happy_Killbot but it sure as f&ck reduces them

@A2Jennifer Just not bellow the levels of gun crime. By a long shot.

@A2Jennifer If you go to a gun store, most have a range and will teach you how to use the weapon, especially if it is your first time shooting or with a weapon you have never used. If you want to carry the gun in public, you need a permit to do so, which has a number of restrictions similar to that of owning a licences, such as a background check and getting fingerprints taken. All guns legal for sale in the US have to meet strict safety protocols and regulation, which includes the ability to be field stripped ( you can disassemble it easily ) and registration of the weapon ( similar to a VIN on a car ) All guns have safety mechanisms which physically prevent the weapon from discharging while active or if dropped. You can buy insurance for your gun if you desire, but unlike with vehicles this insurance is not mandatory.

The process for obtaining and using a weapon is very similar to that of a motor vehicle, especially since marksmanship like driving, is a skill.

If you have never shot a gun in your life, I would strongly recommend it. You might even consider owning one for self defense, as many women are choosing to do so.

@JamesUC That claim is a little dubious because we don't actually know how many guns there are in the country. The 310 million figure you hear is the number of serial numbers issued to gun manufacturers in the US, and doesn't account for weapons that are broken, malfunctioning, lost, or destroyed. This statistic is half true at best, with real estimates around 250 - 275 million weapons, mostly handguns. The number of cars registered was 272 million in 2017, and does not include vehicles whose registration expired and was not renewed.

@Happy_Killbot that’s a pretty inaccurate review. A gun store may CHOOSE to educate customers but is not required to. A significant portion of gun sales are “private” and therefore unrecorded and without any background checks. The states all have different sets of regulations. Guns are NOT regulated by “safety protocols” or even subject to consumer safety rules.
People who own guns are more likely to be injured by them than to use them in self-defense.

@A2Jennifer when you say that the sale is "private" what you really mean is it is illegal, and no amount of legislation will stop that, the same way you can't stop people from driving without a licence. While all the states do have different regulations, even the most lenient states require background checks.

There are 7 states that require guns to meet certain safety protocols same as cars do. For example, a firearm can not fire if dropped or subject to mechanical shock. There are also melting point and firing requirerments. The military has strict rules on what types of weapons they can use. This does fall onto the shoulders of the consumer to make an informed purchase decision. If no army uses it, I wouldn't buy it.

@linxminx It really shows how the media skews peoples perspective.

Can you give a link to your chart? It won’t focus on my iPhone.

@WilliamFleming [imgur.com]

@JasonTomerlin2 Thanks. The news media makes money by keeping people stirred up and scared.

This one moved to my prime-share roster. I'm sharing this all over Facebook. Excellent POV by Trevor Noah, and I'm sad that my hero, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, had to defend the commonality of deaths by guns...shame on him.

I did find this "apology" by him this morning;

Yesterday, a Tweet I posted in reaction to the horrific mass shootings in America over the previous 48 hours, killing 34 people, spawned mixed and highly critical responses.
If you missed it, I offered a short list of largely preventable causes of death, along with their average two-day death toll in the United States. They significantly exceeded the death toll from the two days of mass shootings, including the number of people (40) who on average die from handgun homicides every two days.
I then noted that we tend to react emotionally to spectacular incidences of death, with the implication that more common causes of death trigger milder responses within us.
My intent was to offer objectively true information that might help shape conversations and reactions to preventable ways we die. Where I miscalculated was that I genuinely believed the Tweet would be helpful to anyone trying to save lives in America. What I learned from the range of reactions is that for many people, some information –-my Tweet in particular -- can be true but unhelpful, especially at a time when many people are either still in shock, or trying to heal – or both.
So if you are one of those people, I apologize for not knowing in advance what effect my Tweet could have on you. I am therefore thankful for the candor and depth of critical reactions shared in my Twitter feed. As an educator, I personally value knowing with precision and accuracy what reaction anything that I say (or write) will instill in my audience, and I got this one wrong.
Respectfully Submitted
Neil deGrasse Tyson

So....my heart is less anguished by his insensitivity. Thanks, Dr. T

@JamesUC you don’t think that making it more difficult for them to obtain these weapons and giving the police the ability to arrest them if they violate a stricter law that requires better background checks would help to stop them? Yea, criminals may still break the law, but it’s much harder to get a gun illegally than to get it legally and if caught with the illegal weapon, police would be empowered to take action. Also, a huge part of the problem is access to mental health services, imo, so “doing something” would include revamping our healthcare system, which makes it near impossible to get help, even when you want it, unless you have already gone off the deep end.

@JamesUC i should legally be allowed to have hand grenades. if everyone has one, then we can stop hand grenade violence.

@JamesUC they are illegal in the U.S. but hundred round magazines like he used are legal. for hunting rabbits or something.

@JamesUC Hand grenades are regulated under the National Firearms Act (“NFA&rdquo, a federal law first passed in 1934 and amended by the Crime Control Act of 1968. The 1968 amendments made it illegal to possess “destructive devices,” which includes grenades. (26 U.S.C. § 5801.) There’s no doubt that a live hand grenade designed for military combat fits within the law’s provisions—non-military people may not possess them.

@JamesUC #1; I'm agnostic; your facts have no source...so they're not taken seriously.

#2 I concur with "it's not my place" to tell people about their gun use - but I will still push my congresspeople for more and better control....you obviously don't care.

#3. It's not about taking rights away - it's about instilling, and demanding responsibility. Right now there's far too little of that in America.

I recommend you re-watch the Trevor Noah video and the one I shared. Perhaps even sharing them to other groups.

You're giving unsubstantiated defense for the absurd abuses of guns in America; and frankly to me that's sad and a bit frightening.

@JamesUC I'll try one more time; you're obviously not watching, nor getting the message in this video. Please. watch...

Automatic weapon are extreme hard to get in the US. Though I’ll admit I don’t know much about how difficult it is to convert guns over to be automatic, but has it been a problem? I’ve not heard much about people doing that.

@uuberdude Oh I’m sure it’s going on. I just don’t think it’s related to the mass shootings. My understanding is that semi-auto weapons have been used in the vast majority of mass shooting. I could be wrong of course.

@JamesUC I'm not even going to attempt to debate it with you. You either see the reason, namely under-restricted weapons compared to the rest of the world, correlated with way more mass shootings than the rest of the world, or you don't. We're done...

@LimitedLight crunch

@LimitedLight

I did not say none at all. I said they are not plagued by mass shootings like we are here in the US. The common denominator is now, and remain guns.

@Veteran229

That's odd, ours has become a tyrannical oppressive government and we have more than a plethora of guns.

@Veteran229

Hahahaha.

Two justice systems for those with money and those without. White privilege. Tyrannies frequently have show trials and trials with pre-determined outcomes. Either you don't know US history or are brainwashed in your own denial echo chamber.

@Veteran229 The defense are THERE to repel any invasion of our country, that's what they are for are they not?
But, invade Australia and you do so at your peril.

@Veteran229 Yeah, the Yanks ALONE liberated Europe BUT only after the rest of it suffered and fought back since 1939 if I remember correctly and America made a fortune from its Lend-Lease Programme as well, didn't it?

@Veteran229 As well as guns, etc, our ADF have the vastness and sparseness of the inland on their side and we, from the outback, know it all very well, how to live in it, how to ambush from it and how to survive in it.