NON-BREAKING non-news 39 US murders 6-5-2017

[funinspace]

There are a dozen 'terror' threads, I suggest that exclusively 'terror' orientated posts should find another place to deposit their shit...

Hey, I bumped into a site that at least tracks the daily carnage from gun violence. So maybe 10% of the murders fall off the map, but the DB is interesting.
Yesterday's carnage, with the last column having the deaths:
http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/last-72-hours
6-Jun-17 California Wilmington 900 block of West I St 1
6-Jun-17 Texas Mathis 512 S Aransas St 1
6-Jun-17 Pennsylvania Strasburg 1433 Village Rd 3
6-Jun-17 California Los Angeles 1800 block of North Johnston Street 1
6-Jun-17 Texas Beaumont 6100 block of Sienna Trails 1
6-Jun-17 Tennessee Nashville 766 Lewis Street 1
6-Jun-17 Utah Sandy 2232 Alta Canyon Drive 3
6-Jun-17 Indiana Evansville 1900 block of Cass Ave 1
6-Jun-17 California Fresno 5267 E Hammond Ave 3
6-Jun-17 New Jersey Township Of Washington (Washington Township) 6000 block of Black Horse Pike 2
6-Jun-17 Indiana Indianapolis 7600 block of Wickfield Drive 1
6-Jun-17 Maine Orrington Johnson Mill Road 1
6-Jun-17 Virginia Petersburg Sandlewood Court 1
6-Jun-17 Washington Seattle 10700 block of 14 Avenue 1
6-Jun-17 Washington Vancouver 73rd Street and 182nd Avenue 1
6-Jun-17 Missouri Saint Louis 1800 block of Bahama Ct 1
6-Jun-17 Michigan Detroit N/A 1
6-Jun-17 West Virginia Lumberport Ithaca Dr 1

 

[untermensche]

Where do these two get these numbers from? What is their methodology and definition of terrorism?
It smells like apologetics for Islam that is so widespread among the Left.
I mean, it's pretty much only Muslims who fly planes into buildings or bomb tweens at pop concerts or drive "trucks of peace" into crowds.
And many terrorist attacks in the Muslim world are Muslim-on-Muslim terrorism. Shiites blow up Sunni mosques and vice versa for example. Did these two researchers completely discount those? Even their link to a terrorism database that is supposed to show only 20% of terrorism is committed by Muslims has two Muslim-on-Muslim attacks in Iraq under "this date in terrorism". I could not find any backing for the 20% claim on that site.

In fact, if you look at heat maps of terrorism, it is concentrated in places like Iraq/Syria, Afghanistan/Pakistan, and other areas that are predominately Muslim or have large Muslim populations (who do you think is responsible for most of these dots across Western Europe even though they are <10% of the population?) So again, where do these two get their numbers?

Does your little cartoon count US killing of civilians as terrorism?

Or is terrorism only defined as that which Muslims do?

 

[Derec]

Does your little cartoon count US killing of civilians as terrorism?

- It is not "mine" (it is done by a group run by University of Maryland) and it is not a "cartoon" but a heat map.
- the article bilby linked to claims that only 20% of terrorist attacks are committed by Muslims. That article linked to GTD as support, but it does not support their claims at all.
- Garden variety killings are not terrorism. Terrorism is violence in service of a political or religious ideology, for purpose of spreading fear (hence "terror") in the populace. So a thug shooting a clerk in the store he is robbing is not terrorism but both San Bernardino and Charleston shootings are.

Or is terrorism only defined as that which Muslims do?

No. But Muslims do commit a disproportionate share of them.

 

[funinspace]

- It is not "mine" (it is done by a group run by University of Maryland) and it is not a "cartoon" but a heat map.
- the article bilby linked to claims that only 20% of terrorist attacks are committed by Muslims. That article linked to GTD as support, but it does not support their claims at all.
- Garden variety killings are not terrorism. Terrorism is violence in service of a political or religious ideology, for purpose of spreading fear (hence "terror") in the populace. So a thug shooting a clerk in the store he is robbing is not terrorism but both San Bernardino and Charleston shootings are.

Or is terrorism only defined as that which Muslims do?

No. But Muslims do commit a disproportionate share of them.

I'm going to engage this one last time, in a thread that is NOT ABOUT TERRORISM:
Your Maryland University linky is still a spin, even if professionally done. I went down into the nuts-n-bolts of it looking at Yemen. It clearly included militias/rebels attacking military targets as part of their "terrorism" data points. That is very misleading. Yemen, Syria-Iraq, and Afghanistan are clearly in the midst of civil wars. Militias/rebels taking on military targets or things like real infrastructure or political figures are part of warfare, not "terrorism". Either that or one needs to start including the US bombing from 30,000 feet or missiles launched from drones as terror attacks as well. But sure, suicide attacks targeting shopping areas or Mosques is terrorism; and those 3 areas certainly have tons of that as well.

IF ANYONE wants to debate terrorism further, I suggest starting a new thread.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

No. But Muslims do commit a disproportionate share of them.

Being 24% of the global population, 20% is not disproportionate.

 

[Derec]

No. But Muslims do commit a disproportionate share of them.

Being 24% of the global population, 20% is not disproportionate.

The 20% claim is BS.
Even today, there were two terrorist attacks in Iran. Not committed by Jews or Christians or even atheists, but by their fellow Muslims, albeit of the Sunni varierty.
This Muslim-on-Muslim terrorism is easily >20% of the total by itself.

 

[laughing dog]

No. But Muslims do commit a disproportionate share of them.

That claim is BS.

 

[Derec]

No. But Muslims do commit a disproportionate share of them.

That claim is BS.

What is BS is the silly claim that Muslims commit only 20% of terrorism. The site bilby's article cites for backup does not back it up at all.
There is a lot of Muslim apologetics on the Left and you jave fallen for it hook, line and sinker.

 

[laughing dog]

That claim is BS.

What is BS is the silly claim that Muslims commit only 20% of terrorism. The site bilby's article cites for backup does not back it up at all.
There is a lot of Muslim apologetics on the Left and you jave fallen for it hook, line and sinker.

You have not bothered to document any of your claims. That is now 3 BS claims in a row you have posted.

 

[Derec]

What is BS is the silly claim that Muslims commit only 20% of terrorism. The site bilby's article cites for backup does not back it up at all.
There is a lot of Muslim apologetics on the Left and you jave fallen for it hook, line and sinker.

You have not bothered to document any of your claims. That is now 3 BS claims in a row you have posted.

When you first document the silly 20% claim.

 

[funinspace]

Ok, I had asked for assistance, but I decided I could help the split off myself. So the terrorism chat can continue here:
https://talkfreethought.org/showthread.php?11377-TERROR-TERROR-come-here-come-all

 

[laughing dog]

You have not bothered to document any of your claims. That is now 3 BS claims in a row you have posted.

When you first document the silly 20% claim.

I made no claim about percentages. Thanks for admitting your claims are BS.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I'm gonna play devil's advocate here. It's not just the number of murders that's relevant. It's the sense of "this could happen to me too" that goes with a random mass killing in a public place.

Exactly. We care a lot more about the risk to the average person than to the person who put themselves in harm's way (criminal lifestyle, or staying in a domestic violence situation.)

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Switching off the TV however will not stop terrorism.

It might, actually.

A major contributor to the elimination of the notorious violence at English football matches was a media agreement not to show the violence on TV.

Young men being ultra-violent for the fame it brings, regardless of personal harm, can be kept from violence by having their actions widely ignored.

What's the point of committing a terrorist atrocity that only the handful of victims and onlookers, plus the investigating police, know about?

Yeah--for many years now I've been saying we should limit news coverage of terrorism.

I'm not saying to censor them, but rather to limit the amount of coverage. Something bad happens, they report it. Once. That's that. No going over and over it, no "get the latest on <x>" teasers etc. They can present follow-up reports when there is more information but the size of the report must be consistent with how much news there is, not the size of the total story--they don't get to redo the whole broadcast to present one more bit of information.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

https://theconversation.com/looking-at-terror-attacks-per-capita-should-make-us-rethink-beliefs-about-levels-of-risk-and-muslims-78449

Approximately 23% of the world population identifies as Muslim. But, since September 11, Islamist groups have conducted about 20% of terrorist attacks worldwide. Thus, terrorist attacks are – historically and today – less likely to be conducted by a Muslim than by a non-Muslim group.

I'm having a hard time with that database--are they doing the usual stunt of mixing minor incidents with lethal ones? Because the big incidents are almost all Muslim.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Terrorism is violence in service of a political or religious ideology, for purpose of spreading fear (hence "terror") in the populace. So a thug shooting a clerk in the store he is robbing is not terrorism but both San Bernardino and Charleston shootings are.

It's about spreading ideology, period. Don't limit it to political and religious.

There is such a thing as eco-terrorism, although it's almost all directed at property, not people.

There is such a thing as narco-terrorism, directed at keeping the police from interfering with the traffickers.

 

[Elixir]

It might, actually.

A major contributor to the elimination of the notorious violence at English football matches was a media agreement not to show the violence on TV.

Young men being ultra-violent for the fame it brings, regardless of personal harm, can be kept from violence by having their actions widely ignored.

What's the point of committing a terrorist atrocity that only the handful of victims and onlookers, plus the investigating police, know about?

Yeah--for many years now I've been saying we should limit news coverage of terrorism.

I'm not saying to censor them, but rather to limit the amount of coverage. Something bad happens, they report it. Once. That's that. No going over and over it, no "get the latest on <x>" teasers etc. They can present follow-up reports when there is more information but the size of the report must be consistent with how much news there is, not the size of the total story--they don't get to redo the whole broadcast to present one more bit of information.

Yeah - the time spent covering lethal incidents should be proportionate to the number of fatalities. But car crashes simply don't sell insurance, diabetic supplies or burgers.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Yeah--for many years now I've been saying we should limit news coverage of terrorism.

I'm not saying to censor them, but rather to limit the amount of coverage. Something bad happens, they report it. Once. That's that. No going over and over it, no "get the latest on <x>" teasers etc. They can present follow-up reports when there is more information but the size of the report must be consistent with how much news there is, not the size of the total story--they don't get to redo the whole broadcast to present one more bit of information.

Yeah - the time spent covering lethal incidents should be proportionate to the number of fatalities. But car crashes simply don't sell insurance, diabetic supplies or burgers.

I'm not saying how much or little they should cover other incidents. Just limiting the coverage of those who are seeking publicity from doing wrong.

 

[Elixir]

View attachment 11338

Switching off the TV however will not stop terrorism.

So what. It won't stop coconuts from falling out of trees either, and they kill more people than terrorists in an average year. But the media don't whip people into a fit of terror over coconuts... why not?

 

[funinspace]

Switching off the TV however will not stop terrorism.

View attachment 11355

So what. It won't stop coconuts from falling out of trees either, and they kill more people than terrorists in an average year. But the media don't whip people into a fit of terror over coconuts... why not?

I will not fear coconuts...