Is Derec using your account?
A cop with a pistol at hand if faced with a madman with a hammer may have no choice. In such instances that is up to an inquiry determine the circumstances leading up to the shooting.
View attachment 11344
So, what is the theme of this thread (and the other one like it)? To minimize the impact of Islamic terrorism? These threads always kind of amuse me, in that we're constantly told that this is a non-event, more people die of the flu, people get shot every day around country, the country "can absorb it" (yes, that's been said), everyone move along....
But what if we have a different set of victims and perpertrators? Do we adopt the same sort of "meh" attitude? Let's say instead of ISIS killing random people, its white supremecists killing blacks? Or MRAs killing random women? Or some guy shooting (or maybe "only" hitting them with hammers) kids in schools, just cause he hates kids? Do we mock that? Are the lives of innocent people worth more or less just because of the race or ideology of the killers?
nice chart, Elixir. I believe these are contemporary statistics.. do you know the scope of this data?
Who cares?
Who cares?
Well, you started a thread about him.
The original theme of the thread was to point out an incident on reported on the front page of CNN was being played up like a full-blown threat. Not to downplay real threats, but to criticize the media. These types of incidents play out in America everyday, but are seldom newsworthy. Why was this incident chosen?
But no one was killed in this incident. So was this newsworthy enough to be on the front page of CNN?Are the lives of innocent people worth more or less just because of the race or ideology of the killers?
nice chart, Elixir. I believe these are contemporary statistics.. do you know the scope of this data?
Confession: I admit to laziness. I didn't either vet the source of that chart nor look up any corroborating data. It agreed with my own confirmation bias, so I posted it.
My point was more that the order seems to be completely inverted for media purposes, rather than to actually submit accurate numbers for deaths caused by "X".
Confession: I admit to laziness. I didn't either vet the source of that chart nor look up any corroborating data. It agreed with my own confirmation bias, so I posted it.
My point was more that the order seems to be completely inverted for media purposes, rather than to actually submit accurate numbers for deaths caused by "X".
In general, I agree with the death statistics regarding terrorism. I'm certainly not worried about dying from that. I guess I'm sorta curious why we don't take the same attitude about, say, school shootings? The odds of a child dying from automatic weapon fire on school grounds is close to zero, but after each incident, no one posts an infographic like you did. Or tries to poo poo or dismiss it. Instead, we talk about banning automatic weapons. Shouldn't we be consistent with our attitudes about statistics and death?