Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
There have been at least 50 school shootings in the United States so far this year, as of September 19. Thirteen were on college campuses, and 37 were on K-12 school grounds. The incidents left 24 people dead and at least 66 other victims injured, according to CNN’s analysis of events reported by the Gun Violence Archive, Education Week and Everytown for Gun Safety.
https://www.cnn.com/us/school-shootings-fast-facts-dg/index.html
It's literally in the first paragraph:
And if you read the article from NPR and look at the data from GVA, you will see a pattern of school shootings that aren't school shootings, but are counted as such because they happened near a school or some other reason.
An example is a pellet gun being used to shoot out the window on a school bus on the weekend...do you think that should be counted as a school shooting? I hope you don't.
What source should be used?
And was there more than one school shooting this year? Because that's one more than almost every other Western country.
I'm not sure why you're trying to downplay this problem.
Edit: Don't bother reading below for a source. They don't give one. They're just here to troll.
~~Sorry bud, I do usually agree with you, but I think you might be in the wrong on this one. Why don't you find the NPR article convincing that maybe these numbers ~~are~~ might be inflated (edit: didn't mean to use a declarative statement there)? Are you contending that NPR is misrepresenting the numbers and/or trying to push an agenda? They don't really have a track record of either as far as I'm aware.~~
edit 2: leaving this because it's still true:
Looking at the actual scope of an issue isn't downplaying it. Nor is checking if the reporting is accurate. And accurate reporting (of data, I mean, as opposed to news) is extremely important when passing laws, so it is something to care about.
FFS! I never said the numbers weren't inflated! I asked for a better source! They refused to give one.
edit: clarified my misunderstanding
~~If you want a better source, that's fine; I don't have one, I'm not that other guy and I'm not trying to prove anything myself. I just want to know what's wrong with NPR as a source, or what's wrong with that particular article.~~
~~I think you might be taking issue with the fact that~~ this guy wants to say the Gun Violence Archive counts non-shooting incidents as shootings? He's wrong, they don't; that GVA link points to "school incidents", where even finding a gun is counted. CNN's methodology for counting seems reasonable.
Nothing's wrong with it. If that's a good source, it's a good source. They said the GVA source was a bad one, so I asked for a better one and got a bunch of lies about myself in return from them.
I misunderstood, it read in the conversation like you were rejecting NPR saying the actual numbers were pretty hard to confirm (which does make sense, what school official is going to want to talk to the press about violence that happened in their school?), and I couldn't figure out why 😅 Thanks for clarifying that!
No problem!
https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/school-shootings?page=1
Have a go through there. You're literally putting republican logic to your statement..."who cares if it's false, as long as there is a bit of truth somewhere"...
Facts matter when discussing these topics, because they are what's used to create/shape laws. If laws are built upon lies, like the patriot act, then the law was not created with the right goals in mind.
That link shows "school incidents", not "school shootings":
They're all in one link. They don't have a distinction. That's why the data is shit
I agree it should be separated, but that doesn't make it bad data. Unless you don't know how to read tables, but that's more of an individual problem than an issue with the information provided.
It's bad data because it's used as a contention point to make people think mass shootings happen ever 4 seconds or a school shooting every day. When this is completely incorrect. We get pissed at scientist who indulge in their papers, but this gets a pass?
Nope, bad data is incorrect data. This is not incorrect, we just don't like the way it's presented.
This is incorrect data. An adult who gets charged with possession of a firearm near a school, is not a school incident. That's not just badly presented, it's completely incorrect.
This is not incorrect data, that is the definition of a school incident. A firearm was found in or near a school. It is not a school shooting, but every school shooting begins with a school incident because it is not possible to shoot in a school without a gun near or in the school.
But this data is not being presented in its entirety as school shooting data, in any instance you've cited. Only the data for incidents which involved a shooting in a school is presented as school shooting data.
A school incident involves school personnel. Do you classify a wreck that happened near a school as a school incident as well? You do know how many schools are directly in neighborhoods right?
No it's not, it's actively used constantly by anti2a groups. There is a reason mother jones, one of the most antigun journals out there, called out the data.
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/12/no-there-were-not-355-mass-shootings-this-year/
That is a disgusting lie. I said nothing of the sort.
I'm literally doing the opposite of that since I asked you what source should be used.
Then I asked you if there was more than one.
I didn't say anything even remotely like, "who cares if it’s false, as long as there is a bit of truth somewhere."
You should be ashamed of yourself with trolling this shitty.
I should have realized you'd lie about what I said in direct response to the thing I said yet again since this is the third or fourth time you've done it.
Oh, and now it's time for you to tell the lie that I want to ban guns. You've done that one before.
You did. You're downplaying the fact that the GVA uses junk data to drive an agenda.
By using the next line of:
Which implies that. Who cares as if there is more than one it's the same problem. Which is not the case at all, if we had thousands of kids being killed constantly in school, that's a totally different issue than if we had one outlier shooting every year.
You pretty much did. You are equally giving weight to false numbers.
You clearly don't understand trolling, at this point you should know I'm not a troll.
Sure thing, totally... you're all about the truth and you really are for legislation that'll actually fix the problem, not emotionally driven legislation, because even 1 school shooting is the same as 50..
The end goal is always, a ban from the anti2a crowd. Making something so damn impossible to obtain, is a defacto ban. Just remember that those who put the rules in place, will make sure minorities, LGBTQ+, and women will be the main ones unable to obtain firearms.
Stopped reading at your first line, which was another lie. I asked you which source should be used. That's all I did. I just asked a fucking question. You didn't even answer it.
This conversation is over. You are just a troll.
You asked a loaded question, but if you want to use a source, use the FBI data.
This is your own question, which you answered by saying it's one more than almost every other Western country. So no you weren't asking a question, you were trying to make a statement.
Frankly, it doesn’t matter what is and what is not counted as a school shooting. If one shooting happens, and one child is murdered-
It’s one too fucking many.
More kids die getting to school, more die from drowning, more die from preventable diseases...the only reason one is to many for you in this instance is because you hate the idea of an armed populous. It's not about the deaths, it's about how they die.
This is a bad take. We can work to reduce the gun-clutching while also working on water safety, road safety and vaccines -- which we did.
It's not effective to just start naming ways people die to somehow address how a countable number die in a preventable, horrific way, via an implement whose entire sole purpose is killing.
Naming other hazards that are being addressed seems a little "whataboutist" to my eyes, and I'm sorry if that's not your intent and you were just enjoying listing hazards.
See my other comment to soup. The issue with the data at hand is that bad/incorrect data drives bad/horrible policies. You don't see 900+ kids a drowning, having legislation brought forward for only pools that hold 500 gallons or at 3' deep or less. Why? Because that's not going to actually help. So why is it that the "common sense" antigun groups want legislation that's the equivalent to banning all pools over 500 gallons? Because the data they have and they are fed is junk data.
So… wait. You’re….. defending school shootings? If not then maybe back the fuck off. I’m simply saying ONE school shooting is too fucking many.
If you disagree with this. You have a SERIOUS problem.
If you got from what I wrote that I was defending school shootings, you're brain dead. No where in my comment have I defended it. I have pointed out multiple times that bad data leads to terrible policies/laws.
You're doing the same shit the anti-abortion nuts do. Make stats fit your narrative. It's why another AWB won't do shit. It's why UBCs won't do shit. It's why waiting periods won't do shit. Because all of those things and all of this "common sense" gun legislation isn't common sense, it's idiotic, because it's built on junk data.
I’m not doing ANY shit. I’m asking you to define your position more clearly. And what I’m saying is that while you two had your little slap fight, neither of you stopped for a moment to consider that you’re talking about burdens of children’s lives here.
My point?
If we only had ONE SCHOOL SHOOTING PER YEAR WITH ONE FATALITY PER YEAR ITS ONE SHOOTING AND ONE FATALITY TOO MANY.
but you go ahead and have your little squabble over what counts as a school shooting and what doesn’t. Because there will always be parents who are having to bury their children, right?
Do me a favor by doing them a kindness and have it resolved as soon as possible so they can rest at ease knowing there’s some random guy on the internet vetting the bad ones from the good ones so that the can be confident in knowing that their child did in fact- die in a proper and official school shooting.
Emotional legislation is shit legislation. Again, that's how we got the patriot act....
Again, you only seem to give a shit if the child dies via firearm.
Again emotionally driven legislation is not good legislation. You're applying the "think of the children logic".
So the parents burying their child that died in a car wreck going to school doesn't count? Again, you seem to not give a crap about how they died unless it's via firearm.
I’m not one to exercise futility, so we’ll end this here.
So would you support banning schools?
It might save a child's life.
What an ignorant take on the subject. I love when people prove they’re not paying attention. It saves me a LOT of time.
I thought literally any measure that might save kids lives was justified.
Or is that only the case with guns?
I don’t argue against straw men. Find someone else to annoy.
Yeah that's what I figured
So… you knew I wouldn’t want to argue against your flimsy straw man, but you took the time to build it regardless?
Hmmm… I wonder if there’s a name for people that do that.
So you admit that you’re here to troll? That was easy!
Cute
Just block the troll and move on. :)