Crazy how you guys only care about gun violence when someone other than your own side does it. Especially given that most political violence is right wing violence.
Saying “Gun violence” instead of “Violence” is dog whistling that you care more about disarming people than saving lives.
That aside, yes, most political violence world wide is right wing violence. This is mainly due to Islamic terrorism, which is right wing. Note that is not American right wing.
Most shooters are straight, cis, white males.
Define shootings. Because with one definition, you can have 300+ shootings every year, but that counts gang violence, and suddenly white men aren’t the biggest contributors to the stat anymore. I’ll let you guess which demographic would, since you brought it up.
Alternatively, excluding gang violence, you can have under a dozen every year, and white men are the biggest contributors. Not per capita, but still in absolute numbers.
Yet you’ll never see fox news with a headline going “X shooting suspect identified as a straight, cis, white male with ‘kill all blacks’ written on gun”.
Guess what? They have a right wing bias. They generally don’t report shootings because there’s no angle. Left wing sites do report on them because they want to push an anti-gun narrative, that and ratings.
And here is an actually good source:
Don’t think I didn’t notice just how light on details that AP is. They talk a bunch about the victims and Joel osteen, but they barely give you her name. They are pushing an angle by omission. Same as fox, same as cbs, same as every news site.
Saying “Gun violence” instead of “Violence” is dog whistling that you care more about disarming people than saving lives.
I’m saying gun violence because that’s the topic. Getting upset over this wording is like getting upset somebody calls a ride on a plane “air travel” instead of “travel”. That’s the category of the subject being discussed.
That aside, yes, most political violence world wide is right wing violence. This is mainly due to Islamic terrorism, which is right wing. Note that is not American right wing.
Even if you’re just limiting to domestic terrorism, right wing terrorism is the majority of said terrorism.
Define shootings
I thought it was pretty clear that I was talking about politically motivated attacks when I was talking about the straight white shooters thing. Gang violence isn’t really politically motivated.
Guess what? They have a right wing bias. They generally don’t report shootings because there’s no angle. Left wing sites do report on them because they want to push an anti-gun narrative, that and ratings.
So when left wing sources push an angle, it’s to reduce deaths. When right wing sources push an angle, it’s to demonize minorities who are already at risk for violence.
And you think the chosen angle for this particular case makes you look good?
Don’t think I didn’t notice just how light on details that AP is. They talk a bunch about the victims and Joel osteen, but they barely give you her name.
Glorifying shooters only makes copy cats more likely. The AP is being responsible.
Per the Reuters article from 2016 - 2020, trans people accounted for 2.3% of mass shootings but per 2020 census data only account for 0.6% of the population. They are 4x more likely to commit a mass shooting then the rest of the population.
See I can cherry pick stats to make them say what I want to too.
Also it’s odd that you’re complaining that I’m grouping republicans together (for a post/article you guys agree with and support), but when someone comes along and says “dEMocRatS aRe VIoLenT” you’re silent. What a double standard.
This is just the past month alone, and just one user. Admittedly, 90% of these kinds of statements come from winter. But every single one, not a peep out of the mods saying “hey, don’t say that, democrats are not a monoloth”.
The exact one about democrats being violent must have been from a while ago. And tbh I don’t care enough to go digging for it. My point has been made.
Ive said it time and time again, conservatives are not a monolith. Please stop acting like it.
More people should hear and understand this on both extreme ends of the political spectrum.
Don’t listen to people who broadly mock an ideology with straw man arguments and broad generalizations. That shit is for children.
If someone says “conservatives always…”/“liberals only think…” or any variation just ignore them.
If you’re going to comment, at least try to address what I’m saying.
You know what? Fuck it.
Saying “Gun violence” instead of “Violence” is dog whistling that you care more about disarming people than saving lives.
That aside, yes, most political violence world wide is right wing violence. This is mainly due to Islamic terrorism, which is right wing. Note that is not American right wing.
Define shootings. Because with one definition, you can have 300+ shootings every year, but that counts gang violence, and suddenly white men aren’t the biggest contributors to the stat anymore. I’ll let you guess which demographic would, since you brought it up.
Alternatively, excluding gang violence, you can have under a dozen every year, and white men are the biggest contributors. Not per capita, but still in absolute numbers.
Guess what? They have a right wing bias. They generally don’t report shootings because there’s no angle. Left wing sites do report on them because they want to push an anti-gun narrative, that and ratings.
Don’t think I didn’t notice just how light on details that AP is. They talk a bunch about the victims and Joel osteen, but they barely give you her name. They are pushing an angle by omission. Same as fox, same as cbs, same as every news site.
I’m saying gun violence because that’s the topic. Getting upset over this wording is like getting upset somebody calls a ride on a plane “air travel” instead of “travel”. That’s the category of the subject being discussed.
Even if you’re just limiting to domestic terrorism, right wing terrorism is the majority of said terrorism.
I thought it was pretty clear that I was talking about politically motivated attacks when I was talking about the straight white shooters thing. Gang violence isn’t really politically motivated.
And your numbers are way off:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41488081
https://www.statista.com/statistics/476456/mass-shootings-in-the-us-by-shooter-s-race/
https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSL1N363273/
So when left wing sources push an angle, it’s to reduce deaths. When right wing sources push an angle, it’s to demonize minorities who are already at risk for violence.
And you think the chosen angle for this particular case makes you look good?
Glorifying shooters only makes copy cats more likely. The AP is being responsible.
Per the Reuters article from 2016 - 2020, trans people accounted for 2.3% of mass shootings but per 2020 census data only account for 0.6% of the population. They are 4x more likely to commit a mass shooting then the rest of the population.
See I can cherry pick stats to make them say what I want to too.
Wow you straight up admitted you were cherypicking. You have no argument so I’ll move on.
The difference between you and I is that I’m honest enough to admit when I’m using cherry picked stats.
Also it’s odd that you’re complaining that I’m grouping republicans together (for a post/article you guys agree with and support), but when someone comes along and says “dEMocRatS aRe VIoLenT” you’re silent. What a double standard.
Can you link to somewhere blameta did this?
https://lemm.ee/comment/9020958
https://lemm.ee/comment/8872460
https://lemm.ee/comment/8870239
https://lemm.ee/comment/8520157
https://lemm.ee/comment/8513465
https://lemm.ee/comment/8410895
https://lemm.ee/comment/8405309
https://lemm.ee/comment/8377599
This is just the past month alone, and just one user. Admittedly, 90% of these kinds of statements come from winter. But every single one, not a peep out of the mods saying “hey, don’t say that, democrats are not a monoloth”.
The exact one about democrats being violent must have been from a while ago. And tbh I don’t care enough to go digging for it. My point has been made.
So because I dont censor it, that must mean I agree with it? Is that really your mindset?
Not even close to what I am saying.
What I am actually saying:
You are applying a double standard
You are failing to keep this place civil
What double standard?