• PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    It matters because the Gun Violence Archive and the uncritical mass media are inflating the statistic to make people scared so they can push an agenda

    Bullshit. You’re attacking it because it’s counter to your agenda.

    Republicans, right-wing media, the gun lobby and the pro-gun community routinely fearmonger as a way to boost their own profits and power.

    Not only do you not care when they do it, you’ve enthusiastically put yourself and your own family in more danger because of it.

    You’re hopelessly compromised and your thoughts about how gun violence statistics are about as trustworthy as a cops views on police brutality statistics.

    • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      My agenda is “words mean things” and if you’re going to throw around a phrase like “mass shooting” you shouldn’t have a low hanging fruit definition that does not take intent into consideration.

      Here are two scenarios:

      1. You have a party, two groups of people are talking. Words are had, there’s an argument. Punches are thrown. One person pulls a gun, causing another person to pull a gun, multiple shots are fired and 5 people are injured.

      2. You have a party, a disgruntled incel was not invited, shows up with a semiautomatic weapon and shoots 4 people before being dragged to the ground.

      According to the Gun Violence Archive, both of these are “mass shootings” and if you go down their list of shootings of the year, the vast majority of them fall under category 1, not category 2.

      The difference is, in scenario #1, nobody went to the party intending to shoot anyone. You can’t say the same for scenario #2.

      Lumping them together so you can make people think there are more cases of scenario #2 than there actually are is disingenuous.

      • PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        My agenda is “words mean things”

        If that was actually your agenda, this wouldn’t be your position. You want to lower the statistic using semantics and as an added bonus, take away the vocabulary needed to discuss a huge percentage of gun violence.

        The difference is, in scenario #1, nobody went to the party intending to shoot anyone. You can’t say the same for scenario #2.

        5 people were shot. Intentional vs accidental, premeditated vs impulse, none of that changes the fact that 5 people were shot and the event was a mass shooting.

        Even in your own example that you made as contrived as you needed, 3 innocent people were still shot and swept under the rug.

        The organizations you’re rallying against are completely open about their definitions, making them far more honest than you’re being.

        I’m sorry if that hurts your guns feelings.