• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Kurt Russell blasts gun control push: “I think it’s absolutely insane”

natsb said:
This response is hilarious coming from someone who claims its the other guys that are using straw men. You are a hoot!

That sign on your street clearly reads: "One Way".
Click to expand...

The post was obviously a joke.
 
NonoBadDog said:
The claim that you cite is not Congressional research. It is data compiled by a bunch of people on Reddit using a definition created by a guy on Reddit. The definition does not parallel anything and is not even close to the FBI definition. The FBI tracks "active shooters".

Media Push Activists' Count of Mass Shootings - Washington Free Beacon

WaPo and NY Times Report Misleading Shooting Stats, Cite Reddit As Their Source | Mediaite

So much for "Congressional research". There isn't even a smidgen of "Congressional research here". It nothing more than a compiled bunch of garbage.
Click to expand...

I know that the list of 300 comes from a Reddit post. I still agree with them that "mass shooting" can and should be defined as an event where four or more people were shot by a firearm. And there is a basis in that definition as it allies itself closely to the definition USED by the Congressional Research Service and the term of "mass murderer" used by the FBI.
 
MrT said:
The post was obviously a joke.
Click to expand...

[bow]A successful one then.[/bow] I laughed. Like I said before, you are an artist.
 
MrT said:
I know that the list of 300 comes from a Reddit post. I still agree with them that "mass shooting" can and should be defined as an event where four or more people were shot by a firearm.
Click to expand...
You can agree with anyone on anything. That is your right. It isn't credible but you can live in any world that you want to. To expect anyone else, except people in your echo chamber, to believe it as credible is asking a bit too much. I guess you would cite a reddit definition in court.

And there is a basis in that definition as it allies itself closely to the definition USED by the Congressional Research Service and the term of "mass murderer" used by the FBI.
Click to expand...
The Congressional Research Service gets these statistics from the FBI. The reddit people get their stats form other reddit users. There is nothing Congressional about it.

There isn't a basis for anything. They took a partial definition from the FBI and forgot the rest so as to spike the numbers.
 
NonoBadDog said:
You can agree with anyone on anything. That is your right. It isn't credible but you can live in any world that you want to. To expect anyone else, except people in your echo chamber, to believe it as credible is asking a bit too much. I guess you would cite a reddit definition in court.


The Congressional Research Service gets these statistics from the FBI. The reddit people get their stats form other reddit users. There is nothing Congressional about it.

There isn't a basis for anything. They took a partial definition from the FBI and forgot the rest so as to spike the numbers.
Click to expand...

Let us boil down the debate then, what is your definition of a mass shooting? Mine is "a situation wherein four or more people are shot by a projectile from a firearm and the shot results in an injury or death."
 
MrT said:
Let us boil down the debate then, what is your definition of a mass shooting? Mine is "a situation wherein four or more people are shot by a projectile from a firearm and the shot results in an injury or death."
Click to expand...

Active Shooter Incidents
An active shooter is an individual actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a populated area, and recent active shooter incidents have underscored the need for a coordinated response by law enforcement and others to save lives. The FBI is committed to working with its partners to protect schools, workplaces, houses of worship, transportation centers, other public gathering sites, and communities. Although local and state law enforcement agencies are virtually always the first ones on the scene, the FBI has played a large role in supporting the response to every major incident in recent years and has much to offer in terms of capacity, expertise, specialized capabilities, training, and resources before and after an incident occurs. The successful prevention of these active shooter incidents lies with a wide range of public and private entities all working together. To that end, the FBI provides operational, behaviorally-based threat assessment and threat management services to help detect and prevent acts of targeted violence, helping academic, mental health, business, community, law enforcement, and government entities recognize and disrupt potential active shooters who may be on a trajectory toward violence. The Bureau also continues its research to identify indicators that could signal potential violent intent.
Click to expand...

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/office-of-partner-engagement/active-shooter-incidents

Active shooter is a term used by law enforcement to describe a situation in which a shooting
is in progress and an aspect of the crime may affect the protocols used in responding
to and reacting at the scene of the incident. Unlike a defined crime, such as a murder or
mass killing, the active aspect inherently implies that both law enforcement personnel and
citizens have the potential to affect the outcome of the event based upon their responses.
The agreed-upon definition of an active shooter by U.S. government agencies—including
the White House, U.S. Department of Justice/FBI, U.S. Department of Education, and
U.S. Department of Homeland Security/Federal Emergency Management Agency—is
“an individual actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a confined and
populated area.”3 Implicit in this definition is that the subject’s criminal actions involve the
use of firearms.4
Click to expand...

As a result, the FBI identified 160 active shooter incidents that occurred in the United States
between 2000 and 2013.8 Though additional active shooter incidents may have occurred
during this time period, the FBI is confident this research captured the vast majority of
incidents falling within the search criteria. To gather information for this study, researchers
relied on official police records (where available), FBI records, and open sources.9 The
time span researched was intended to provide substantive results to aid in preparedness and
response efforts. This study is not intended to explore all facets of active shooter incidents,
but rather is intended to provide a baseline to guide federal, state, tribal, and campus law
enforcement along with other first responders, corporations, educators, and the general
public to a better understanding of active shooter incidents.
Click to expand...

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/office...ctive-shooter-incidents-in-the-u.s.-2000-2013

I would not use a definition created by some guy on reddit.
 
Mr Person said:
I would want an accomplished sniper with a sniper rifle in the proximity. At worst, I'd settle for a marine with great marksmanship.

That person would be much less likely to blow me away in the process of shooting the terrorist, than would random Bubba McRambo.

It would be nice if I had some statistics on how many open and concealed carry folks are trained military with great marksman ship, and how many are Bubba McRambo.
Click to expand...

Of what use would such statistics be? Firearm owners are by far the vast majority the most law-abiding and honest citizens in the world and that includes the USA. You are babbling gun control propaganda and have not bothered to check the accuracy of what you now claim as fact. That does not bode well for your ability to discern fact from fiction.

With all your hyperbole I'm loath to even suggest you can find the answers by checking the studies on armed self-defence. Do you think you can handle the truth? google is your friend.

ARMED RESISTANCE TO CRIME: THE PREVALENCE AND NATURE OF SELF-DEFENSE WITH A GUN*
GARY KLECK MARC GERTZ 1995

Degrading Scientific Standards to Get the Defensive Gun Use Estimate Down

In this article, Florida State University Professor Gary Kleck responds to critics of the National Self-Defense Survey, which found that there are approximately 2.5 million defensive gun uses per year in the United States.

That will open the eyes of some to the tricks gun control researchers pull to aid gun control propaganda.
 
Last edited:
Crimefree said:
You are babbling gun control propaganda and have not bothered to check the accuracy of what you now claim as fact. That does not bode well for your ability to discern fact from fiction. With all your hyperbole I'm loath to even suggest you can find the answers by checking the studies on armed self-defence. Do you think you can handle the truth?
Click to expand...

Making things personal does not help you....



Crimefree said:
Of what use would such statistics be?
Click to expand...

It'd be a good way to test this good guy with a gun myth.

Statistics about a homeowner scaring off a robber with a shotgun are irrelevant to what was being discussed anyway, which was whether or not I would want a random citizen to be present with a gun, were someone to hold me hostage at gunpoint.

What is relevant to that scenario is what I mentioned: how trained on average are these good guys with guns? In a hostage or active shooter situation, the last thing we need is unskilled shooters trying to play hero and get the bad guy.
 
MrT said:
You also did not give me a single definition for "mass shooting." You gave me a definition for "active shooter." Will you please give me a definition for "mass shooting?"
Click to expand...

One would think you could find the definition for yourself. I can give you a definition but there isn't one used by the govt in the sense you want. The closest you are going to get is the Congressional Research Service, that you mentioned earlier. They don't even define a "mass shooting" because there are so many varying definitions. They even discuss the different definitions but the closest they get to it is the definition from the FBI, "active shooter" definition.

What is “mass murder” with firearms? According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)

criminal profilers, the term “mass murder” has been defined generally as a multiple homicide
incident in which four or more victims are murdered—not including the offender(s)—within one
event, and in one or more geographical locations relatively near one another.10 It follows then that
a “mass shooting” could be defined as a multiple homicide incident in which four or more victims
are murdered with firearms—not including the offender(s)—within one event, and in one or more
locations relatively near one another. Similarly, a “mass public shooting” could be, and has been,
defined to mean a multiple homicide incident in which four or more victims are murdered with
firearms—not including the offender(s)—within one event, in one or more public locations, such
as a workplace, school, restaurant, house of worship, neighborhood, or other public setting.11
Click to expand...
 
NonoBadDog said:
One would think you could find the definition for yourself. I can give you a definition but there isn't one used by the govt in the sense you want. The closest you are going to get is the Congressional Research Service, that you mentioned earlier. They don't even define a "mass shooting" because there are so many varying definitions. They even discuss the different definitions but the closest they get to it is the definition from the FBI, "active shooter" definition.
Click to expand...

Right, four or more are murdered. So if three people are murdered and then another dozen people are shot and injured, it doesn't qualify, does it ?
 
Absentglare said:
Right, four or more are murdered. So if three people are murdered and then another dozen people are shot and injured, it doesn't qualify, does it ?
Click to expand...

I would think if 4+ people are shot, that is a mass shooting dead or not.
 
Mr Person said:
I would want an accomplished sniper with a sniper rifle in the proximity. At worst, I'd settle for a marine with great marksmanship.

That person would be much less likely to blow me away in the process of shooting the terrorist, than would random Bubba McRambo.


It would be nice if I had some statistics on how many open and concealed carry folks are trained military with great marksman ship, and how many are Bubba McRambo.
Click to expand...

when it comes to snipers-the best are coming out of the US Army marksmanship unit in Fort Benning which is also where the US army shooting team is stationed The marines have a similar shooting team at Quantico. the best pistol shots tend to be civilians and America's greatest shooters in action pistol are guys like Robbie Leatham, Jerry Barnhart, Todd Jarrett and Rob Vogel. The army decided to create an action pistol team and Max Michel is (or was-its been a while since I shot on the USPSA circuit) and Julie Golub were the army's top shooters.

however the very very best long range rifle shooters have some civilians including J David Tubb, Middletown Tompkins, his wife Nancy
and their daughters (one who now shoots for the Army but was world class before enlisting)

Nancy Tompkins « Daily Bulletin

About David Tubb
 
Absentglare said:
Right, four or more are murdered. So if three people are murdered and then another dozen people are shot and injured, it doesn't qualify, does it ?
Click to expand...

It is apparent that you have no idea I am talking about. You sure are full of hyperbole tho. Not every shooting is classified as the same kind of shooting. There is a reason for that. If you want to know the reason do some research on your own and quit throwing out nonsensical posts.
 
Last edited:
Absentglare said:
Okay. How about Business Insider ?

How many mass shootings in US in 2015? - Business Insider

We're on course to have 380 mass shootings in 2015. The FBI defines it more rigidly, as explained in the article.
Click to expand...

I am talking about legal definition. I am not talking about a definition dreamed up by someone that writes for a magazine or a blog on reddit. The FBI doesn't classify a family shooting as an active shooter murder. They don't count wounded as a murder. They don't count 4 people shooting at four other people in the street as an active shooter killing. The reddit folks count pellet gun incidents with hardly any wounds as a mass shooting. Yeah, the FBI uses a different standard.
 
NonoBadDog said:
I am talking about legal definition. I am not talking about a definition dreamed up by someone that writes for a magazine or a blog on reddit. The FBI doesn't classify a family shooting as an active shooter murder. They don't count wounded as a murder. They don't count 4 people shooting at four other people in the street as an active shooter killing. The reddit folks count pellet gun incidents with hardly any wounds as a mass shooting. Yeah, the FBI uses a different standard.
Click to expand...

It doesn't take reddit to consider the idea that a shooting where 4 people, not including the perpetrator, are shot can be considered a "mass shooting." The FBI uses a standard where at least 4 people are murdered. Obviously, you can have a horrifying mass shooting where no one actually ends up being killed.

This is the first post :

MrT said:
I can recall more than 300 instances of mass shootings in the United States from this year alone.
Click to expand...

Later, this was stated to you :

"Mass shooting refers to an incident involving multiple victims of gun violence.[1] The Congressional Research Service acknowledges that there is not a broadly accepted definition,[2] and uses a definition of a "public mass shooting"[3] if 4 or more people are actually killed, not including the perpetrator, echoing the FBI definition[4][5] of the term "mass murder"."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shooting

It seems the Congressional Research Service would be a reasonable organization to define "mass shooting," so it seems like you're using a more narrow definition to associate with a smaller number. You're not disproving the fact he's communicating, you're debating that the terminology he used applies, you're complaining about how he communicated it. Well, he defined it for you already.

You can argue that the other definition is a more appropriate number, sure, but the number of "mass shootings" by the FBI definition is still alarmingly high.
 
Absentglare said:
It doesn't take reddit to consider the idea that a shooting where 4 people, not including the perpetrator, are shot can be considered a "mass shooting." The FBI uses a standard where at least 4 people are murdered. Obviously, you can have a horrifying mass shooting where no one actually ends up being killed.

This is the first post :



Later, this was stated to you :

"Mass shooting refers to an incident involving multiple victims of gun violence.[1] The Congressional Research Service acknowledges that there is not a broadly accepted definition,[2] and uses a definition of a "public mass shooting"[3] if 4 or more people are actually killed, not including the perpetrator, echoing the FBI definition[4][5] of the term "mass murder"."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shooting

It seems the Congressional Research Service would be a reasonable organization to define "mass shooting," so it seems like you're using a more narrow definition to associate with a smaller number. You're not disproving the fact he's communicating, you're debating that the terminology he used applies, you're complaining about how he communicated it. Well, he defined it for you already.

You can argue that the other definition is a more appropriate number, sure, but the number of "mass shootings" by the FBI definition is still alarmingly high.
Click to expand...

Not really, well, one could argue it but one would be wrong in arguing that. If you want to argue it we can but not in this thread. It would be off topic. We could cover all of those topics.

Side note, the Congressional Research Service doesn't define it. The talk about several definitions of the term "mass shootings" but they don't actually adopt any of the definitions but do endorse the one used by the FBI.
 
Heinrich said:
It's called celebrity worship. Americans are famous for it.
Click to expand...

Yeah other countries don't do that-there are no paparazzi in say Britain!
 
Anti gun hacks ahve always played fast and loose with numbers to achieve sensational results. Back during Clintons days they declared 13 Children a day died by gunfire. Of course, to achieve that statistic they had to include 18-25 year old adults...the most violent demographic...in their figures.

So now its 300...or 330...or 3whatever the number is. great. That being the case...and since, you know...it MATTERS so much to anti-gun hacks everywhere...why are they silent on 325 of 330 incidents? Why arent they engaging the vast majority of those 'mass shootings'? Whats the difference between THOSE routine 'mass shootings' and the mass shootings they actual pretend to give a **** about so they can promote gun control?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom