El Paso, Texas Walmart Shooting- 20 dead

Isn't that what you said in 2016? BeatMe was your man in 2018, right?

"Beatme" was crying yesterday, because .... people from El Paso were dying? Or was he crying because Mexican Nationals were? Did Beatme cry when the border patrol officers were shot and killed by Mexican Nationals who snuck into the country with rifles?

Wasn't one of the rifles shipped to Mexico by Obaminable? Originally Posted by LexusLover

There is absolutely nothing about that sentence that remotely makes sense, LL. Nothing.

The world is shocked by these continued hate inspired massacres in the US.

So, why aren't YOU crying?

There is absolutely nothing about my 45,756 eccie posts that remotely makes sense... Nothing. Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

FTFY. No charge.

You mean to tell me that out of 3,000 people in a TEXAS Walmart not ONE of them had a concealed carry license???

Oh, yeah... Walmart is a "gun-free zone". (Where's that dunce emoji when you need it?) Originally Posted by gfejunkie

If there had been a citizen with a CHL and he or she dropped the MFer..

YOU WOULD HAVE NEVER HEARD OF THIS HAPPENING.

If there had been a citizen with a CHL and he or she dropped the MFer..

YOU WOULD HAVE NEVER HEARD OF THIS HAPPENING. Originally Posted by TheDaliLama

Possibly.

Folks, if you’re looking for someone to blame for these weapons being so readily available, you have to go back fifteen years to 2004. The Bush/Cheney administration and Congress allowing the Assault Weapons Ban to expire.

I’m talking both fucking parties... the day those chicken shits allowed that to happen the flood gates opened to gun manufacturers all over the world. They have flooded our country with weapons they can’t sell in their own. I don’t know when the last time you were in a gun shop but my brother and I toured the new hobby/ gun store combo opening near Kema Tx. and there weren’t many weapons stamped “ made in America “.

So I’m just saying, the extreme right and left better get their act together or they will be having their guns pried from their dead hands.

Easily brainwashed by racist conservatives and the evil divisive POTUS. Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

Easily brainwashed? You've just described many democrats.

Folks, if you’re looking for someone to blame for these weapons being so readily available, you have to go back fifteen years to 2004. The Bush/Cheney administration and Congress allowing the Assault Weapons Ban to expire.

I’m talking both fucking parties... the day those chicken shits allowed that to happen the flood gates opened to gun manufacturers all over the world. They have flooded our country with weapons they can’t sell in their own. I don’t know when the last time you were in a gun shop but my brother and I toured the new hobby/ gun store combo opening near Kema Tx. and there weren’t many weapons stamped “ made in America “.

So I’m just saying, the extreme right and left better get their act together or they will be having their guns pried from their dead hands. Originally Posted by Jaxson66

If you're really looking for someone to blame then go back to 1994 when the democrats and Bill Clinton put a sunset clause in the ban. George W Bush and the congress took NO action in to let the ban expire.

Just read a story by reporter Olivia Sanchez of USA Today who said that on day 215 of this year, there have been over 200 mass shootings. She described a mass shooting as having at least 4 fatalities not including the shooter. A total of 552 dead.

Anyone see the problem with her story?

If you're really looking for someone to blame then go back to 1994 when the democrats and Bill Clinton put a sunset clause in the ban. George W Bush and the congress took NO action in to let the ban expire. Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

Isn’t that what I just posted...but you being a party loyalist has to blame the Clintons.
Take yourself an atta boy out of the club coffer.

Just read a story by reporter Olivia Sanchez of USA Today who said that on day 215 of this year, there have been over 200 mass shootings. She described a mass shooting as having at least 4 fatalities not including the shooter. A total of 552 dead.

Anyone see the problem with her story? Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

As I noted in another thread, this is most likely coming from

https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/

They define a mass shooting as.

Why are GVA Mass Shooting numbers higher than some other sources?

GVA uses a purely statistical threshold to define mass shooting based ONLY on the numeric value of 4 or more shot or killed, not including the shooter. GVA does not parse the definition to remove any subcategory of shooting. To that end we don’t exclude, set apart, caveat, or differentiate victims based upon the circumstances in which they were shot.
GVA believes that equal importance is given to the counting of those injured as well as killed in a mass shooting incident.

The FBI does not define Mass Shooting in any form. They do define Mass Killing but that includes all forms of weapon, not just guns.

In that, the criteria are simple…if four or more people are shot or killed in a single incident, not involving the shooter, that incident is categorized as a mass shooting based purely on that numerical threshold.

Many are confusing the Shot and or Killed of four or more as four or more fatalities. It's a far different number.

If you look at the site many of the mass shootings listed don't have a single fatality.

Now the mental illness bullshit is the excuse. Why when white guys kill in mass all the sudden mental illness? That's our POS president.

As I noted in another thread, this is most likely coming from

https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/

They define a mass shooting as.



Many are confusing the Shot and or Killed of four or more as four or more fatalities. It's a far different number.

If you look at the site many of the mass shootings listed don't have a single fatality. Originally Posted by eccielover

How is that this site proposes that an "incident" is defined as four or more casualties; yet, it lists substantially more 'incidents' than 'casualties' -- a total more than killed and injured combined? The 'number of incidents' should be a fraction of the 'total' number of casualties.

Now the mental illness bullshit is the excuse. Why when white guys kill in mass all the sudden mental illness? That's our POS president. Originally Posted by Trey

Actually it's the lib-retard broadcasters in the lame stream media who are misleading you. Quit watching Madcow and Lemon.

How is that this site proposes that an "incident" is defined as four or more casualties; yet, it lists substantially more 'incidents' than 'casualties' -- a total more than killed and injured combined? The 'number of incidents' should be a fraction of the 'total' number of casualties. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Not sure what you are saying.

The total incidents are anything relating to a gun being fired from what I can see. There are many where shots are fired, but not injuries or fatalities.

The total mass shooting incidents all have the common factor of at least 4 shot(includes both injuries and fatalities)

It is a hodgepodge of data that you need to sift through, but again Mass shootings are a very low volume of overall incidents in their database and a low number of deaths and injuries in comparison to overall deaths and injuries.

That again is the elephant in the room no one will talk about because it doesn't score political points. Better to gin up outrage over a small subset of incidents.

Isn’t that what I just posted...but you being a party loyalist has to blame the Clintons.
Take yourself an atta boy out of the club coffer. Originally Posted by Jaxson66

My party is not in the White House.

It's the math people... 552 dead and you have to at least four dead to count. Divide 552 to find the most possible shooting and you get 138 and not 225 as described in her story. If you can't get simple math right...