mass shooting in orlando

[Keyrock]

 

 

Well... no. I said that American culture has a weird obsession with guns, seeing them as symbols of freedom and rugged individualism, and given that mass shootings are a uniquely American phenomena, the culture surrounding guns and the societal perception thereof is likely a contributing factor in that.

 

 

 

Except they're not.  That's completely false.  Mass shootings have happened and continue to happen all over the world.  In fact, if you take a ratio of mass shooting deaths compared to population, the US doesn't even make the top 5 (admittedly this chart doesn't include 2014, 2015, or 2016):

 

Edited June 13, 2016 by Keyrock

[Gromnir]

 

 

 Sure, I don't think you should be, but restrictions on the magazine size sound reasonably enough to me, and I believe they have been in effect for quite some time. I assume you don't need 30 bullets to defend yourself from hostile fauna.

 

 

You know Alum I'd even go along with that if I thought for a second that is where it would end. But it won't. The goal of the gun control crowd is no less than prohibition followed by confiscation. They are willing to do it incrementally but that is the end all things are leading towards. Each new "reasonable" restriction begets another "reasonable restriction" and another and another and another. The best way to ensure you never reach the bad end is don't start down the bad road. 

 

That is the heart of it right there. That is why you see people like me opposing even "reasonable" restrictions. Because we do not trust the government to be satisfied with that. We are not dealing with an honest partner. 

 

 

You have a better shot of convincing people if you don't automatically assume that those who disagree with you are Bond villains.  People who want gun control in America don't gather to laugh maniacally about the success in the next stage of their Master Plan.  (Or, well, they wouldn't if they ever achieved any political victories worth celebrating.)  They're just ordinary citizens who are sick of seeing bullets hit things they care about. 

 

 

For my part, the horse is pretty much out of the barn on gun control.  Sure, if I had the choice between a society with few guns in private hands, versus one with many, I'd pick the former 10 times out of 10.  (The latter was a useful check on 17th-18th Century tyrants, which is why the 2nd Amendment was written, but modern technology has functionally destroyed the capacity of personal arms to overthrow a better-than-3rd-World oppressive sovereign power.)  In America, though, that choice was made for me a long time ago-- both in the whole Constitution thing, and in the fact that there are just a ****load of guns out there.  That sucks, and creates a whole lot more tragedies than there need to be, but that also doesn't make it smart to expend a whole lot of political capital tilting at that particular windmill. 

 

am mostly agreeing with enoch. truth to tell, in spite o' the Constitutional hurdles, Gromnir is in favor o' gun control in some form.  'course in our mind, handguns is the genuine menace, and semi-automatic weapons is a distraction from the problem. we would be in favor o' a magazine capacity limit, but as we noted already, am dubious 'bout the actual benefits o' such a measure.  

 

am also having a hard time finding common ground with gd who is clear untrusting o' the State in this matter. dunno. our background makes us highly suspicious o' The State's good intentions-- growing up in the shadow o' wounded knee can color the perspective o' a guy. even so, while we hunt no more, we do own numerous firearms, but paper targets is 'bout all we shoot at these days.  regardless, all our "hunting" firearms is having no more than a five-shot magazine (our marlin 336 xlr... though our .22lr does have a box that holds 10 +1). am having a hard time envisioning a legit need for a 30 round magazine... particularly for an ar-15, which is NOT a hunting weapon with its .223 calibre. the slippery slope arguments for resisting any kind o' gun control for fear o' inevitable future excesses by the State is difficult for us to embrace.

 

where we heartily disagree with enoch is his observations 'bout the impact o' a well-armed populace in confrontations with foreign or domestic armies.  dismiss the war games scenario where US and a foreign power plays out global thermonuclear war. such stuff is apocalyptic but largely pointless. purpose o' an invasion is traditional to conquer and not just to destroy. *chuckle* even if a hypothetical chinese army could invade and hold territory in the United States, we cannot begin to imagine how bloody would be attempts to control populations in cities such pittsburgh (lots o' hunters and ferocious geography) or chicago or entire rural areas o' west virginia, kentucky, colorado, etc.  shady can tell you just how forbidding the geography alone is in colorado.  add an angry and well-armed population that includes a significant percentage o' experienced hunters? we can't even imagine how a domestic tyrant would establish control in urban or rural areas o' much o' the United States if some considerable portion o' the population chose to revolt or resist.  urban fighting is notoriously bloody, but in US cities where citizen owned guns is so plentiful, we predict considerable carnage being visited 'pon foreign or domestic oppressors.  heck, every male we knew growing up in the dakotas knew firearms basics and likely had some skill in hunting.  *chuckle* looks at this board and see how many military veterans we got posting in this place.  a large standing army means we got loads o' military veterans too... armed veterans. tanks, smart bombs and stealth fighters would be woeful inadequate weapons for maintaining control o' hostile populations in the united states. 

 

yeah, our marlin 336 xlr, remington 798 and savage mk ii is all feeble weapons that would be largely useless if we were attempting to stop US armour under the command o' emperor trump. still, am kinda warmed by the thought o' the abattoir trump's occupation forces would face from guerrilla fighters armed with weapons such as is in our personal arsenal as regular army units attempted to exert control throughout the foothills and sierra nevadas. 

 

...

 

am kidding 'bout the emperor trump stuff.  mostly kidding.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Gromnir]

 

 

 

Well... no. I said that American culture has a weird obsession with guns, seeing them as symbols of freedom and rugged individualism, and given that mass shootings are a uniquely American phenomena, the culture surrounding guns and the societal perception thereof is likely a contributing factor in that.

 

 

 

Except they're not.  That's completely false.  Mass shootings have happened and continue to happen all over the world.  In fact, if you take a ratio of mass shooting deaths compared to population, the US doesn't even make the top 5 (admittedly this chart doesn't include 2014, 2015, or 2016):

 

 

the list keyrock reveals is much similar to the one we linked already... am only bringing up as is is noteworthy that if one changes the descriptor from mass shootings to mass violence, the US drops even further and belgium and russia makes massive leaps.  why should we ignore bombings, eh?  russia has very few mass shootings, but w/o guns, those wishing to do mass violence find a way.  gun restrictions do not stop russian mass violence.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited June 13, 2016 by Gromnir

[HoonDing]

"(admittedly this chart doesn't include 2014, 2015, or 2016)"

 

no matter how hard our Muslim friends have been trying in Yurop, I'm confident USA is lonely at the top agein

[Gromnir]

"(admittedly this chart doesn't include 2014, 2015, or 2016)"

 

no matter how hard our Muslim friends have been trying in Yurop, I'm confident USA is lonely at the top agein

your confidence is misplaced

 

http://crimeresearch.org/2015/06/comparing-death-rates-from-mass-public-shootings-in-the-us-and-europe/

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Hurlshort]

I think the number one issue here is teaching tolerance.  We have a huge religious right the preaches against homosexuality, gay marriage, and morality.  If anyone should be called out over this, it is them.  They sow hatred.  

[Gromnir]

I think the number one issue here is teaching tolerance.  We have a huge religious right the preaches against homosexuality, gay marriage, and morality.  If anyone should be called out over this, it is them.  They sow hatred.  

am not sure if you is serious. as homophobic and intolerant as is elements of the religious right in the US, to attribute the current violence to them is misplaced.  blame christian right? blame jewish right? such groups frequent resist affording lgbt citizens equal rights, but is rare to hear calls for violence from such groups. and regardless, it seems highly unlikely that omar were a disciple o' jerry falwell.  you think omar were tuning into jewish right broadcasts on saturday nights?

 

we got a lesbian freind that we were speaking with earlier today and her reaction to the recent violence were... curious. somehow the violence perpetrated by a single isis advocate represented a massive reversal for the lgbt community.  regardless o' how much the equality for lgbt citizens has improved in the last couple decades, the single act o' violence by an islamic extremist represented just how little progress had actually been made since the 60s.  today it were a muslim extremist, but our friend were certain that this event were a harbinger o' more widespread violence. dismiss as terrorism were a way for the non lgbt folks to ignore the epidemic o' violence  building like a thunderstorm on the horizon.  clearly the religious right couldn't handle transvestites sharing their bathrooms, and because their legal resistance had failed, the religious right were turning violent. etc.

 

...

 

honestly, we love our friend like a sister, but she were completely off her nut.  

 

am not ignoring the tragedy, but is no way to see this violence as somehow representative o' a greater shift towards violence by americans as a whole towards the lgbt community. any suggestion that the religious right as a whole made this specific act o' violence more likely cannot be advocated with any seriousness.  am not dismissing that lgbt folks continue to be unfairly discriminated 'gainst by their fellow citizens, but to use this incident as an excuse to promote a larger crusade 'gainst the religious right would be unjust.  

[BruceVC]

I think the number one issue here is teaching tolerance.  We have a huge religious right the preaches against homosexuality, gay marriage, and morality.  If anyone should be called out over this, it is them.  They sow hatred.  

Yes, thats an accurate observation. One of the main criticisms I had for the USA was this incongruous social reality where you had the greatest, influential and significant country of the Western world which in turn means it has the most influence in the world and you have this respected Constitution and value human rights yet homophobia was still fairly rife in some states. Yes it was more the views of Conservative  Christians but it did create a a strange inconsistency, the world expects a  country like the USA to have  addressed tolerance around gay rights

 

Thats why I said to GD the way the supreme court  basically made gay marriage mandatory was necessary because if you left it up to the states then there would still be states who would refuse to allow gay people to marry...so sometimes in society you need to legislate social changes because human beings dont always do the right thing  

[Valsuelm]

I think the number one issue here is teaching tolerance.  We have a huge religious right the preaches against homosexuality, gay marriage, and morality.  If anyone should be called out over this, it is them.  They sow hatred.  

 

My gosh I hope you are jesting badly, and are not truly that deluded.

Edited June 13, 2016 by Valsuelm

[Meshugger]

I think the number one issue here is teaching tolerance.  We have a huge religious right the preaches against homosexuality, gay marriage, and morality.  If anyone should be called out over this, it is them.  They sow hatred.  

 

The religious extreme right has been quite tolerant lately, in fact i haven't heard of any attacks on gay prides or abortion clinics lately, both of which are targets to them. Surely you're not trying to equate Islamic terrorism with Christian terrorism in the US? They have nothing in common culturally or theologically. Rather, i would say comparing the both as equals requires a certain amount of mental gymnastics of which is more worrying.

 

As for the usual gun control issue, Gromnir is right and the rest of you are wrong. I also suspect that there's a dimension jealousy stemming from low self-esteem that guides people who are not from the US to have these false concerns about the weaponry of private US citizens. More so than actual concerns and a true love for peace.

[kirottu]

Games journalists try to answer one simple question: When isis terrorists kills 50 people did it really happen if you can't blame violent video games for it?

 

(archive) Link to the article.

 

(archive) The Wrap: Orlando Shooting Puts E3's Shooting Games in Crosshairs

Edited June 13, 2016 by kirottu

[IndiraLightfoot]

The Christian far right has most likely nothing to do with this hideous act of Omar's.

Nor has any radical Islamism, for that matter.

What we most likely have here, is a mentally unstable individual that saw an opportunity to associate his violent extrovert "acting-out" with Daesh. His father and ex-girlfriend, among others, seem to be insisting that this is the case. It has nothing to do with religion, and so much more to do with a loose cannon that have been in need for some serious help for years.

 

As for the bigger picture; Yes. LGBTQ rights have been slowly increasing, and the overtness of LGBTQ in society and mass media has certainly change for the better over the last two decades. If we would compare the situation of today with that of the early 1960s, it's like night and day. In many European countries, though, some sort of right-wing renaissance has been going on for a few years now, and alongside that, a tendency of backlash. Various versions of Christian far right groups call for retractions of any laws protecting anything LGBTQ - this range from Russia and Poland to Greece. However, in France, National Front has amassed a substantial number of gay votes and party members. Still, if we were to add various Muslim groups which detest LGBTQ in Europe, the 2010s trend is a bit grim in that department.

 

Another global pattern is this:

Self-proclaimed free, enlightened and liberal countries seem to be pitted against equally self-proclaimed conservative, family-values-oriented countries, where the former supposedly unequivocally love LGBTQ, and the latter view LGBTQ as something inherently bad and unwanted and illegal. 

[Fighter]

Games journalists try to answer one simple question: When isis terrorists kills 50 people did it really happen if you can't blame violent video games for it?

 

(archive) Link to the article.

 

(archive) The Wrap: Orlando Shooting Puts E3's Shooting Games in Crosshairs

 

There it is again. And then they complain that gamers are so defensive. Games are still not out of the woods and censorship is still on the table.

 

And regardless of whether this was a religious extremism attack Islam needs to get the same treatment as everyone else does on the question on human rights. People are ready to show up with pitchforks to a christian bakery but tremble before islamism.

Edited June 13, 2016 by Fighter

[BruceVC]

The Christian far right has most likely nothing to do with this hideous act of Omar's.

Nor has any radical Islamism, for that matter.

What we most likely have here, is a mentally unstable individual that saw an opportunity to associate his violent extrovert "acting-out" with Daesh. His father and ex-girlfriend, among others, seem to be insisting that this is the case. It has nothing to do with religion, and so much more to do with a loose cannon that have been in need for some serious help for years.

 

As for the bigger picture; Yes. LGBTQ rights have been slowly increasing, and the overtness of LGBTQ in society and mass media has certainly change for the better over the last two decades. If we would compare the situation of today with that of the early 1960s, it's like night and day. In many European countries, though, some sort of right-wing renaissance has been going on for a few years now, and alongside that, a tendency of backlash. Various versions of Christian far right groups call for retractions of any laws protecting anything LGBTQ - this range from Russia and Poland to Greece. However, in France, National Front has amassed a substantial number of gay votes and party members. Still, if we were to add various Muslim groups which detest LGBTQ in Europe, the 2010s trend is a bit grim in that department.

 

Another global pattern is this:

Self-proclaimed free, enlightened and liberal countries seem to be pitted against equally self-proclaimed conservative, family-values-oriented countries, where the former supposedly unequivocally love LGBTQ, and the latter view LGBTQ as something inherently bad and unwanted and illegal. 

Good insights Indira

 

But why do you think this attack is not ISIS related? It is ISIS related in the sense that becomes the tribute for the attack. Would he still have attacked the gay club if ISIS didn't exist? I doubt it as the reality of ISIS and its campaigns have definitely emboldened certain people to act in there name...so for example if this wasnt a real attack to support ISIS he wouldn't have announced it?

 

The USA has had many attacks  like this that weren't extremist related but I do consider this logically one ?

Edited June 13, 2016 by BruceVC

[BruceVC]

 

Games journalists try to answer one simple question: When isis terrorists kills 50 people did it really happen if you can't blame violent video games for it?

 

(archive) Link to the article.

 

(archive) The Wrap: Orlando Shooting Puts E3's Shooting Games in Crosshairs

 

There it is again. And then they complain that gamers are so defensive. Games are still not out of the woods and censorship is still on the table.

 

And regardless of whether this was a religious extremism attack Islam needs to get the same treatment as everyone else does on the question on human rights. People are ready to show up with pitchforks to a christian bakery but tremble before islamism.

 

Fighter can you say with absolute certainty that violent FPS games are not at least a contributing factor ?

In fact my advice is you should stop playing any violent game as you dont want to commit violent acts....or do you think  you know the difference between gaming and reality? 

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

The Christian far right has most likely nothing to do with this hideous act of Omar's.

Nor has any radical Islamism, for that matter.

What we most likely have here, is a mentally unstable individual that saw an opportunity to associate his violent extrovert "acting-out" with Daesh. His father and ex-girlfriend, among others, seem to be insisting that this is the case. It has nothing to do with religion, and so much more to do with a loose cannon that have been in need for some serious help for years.

 

As for the bigger picture; Yes. LGBTQ rights have been slowly increasing, and the overtness of LGBTQ in society and mass media has certainly change for the better over the last two decades. If we would compare the situation of today with that of the early 1960s, it's like night and day. In many European countries, though, some sort of right-wing renaissance has been going on for a few years now, and alongside that, a tendency of backlash. Various versions of Christian far right groups call for retractions of any laws protecting anything LGBTQ - this range from Russia and Poland to Greece. However, in France, National Front has amassed a substantial number of gay votes and party members. Still, if we were to add various Muslim groups which detest LGBTQ in Europe, the 2010s trend is a bit grim in that department.

 

Another global pattern is this:

Self-proclaimed free, enlightened and liberal countries seem to be pitted against equally self-proclaimed conservative, family-values-oriented countries, where the former supposedly unequivocally love LGBTQ, and the latter view LGBTQ as something inherently bad and unwanted and illegal. 

Good insights Indira

 

But why do you think this attack is not ISIS related? It is ISIS related in the sense that becomes the tribute for the attack. Would he still have attacked the gay club if ISIS didn't exist? I doubt it as the reality of ISIS and its campaigns have definitely emboldened certain people to act in there name...so for example if this wasnt a real attack to support ISIS he wouldn't have announced it?

 

The USA has had many attacks  like this that weren't extremist related but I do consider this logically one ?

 

That is a clever question!

 

I must admit that Daesh propaganda on the world wide web certainly may act some kind of trigger for a loose cannon on the brink of exploding. In that sense, it may be considered as Daesh-realted.

Still, even without anything like Daesh, he may have done the vile deed anyway.

This question of yours also applies to the Breivik case at Utøya in Norway. If it wasn't for all those extreme right forums, would he have done it then, and even more interestingly, would he have done it on that scale and with those twisted political "stamps of approval"?

 

EDIT:

Speaking of triggers;

As for the role of violent video games in this kind of crimes, I'd say it's pretty much no role whatsoever.

(I do recall the absurd PnP RPG debate and devils and demons in the 1980s. *Shiver*)

Still, as with any kind of story/media, scenarios and acts taking place in any kind of media may inspire culprits. But, so what?

I mean, then those cave drawing way back in the Stone Age, where some elder probably told a violent story or two, pointing towards, say, an atlatl, are just violence-inducing and harmful as GTA. The linkage is quite bizarre. 

Our brains are hard-wired to copy others. We are copy cats, all of us. Every poet is a thief. You are a thief!

Edited June 13, 2016 by IndiraLightfoot

[Meshugger]

According to this source, the guy have been working for a contractor for Department of Homeland Security since 2007.

 

http://counterjihad.com/isis-infiltrated-homeland-security-orlando-terrorist-worked-major-dhs-contractor

 

I would say that the doors are quite open for those who are tenacious enough.

[Fighter]

Fighter can you say with absolute certainty that violent FPS games are not at least a contributing factor ?

 

I think quiet the opposite. The more ways to channel your emotions safely the better.

 

In fact my advice is you should stop playing any violent game as you dont want to commit violent acts....or do you think  you know the difference between gaming and reality?

 

 

?

[BruceVC]

According to this source, the guy have been working for a contractor for Department of Homeland Security since 2007.

 

http://counterjihad.com/isis-infiltrated-homeland-security-orlando-terrorist-worked-major-dhs-contractor

 

I would say that the doors are quite open for those who are tenacious enough.

This is a very interesting point but it shouldn't concern us too much because this type of attack cannot really be prevented as its a lone wolf attack. So the reality is in  a world where groups like ISIS exist you will always have a small segment of the Muslim  population who will for inexplicable reasons align ideologically with ISIS and be prepared to attack the country that gave them  a home 

[BruceVC]

 

Fighter can you say with absolute certainty that violent FPS games are not at least a contributing factor ?

 

I think quiet the opposite. The more ways to channel your emotions safely the better.

 

In fact my advice is you should stop playing any violent game as you dont want to commit violent acts....or do you think  you know the difference between gaming and reality?

 

 

?

 

I was just joking  because we know there is no link  between video games and people who commit violence

[BruceVC]

 

 

The Christian far right has most likely nothing to do with this hideous act of Omar's.

Nor has any radical Islamism, for that matter.

What we most likely have here, is a mentally unstable individual that saw an opportunity to associate his violent extrovert "acting-out" with Daesh. His father and ex-girlfriend, among others, seem to be insisting that this is the case. It has nothing to do with religion, and so much more to do with a loose cannon that have been in need for some serious help for years.

 

As for the bigger picture; Yes. LGBTQ rights have been slowly increasing, and the overtness of LGBTQ in society and mass media has certainly change for the better over the last two decades. If we would compare the situation of today with that of the early 1960s, it's like night and day. In many European countries, though, some sort of right-wing renaissance has been going on for a few years now, and alongside that, a tendency of backlash. Various versions of Christian far right groups call for retractions of any laws protecting anything LGBTQ - this range from Russia and Poland to Greece. However, in France, National Front has amassed a substantial number of gay votes and party members. Still, if we were to add various Muslim groups which detest LGBTQ in Europe, the 2010s trend is a bit grim in that department.

 

Another global pattern is this:

Self-proclaimed free, enlightened and liberal countries seem to be pitted against equally self-proclaimed conservative, family-values-oriented countries, where the former supposedly unequivocally love LGBTQ, and the latter view LGBTQ as something inherently bad and unwanted and illegal. 

Good insights Indira

 

But why do you think this attack is not ISIS related? It is ISIS related in the sense that becomes the tribute for the attack. Would he still have attacked the gay club if ISIS didn't exist? I doubt it as the reality of ISIS and its campaigns have definitely emboldened certain people to act in there name...so for example if this wasnt a real attack to support ISIS he wouldn't have announced it?

 

The USA has had many attacks  like this that weren't extremist related but I do consider this logically one ?

 

That is a clever question!

 

I must admit that Daesh propaganda on the world wide web certainly may act some kind of trigger for a loose cannon on the brink of exploding. In that sense, it may be considered as Daesh-realted.

Still, even without anything like Daesh, he may have done the vile deed anyway.

This question of yours also applies to the Breivik case at Utøya in Norway. If it wasn't for all those extreme right forums, would he have done it then, and even more interestingly, would he have done it on that scale and with those twisted political "stamps of approval"?

 

EDIT:

Speaking of triggers;

As for the role of violent video games in this kind of crimes, I'd say it's pretty much no role whatsoever.

(I do recall the absurd PnP RPG debate and devils and demons in the 1980s. *Shiver*)

Still, as with any kind of story/media, scenarios and acts taking place in any kind of media may inspire culprits. But, so what?

I mean, then those cave drawing way back in the Stone Age, where some elder probably told a violent story or two, pointing towards, say, an atlatl, are just violence-inducing and harmful as GTA. The linkage is quite bizarre. 

Our brains are hard-wired to copy others. We are copy cats, all of us. Every poet is a thief. You are a thief!

 

Yes that Brevik  example is a good one and I think applicable, you take his actions and what he expects from  his jail cell with  computer privileges . He almost thinks he is a celebrity and I am of the opinion the various right wing rhetoric influenced his choices. I am not blaming the Internet at all but sometimes access to all this information can be abused 

[Meshugger]

Breivik loved Dragon Age 2.

 

Now let that sink in for a while.

[BruceVC]

Breivik loved Dragon Age 2.

 

Now let that sink in for a while.

Well I enjoyed DA2, it was fun but Bioware took noticeable shortcuts ...but that game had the love of my life ...Isabela 

[Meshugger]

 

Breivik loved Dragon Age 2.

 

Now let that sink in for a while.

Well I enjoyed DA2, it was fun but Bioware took noticeable shortcuts ...but that game had the love of my life ...Isabela 

 

 

[Zoraptor]

 

 

 

Well... no. I said that American culture has a weird obsession with guns, seeing them as symbols of freedom and rugged individualism, and given that mass shootings are a uniquely American phenomena, the culture surrounding guns and the societal perception thereof is likely a contributing factor in that.

 

Except they're not.  That's completely false.  Mass shootings have happened and continue to happen all over the world.  In fact, if you take a ratio of mass shooting deaths compared to population, the US doesn't even make the top 5 (admittedly this chart doesn't include 2014, 2015, or 2016):

 

 

 

Yeah, nah. This is the classic statistical Outlier fudge. The issue with these sort of charts is perfectly illustrated by Norway being so high- have one incident in a small country and it will be at the top, because it's a small country not because of any intrinsic difference. At the time of the Port Arthur massacre Australia would be at the top, when Aramoana happened we'd be at the top, with Breivik Norway is at the top. That's the nature of small sample size statistics. After all, the largest incident number of any other country on the chart is 3 compared to the US's 38 and there's not a single other country there with a population larger than 82 million.

 

Except there actually is since it's OECD members' data. To illustrate fully the complete list is here (archive link from the same source as the above chart, shows full chart minus the convenient crop) and contains all the countries including those with zero incidents. Do a full US vs non US analysis? Well, why not. 884 million people in the relevant non US OECD countries for 165 deaths. US: 227 deaths from 315 million. The comparative death ratio is 0.19 for non US to 0.72 for the US, so you're actually 3.5 times more likely to be killed in the US as elsewhere. Big 's' Significant? Asterisk that, unless you're paying me. But for sure it's a little s significant difference.

 

(There's lies, damn lies, and statistics; to quote a phrase. And with the proviso that I'm mainly ragging on the original source, not Keyrock for posting it since his main point that mass shootings happen elsewhere is certainly true, but they are disproportionate to the US)

Edited June 13, 2016 by Zoraptor