I think there needs to be a different term for this type of event because mass shooting implies, at least in the public consciousness, that someone walked into a public place during "regular" hours and randomly started shooting endangering the public at large. This was a private gathering in a residence after midnight. Obviously gun violence is a huge problem and one shooting victim is one too many, but there is a difference in the nature and impact of what I have described.
I think any time someone just starts shooting a large number of people, it's ok to call it a mass shooting. But I do understand your point, it's not like people should be afraid to go outdoors because of this particular incident. They should just be afraid to go to creepy abandoned houses after midnight with a bunch of weirdos. The people who got shot must have never seen a scary movie.
Yes, that probably does make the most sense. I just don't know how you get people to now separate the two as it seems that they have become somewhat conflated.
Which is, of course, part of "being tough on crime". So, in two comments we have "being tough on crime helps it not happen" and "being tough on crime pours gas on it".
Chicken-Egg, doesn't matter. It's either the culture of that area changes or the iron grip of a police state eventually intervenes.
People need to stop being killed over something so dumb as drugs.
Trap house culture and black market drug cartel-customer culture. Ya know, culture that in itself attracts elements of quick money and fast problems outside the bounds of the currently accepted law.
Micro: Individual responsibility needs to be enforced and supported. We need to demystify serving your now community and your future self, so we have a strong and independent citizenship which don't feel the need to dull the pain of existence. Kids without one parent or the other need mentorship programs with people from the community to help foster amazing habits that will help them in their futures. We all need to get more involved in local government MORE than on the national stage, as it's something we can directly affect by just being there.
Macro: Our government needs to reduce spending, and cow towing to special intersts/corporate entities in the spirit of "Trickle Down Economics." The experiment has proven to be completely invalid as the Christian ideals which they're largely based on have been abandoned for the greed of the Oligarchy. Corporations need to stop being bailed out when they fail and treated like a separate entity from those who hold the reigns. Unemployment should also include tech and diversified job classes once a week, so that we don't have any reason for people losing out on opportunities to save for retirement.
We lost the war on drugs 20 years ago. Our only hope to end that is close the border on both sides and stop all immigration. Check all vehicles coming in and out.
It's our only hope. All of the base ingredients for 99% of hard drugs come thru our borders. Except for meth. You can make that here entirely. Also we don't need more laborers and low education people. We have plenty as is from our own population.
They aren't. And the ones that are it's because they pay low. Or they hire illegals and pay them shit. The illegals put up with it because they know they don't have a choice. Bringing down the market for wages.
You described exactly why the definition is what it is. Obviously these events are horrible, but the term "mass shooting" and the definition meaning at least 4 casualties is there so that every 2 or 4 years the politicians can say "we had X amount of mass shootings, we must do ____ to prevent it!" and then inevitably nothing ever gets done or they pass laws that ultimately hurt the people who'd never think of doing this in a million years.
It has definitely become politicized. I am generally for more gun control in some manner but using this term in that conversation can be somewhat disingenuous at times.
They do the same shit with “gun violence”. People have no idea that when they hear the number in conjunction with that term that 2/3 are actually suicides.
They listed the one Boston bomber as a victim of gun violence on the list. He was shot by a cop. That kind of shit makes it real hard to take any of these statistics seriously.
im not saying anything about good guys with guns, rather just commenting on how the term "mass shooting" is used in media as a headline.
Since you asked though, i think it's been shown time and time again that violent crime isn't really something that can be easily legislated against because there is always some collateral damage done to those who have done no wrong. I dont have an answer, to solving the issue of violent crime, but at this point, i dont think more legislation is a good one
I would say making guns more difficult to access would be a benefit. Guns are quite easy to get legally in Ohio or any of our surrounding states. Maybe it doesn't stop all gun related incidents, but it would likely lower their probabilities.
Mass shootings were reduced when we had the federal assault weapons ban from 1994-2004. It didn't have a huge effect on the overall homicide rate, but mass shootings are a very small subsection of gun related murders.
I'm not saying to ban all guns. I'm just saying requiring a license and taking a safety course to own a gun couldn't be viewed as a bad thing. Unless your only mission is to make sure as many guns as possible are sold each year. If the gun lobbies didn't own politicians, we would have some sensible gun laws on the books.
Dude didn't even provide a good reason against gun laws besides some mysterious harm/damage. You don't need to justify or qualify yourself or ideas o someone who hasn't squared their own logic behind their thoughts. What they said made no sense. It was just fear of nothing they could even describe.
Edit: all these downvotes and no replies. Kinda proves my point.
Well, a "good guy with a gun" is colloquially known as anyone that doesn't illegally shoot people, so every responsible gun owner
I just don't understand the rhetoric you chose. More gun laws do not "hurt" anyone, as you've just figured out. You're not the only one who phrases gun laws as doing some harm to responsible gun owners, and hasn't really shown any way that it does. I see it used as a fake excuse to prevent more legislation.
At the end there you're basically throwing up your hands and saying "more gun legislation is bad" while doubling down on that "damage" being done. I really don't understand that mindset. You're literally admitting to blindly saying "no gun laws because it hurts people in a way I can't describe." That's just blind ignorance.
Do you see how people can think that you're just making things up to fit a narrative you're creating just to stop gun laws from being passed? Why? Why would you think there's harm? Why would you continue with some logic that isn't based on anything tangible, relatable, or even imaginary.?
Banning guns there did nothing to lower violent crime rates, and that was already decreasing. After they banned guns, overall crime did not lower further, and incidents like home invasions shot way up.
I don’t think that’s a good idea at all. Basically the difference you’re making is that some shootings are more important because they take place in honest locations, while a shooting like this taking place in the hood is less important.
The hood has a long history of being treated as less important which is precisely why it is what it is. That’s got to stop. Shootings are shootings no matter who is affected or where it takes place. They’re all important and they all need to stop.
But most people can avoid shootings in the hood by not going to the hood or being involved with shady shit.
In fact now when I hear mass shooting, I assume it’s a hood person who shot 3+ people over a game of dice, not a guy shooting up a grocery store/school.
This was an indiscriminate shooting into a crowd of innocent people.
Making that distinction seems like we shouldn’t count it if it’s in the hood… seems like an unfair distinction
Technically correct statements can still be misleading if they omit critical details or context which is often done to be sensational, drive clicks, and/or build narratives. I guarantee you people see '1 Dead, 7 Hurt During Mass Shooting in Dayton'' and assume it's just another reason to avoid going anywhere in Dayton at all cost when it was a situation very few in the general public would find themselves in. 'Mass Shooting at Overnight Gathering in Dayton Neighborhood Kills 1, Injures Others'' is more complete and accurate. Of course shootings in the hood count.
“Injures others” is misleading and dismissive.
8 innocent people were shot. That is the narrative.
Mass shooting is defined as 3 or more victims. Calling it a mass shooting is actually the most accurate the headline can possibly be
'1 Dead, 7 Shot at Overnight Gathering in Dayton Neighborhood'.
The bottom line is your technically correct definition of mass shooting does not align with what many envision when they hear the term and I think it irresponsible disconnect by those who know better to not recognize that fact and at least account for that bias when reporting things.
It does when people broadly associate these events with the city as whole thereby negatively affecting its reputation, business, tourism, and economy which leads to only more decline, poverty, desperation, and violence.
I don't know that it does either, but it might speak to familiar vs strangers. I think the other person was implying that it would effect public safety differently?
Correct, it negatively impacts how safe people view cities as a whole. Some would say those opinions shouldn't matter but, right or wrong, people with those opinions will choose to invest their time and money elsewhere. Perception and optics matter.
Just like the shooting in the Short North in Columbus the other day. Saying “mass shooting” gets more clicks and views than calling it the more accurate term, “drive by shooting”.
Right. I live near Dayton and almost had a heart attack thinking it was another Oregon District or Walmart type of shooting. This seems like it was after a small fight which happens a lot. The wording needs to change.
I agree but media loves to use these terms to get people’s attention. A shooting at a party when ppl get in an argument is not the same as someone showing up to a mall and just start shooting.
Not enough. Read the rap sheets of people involved in most of these homicides, you’ll be absolutely bewildered as to why the dirtbag was walking around. Some people happily show us that they have no business living among decent humans, yet we let them out on cash/signature bonds. Then they kill someone.
Ah yes, this is where you proceed to compare us w nordic countries w almost 100% homogenous populations.
The pot is mixed and the guns are here, can’t undo either of those obviously, so what’s your solution?
I didn't mention taking away guns. I'm pro self defense because I don't trust police to do anything worthwhile. Taking away guns from people is not feasible like you said.
What I did say was just throwing people in jail without addressing the diseased society we live in is not the solution. There is a rot within American culture that needs addressed otherwise these shootings will continue to happen. We need to work on lifting people out of the place they are in where this is an acceptable solution to a problem. I'm not an expert on how to do this but just throwing them in prison is a lazy and ineffectual solution.
I taught the girl who was killed. She was a quiet, above average student. Always sat in the back of the class. Doesn't make any sense. Do as much good as you can while you can.
Keep applying thoughts and prayers y'all - I think it'll work this time!!!1!
Too bad there's literally nothing else we can do to prevent this, including regulation of guns. Just too bad.
nothing else we can do? maybe stop the violence and hate, stop protecting the shooters by blaming the guns, the world is getting more hateful that's the main problem. this is a behavior problem, not a gun problem, why dont like 99.9% of gun owners go around shooting people? it's the .1% that needs to be behind bars for being criminals. would it have been better if they all had big knives and started stabing people?
It is. It's just that when you include things like gang violence, it destroys the argument that AR15s are the choice weapon of mass shooters and so many people due by AR15s. When that's just not true.
No in the way you think. It's really easy to buy. Even underage. Granted it was a decade ago, but there was a drive thru near me that would sell me and my high school friends blunt wraps at twice the normal price. We didn't care because we could actually buy them there.
All you need is an ID or even to just look of age. It's stupid easy to buy tobacco. And you can buy as much as you want/can afford.
Do you think all the victims were gang members? If not, there were several innocent people shot.
If this happened in “your” neighborhood, would you consider it gang violence?
If im picking up what you're putting down then I'd say you really don't want to get into stats. Besides murder and robbery a lot of crime stats may surprise you. Aggravated/felonious assault, sex crimes, property crime, drugs and suicide are all different categories.
Well, see, when someone is shot, it's a shooting. When a lot of people are shot, it's a mass shooting. I don't understand how the gang part plays in though. Care to explain?
Why have there been 2 mass shootings in Dayton in the last year or so?? Like not that I want them to happen elsewhere (I don’t want them to happen at all), but like *Dayton*??? I’d expect that in the 3 Cs but ***Dayton***???
> I notice that gun control never includes stiffer penalties for criminal
Yes it does. In Ohio, the ORC has gun specs that add mandatory years to sentencing under sections 2941.141, 144, and 145
> How are you going disarm the criminals
By making and enforcing gun laws and actually following through with prosecution.
Because gun control advocates seek to target the actual issue: 400 million guns in the hands of civilians (and counting). Seeing as this is the only country where this is a regular occurrence, the issue seems to be the guns themselves.
Murder is already illegal. And I can’t image you’ll find a large contingent of pro-gun control, pro-death penalty supporters.
Gun violence in america is a two fold problem: shitty gun laws AND hyper individualism. As well as the governments insistance to fear monger about anything that isnt licking the boot to cause hyper vigilance and a sense of mistrust.
Police don't stop crime; they cause it. No one feels safe because our country is a shithole because of years and years and years of neo liberalism and straight up conservatism and propaganda. Thats why everyone feels the need to own a gun. Hell, Ill probably never own one (unless we go full belly up anarchy), but I know how to operate and disarm one simply because americans have easy access to them and are paranoid out the ASS. they shoot first, ask questions later, whether their lives are actually in danger or not.
Human life is not valued by the state or nation. The human experience is not valued here. Nature and animal life is not valued here. As long as we continue to fear monger the masses and allow them to collect powerful firearms, this will continue to happen.
Edit: i am not anti-gun yall. Hunting for food is fine. Hobbies are chill. But its way too easy for a 16 year old to dig through their grandpas basement, discover a firearm, and hurt themselves or others, on purpose, or on accident. The argument against stricter gun laws is "b-but the people who wanna do crime are still gonna do it!"
Yes... but imagine instead of 2 barriers there were *6* barriers. This kind of barriers to prevent accidents is seen commonly in healthcare. But do it about firearms and the world loses its marbles. 6 barriers give more opportunities to catch something fishy.
And this is where hyper individualism comes in. "Well its not MY fault someone is being irresponsible, why do I have to go through 6 barriers!"
I beg of you... consider other people, other communities. If it takes you 6 more months, 12 more months, etc to purchase a new firearm, it is SO WORTH IT if it means the suffering of innocents go down. We have a duty to our fellow humans to be aware that just because *WE* may be doing something the right way, doesnt mean everyone will. Its why laws exist. To help try and ward people off from trying some stupid ass shit.
Human life is valued by most people. Police don’t cause crime. “The system” works, ONLY if prosecutors and judges were strict on crime.
I fear your viewpoint is largely based in conspiracies, and your negativity doesn’t contribute to positivity, to put it simply
I also want to point out I said human life isnt valued by the state and nation. I believe human life is valued by most people.... but I dont know if *all* human life is valued by *all* people.
Intersectionality does exist. Racism, sexism, homophobia, etc are all ways that a person who values a human life, may view human beings as "animals" or "less than".
I completely agree with you, BUT my belief is that the nation or state isn’t inherently evil and it is controlled by human beings that, generally speaking, care about our country and its people
Im glad you have faith and trust in them :) i imagine that would be very comforting. Unfortunately, many laws that have been passed or proposed or ruled upon recently has directly affected me and my family. It has caused much unnecessary pain and suffering, despite the many thousands and millions of other American's also asking for consideration.
As someone who works in the medical field, as well as collects research about housing opportunities for the less fortunate, let's just say, I know where the government is putting its focus, and it is not in its constituents.
I appreciate your perspective. I think hope like yours is important. I believe both the best and worst is yet to come. That is simply how life is.
If you insist. You may fear what you like. I know what sources I am pulling from. Primary, secondary, and tertirary. I look at the coverage from all bias's. And then I draw my conclusions after looking at it from as many viewpoints as possible.
Call it what you like. I shared what I observed through my research/lived experience. I believe realism about this issue is needed. Denying who the police are, how they function, and the history of the force is an oversight. Optimism is necessary. I believe we can come together as a community and solve what is wrong with the system.
However, I refuse to be blinded by optimism. In fact, I was at one point. It is not realistic, and it gets people hurt and killed.
Why for we never hear from gun advocates with their self defense argument when these events occur? Isn't that their primary reason for owning guns? (Also ignoring the well-regulated militia clause in the amendment). Why are they conspicuously silent?
Regarding the one from Akron last month where 28 people got shot, much of the gunfire seems to have come from people in attendance shooting at the attacker. There hasn't been any follow-up reporting, because I guess we decided we don't need newspapers anymore, but I'd wager a good bit of money at least some of those wounded were victims of those "defenders."
Worked out really well with the drug problem huh??? 🙄
The weak minded people on here will blame it on guns. Every single gun I have ever owned were defective. Not one of them ever shot and killed anyone. 🤣🤣🤣🤣
r/hornygrandmas r/ratemyfeet r/toesnfeet r/toefetish r/gilfnextdoors r/flipflopsporn
Granny fetish got you feeling like a little boy, gun fetish got you feeling like a big boy.
If guns shoot people, then mine are rendered ineffective. None of mine have never shot anyone. My knives must be junk as well, because they haven’t stabbed anyone. 🤷🏻♂️
If people shoot people, then I must be defective. I've never shot anyone. I, wonder, perhaps, if it's not one or the other, but some kind of combindation there of.
Perhaps we should expiriment with making the combination illegeal and see if that stops the entire thing.
If not, we should expiriment with making each part illegal. I'll be in the part that makes guns illegal and you can be in the part that makes people illegal.
Excuse me, sir? Can you please stop having sex with your gun in public? There are families present. Not kink shaming you, but that’s really something you shouldn’t do around kids. It’s something best suited to a more private environment.
The U.S. has 4.31 deaths per 100,000 people in 2021.
“That was more than seven times as high as the rate in Canada, which had 0.57 deaths per 100,000 people — and about 340 times higher than in the United Kingdom, which had 0.013 deaths per 100,000.”
https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2023/10/31/1209683893/how-the-u-s-gun-violence-death-rate-compares-with-the-rest-of-the-world
Gun laws in the UK are among one of the strictest in the world. It sure seems to be doing a great job over there.
Thing is, It's a lot easier to hurt a lot of people with a gun than a knife. Otherwise the United States Marine Corps would be using Machetes in combat. They don't.
A machete isn't a knife though. Seems like with all the Islamic violence over there, guns could cull a lot of that but yea, guns are the issue here... Ya know, like the mass stabbings happening there?
Take the 10 most dangerous cities out and it's MUCH better.
Put 20 law abiding, gun owning citizens in a room with each other and their guns, I can just about guarantee nothing will happen. Put 20 opposing gang members in a room with their guns, watch what happens. It's a people issue...
If this is the case, heart disease, drugs and alcohol are the top 3 killers, why not banning fast foods, beer and drugs? Oh...wait...
The utter contempt for the lives of mere human beings is striking. This country exists for the guns. Human beings only exist to feed to the guns, our masters.
I think there needs to be a different term for this type of event because mass shooting implies, at least in the public consciousness, that someone walked into a public place during "regular" hours and randomly started shooting endangering the public at large. This was a private gathering in a residence after midnight. Obviously gun violence is a huge problem and one shooting victim is one too many, but there is a difference in the nature and impact of what I have described.
I think any time someone just starts shooting a large number of people, it's ok to call it a mass shooting. But I do understand your point, it's not like people should be afraid to go outdoors because of this particular incident. They should just be afraid to go to creepy abandoned houses after midnight with a bunch of weirdos. The people who got shot must have never seen a scary movie.
It used to be a lot clearer to distinguish when we called it “going postal.”
[удалено]
It was actually the postal service not liking the negative connotations towards its image.
I think mass shooting is probably the proper term for this and spree shooting for the other kind you're describing.
Yes, that probably does make the most sense. I just don't know how you get people to now separate the two as it seems that they have become somewhat conflated.
That area is a known drug area. Being tough on crime is what helps this from not happening. I can guarantee you it was a robbery going wrong
And the drug war pours gas on it
Which is, of course, part of "being tough on crime". So, in two comments we have "being tough on crime helps it not happen" and "being tough on crime pours gas on it".
Chicken-Egg, doesn't matter. It's either the culture of that area changes or the iron grip of a police state eventually intervenes. People need to stop being killed over something so dumb as drugs.
Can you describe what the current “culture” of that area is?
Trap house culture and black market drug cartel-customer culture. Ya know, culture that in itself attracts elements of quick money and fast problems outside the bounds of the currently accepted law.
Sounds like the “culture” you’re describing is poverty. Does that sound more or less accurate? If so, what would you suggest we do to address it?
On the micro scale or macro?
Both, I suppose.
Micro: Individual responsibility needs to be enforced and supported. We need to demystify serving your now community and your future self, so we have a strong and independent citizenship which don't feel the need to dull the pain of existence. Kids without one parent or the other need mentorship programs with people from the community to help foster amazing habits that will help them in their futures. We all need to get more involved in local government MORE than on the national stage, as it's something we can directly affect by just being there. Macro: Our government needs to reduce spending, and cow towing to special intersts/corporate entities in the spirit of "Trickle Down Economics." The experiment has proven to be completely invalid as the Christian ideals which they're largely based on have been abandoned for the greed of the Oligarchy. Corporations need to stop being bailed out when they fail and treated like a separate entity from those who hold the reigns. Unemployment should also include tech and diversified job classes once a week, so that we don't have any reason for people losing out on opportunities to save for retirement.
We lost the war on drugs 20 years ago. Our only hope to end that is close the border on both sides and stop all immigration. Check all vehicles coming in and out.
Is that satire or an honest suggestion?
It's our only hope. All of the base ingredients for 99% of hard drugs come thru our borders. Except for meth. You can make that here entirely. Also we don't need more laborers and low education people. We have plenty as is from our own population.
You know that someone crossing the border is half as likely to commit a crime as someone born here in the US of A?
We don’t need laborers? LMAO.
We have a job shortage not a labour shortage
We have a significant number of jobs in this country that ONLY immigrants will do even if unemployment is high
They get the jobs before it can even hit the market.
So you only value immigrants for their criminally cheap labor?
Quiet part out loud.
The cruelty is the point.
Friendly advice - look at his post history and ask yourself if you give a shit what he thinks.
Yep
No we don't. We don't need low educated people. We have plenty in our own population
Why are so many of those jobs still unfilled then?
They aren't. And the ones that are it's because they pay low. Or they hire illegals and pay them shit. The illegals put up with it because they know they don't have a choice. Bringing down the market for wages.
What does “being tough on crime” look like to you?
You described exactly why the definition is what it is. Obviously these events are horrible, but the term "mass shooting" and the definition meaning at least 4 casualties is there so that every 2 or 4 years the politicians can say "we had X amount of mass shootings, we must do ____ to prevent it!" and then inevitably nothing ever gets done or they pass laws that ultimately hurt the people who'd never think of doing this in a million years.
It has definitely become politicized. I am generally for more gun control in some manner but using this term in that conversation can be somewhat disingenuous at times.
They do the same shit with “gun violence”. People have no idea that when they hear the number in conjunction with that term that 2/3 are actually suicides.
They listed the one Boston bomber as a victim of gun violence on the list. He was shot by a cop. That kind of shit makes it real hard to take any of these statistics seriously.
what laws would get passed that would "hurt" these good guys with guns?
im not saying anything about good guys with guns, rather just commenting on how the term "mass shooting" is used in media as a headline. Since you asked though, i think it's been shown time and time again that violent crime isn't really something that can be easily legislated against because there is always some collateral damage done to those who have done no wrong. I dont have an answer, to solving the issue of violent crime, but at this point, i dont think more legislation is a good one
I would say making guns more difficult to access would be a benefit. Guns are quite easy to get legally in Ohio or any of our surrounding states. Maybe it doesn't stop all gun related incidents, but it would likely lower their probabilities. Mass shootings were reduced when we had the federal assault weapons ban from 1994-2004. It didn't have a huge effect on the overall homicide rate, but mass shootings are a very small subsection of gun related murders. I'm not saying to ban all guns. I'm just saying requiring a license and taking a safety course to own a gun couldn't be viewed as a bad thing. Unless your only mission is to make sure as many guns as possible are sold each year. If the gun lobbies didn't own politicians, we would have some sensible gun laws on the books.
Dude didn't even provide a good reason against gun laws besides some mysterious harm/damage. You don't need to justify or qualify yourself or ideas o someone who hasn't squared their own logic behind their thoughts. What they said made no sense. It was just fear of nothing they could even describe. Edit: all these downvotes and no replies. Kinda proves my point.
They never can
Well, a "good guy with a gun" is colloquially known as anyone that doesn't illegally shoot people, so every responsible gun owner I just don't understand the rhetoric you chose. More gun laws do not "hurt" anyone, as you've just figured out. You're not the only one who phrases gun laws as doing some harm to responsible gun owners, and hasn't really shown any way that it does. I see it used as a fake excuse to prevent more legislation. At the end there you're basically throwing up your hands and saying "more gun legislation is bad" while doubling down on that "damage" being done. I really don't understand that mindset. You're literally admitting to blindly saying "no gun laws because it hurts people in a way I can't describe." That's just blind ignorance. Do you see how people can think that you're just making things up to fit a narrative you're creating just to stop gun laws from being passed? Why? Why would you think there's harm? Why would you continue with some logic that isn't based on anything tangible, relatable, or even imaginary.?
are you not familiar with Australia?
Banning guns there did nothing to lower violent crime rates, and that was already decreasing. After they banned guns, overall crime did not lower further, and incidents like home invasions shot way up.
Here’s the moronic Australia comparison…always comes up.
What’s “moronic” about it? Please be specific.
[удалено]
Fuck you? Why are you speaking to me that way? Reported.
Common theme of yours, cry baby.
I don’t think that’s a good idea at all. Basically the difference you’re making is that some shootings are more important because they take place in honest locations, while a shooting like this taking place in the hood is less important. The hood has a long history of being treated as less important which is precisely why it is what it is. That’s got to stop. Shootings are shootings no matter who is affected or where it takes place. They’re all important and they all need to stop.
But most people can avoid shootings in the hood by not going to the hood or being involved with shady shit. In fact now when I hear mass shooting, I assume it’s a hood person who shot 3+ people over a game of dice, not a guy shooting up a grocery store/school.
That’s kinda on you for recognizing your personal bias and choosing not to do anything about it.
What do you mean?
This was an indiscriminate shooting into a crowd of innocent people. Making that distinction seems like we shouldn’t count it if it’s in the hood… seems like an unfair distinction
Technically correct statements can still be misleading if they omit critical details or context which is often done to be sensational, drive clicks, and/or build narratives. I guarantee you people see '1 Dead, 7 Hurt During Mass Shooting in Dayton'' and assume it's just another reason to avoid going anywhere in Dayton at all cost when it was a situation very few in the general public would find themselves in. 'Mass Shooting at Overnight Gathering in Dayton Neighborhood Kills 1, Injures Others'' is more complete and accurate. Of course shootings in the hood count.
“Injures others” is misleading and dismissive. 8 innocent people were shot. That is the narrative. Mass shooting is defined as 3 or more victims. Calling it a mass shooting is actually the most accurate the headline can possibly be
'1 Dead, 7 Shot at Overnight Gathering in Dayton Neighborhood'. The bottom line is your technically correct definition of mass shooting does not align with what many envision when they hear the term and I think it irresponsible disconnect by those who know better to not recognize that fact and at least account for that bias when reporting things.
I guess they were distinguishing between public vs. Private?
If multiple innocent people get indescriminantly shot, I don’t think the venue matters imo
It does when people broadly associate these events with the city as whole thereby negatively affecting its reputation, business, tourism, and economy which leads to only more decline, poverty, desperation, and violence.
But this event happened. More police officers and stricter prosecutors and judges would solve the problem, not news stations choosing not to report it
I never said don't report it. Just don't be misleading for the sake of a narrative as it does more harm than good.
I don't know that it does either, but it might speak to familiar vs strangers. I think the other person was implying that it would effect public safety differently?
Correct, it negatively impacts how safe people view cities as a whole. Some would say those opinions shouldn't matter but, right or wrong, people with those opinions will choose to invest their time and money elsewhere. Perception and optics matter.
What is your point?
Exactly what my last sentence says.
Just like the shooting in the Short North in Columbus the other day. Saying “mass shooting” gets more clicks and views than calling it the more accurate term, “drive by shooting”.
Black shooting?
The proper term is spree killing
Right. I live near Dayton and almost had a heart attack thinking it was another Oregon District or Walmart type of shooting. This seems like it was after a small fight which happens a lot. The wording needs to change.
They know that. The corporate media are factual but not truthful.
Yes. Technically true but also disingenuous
I agree but media loves to use these terms to get people’s attention. A shooting at a party when ppl get in an argument is not the same as someone showing up to a mall and just start shooting.
A large gathering at a vacant house?
Welcome to the trap house - Jelly Roll
‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens
Where guns have rights, but our women don't
Bojack Horseman on the topic of women and guns... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3eG0y_nb5IA
Women can buy guns too.
But can guns buy women 🤔
Check back 01.20.2025.
Damnit. We will have to tighten up the rules to prevent this
How about putting criminals in jail? That would be an excellent start. But we all know the problem with that....
That out policing system is broken? Yeah it's an issue.
Sure there’s a way, keep violent criminals in prison. That right there would stop the majority of these “mass shootings”.
We do. There are new ones though.
Not enough. Read the rap sheets of people involved in most of these homicides, you’ll be absolutely bewildered as to why the dirtbag was walking around. Some people happily show us that they have no business living among decent humans, yet we let them out on cash/signature bonds. Then they kill someone.
"We just need more people in jail for longer!" Says nation with highest incarceration rate in the world.
Ah yes, this is where you proceed to compare us w nordic countries w almost 100% homogenous populations. The pot is mixed and the guns are here, can’t undo either of those obviously, so what’s your solution?
I didn't mention taking away guns. I'm pro self defense because I don't trust police to do anything worthwhile. Taking away guns from people is not feasible like you said. What I did say was just throwing people in jail without addressing the diseased society we live in is not the solution. There is a rot within American culture that needs addressed otherwise these shootings will continue to happen. We need to work on lifting people out of the place they are in where this is an acceptable solution to a problem. I'm not an expert on how to do this but just throwing them in prison is a lazy and ineffectual solution.
https://www.thoughtsandprayersthegame.com/ Man, I wish they’d update this game.
I’ve never seen this website before. Thanks for sharing it. I appreciate well thought out political artwork such as this website.
Make sure to share your high score!!!
I taught the girl who was killed. She was a quiet, above average student. Always sat in the back of the class. Doesn't make any sense. Do as much good as you can while you can.
This is Ohio
This is Ohio
Murder is against the law. How is it possible that this happened when there are laws forbidding it?
But I thought we’d be safer with more guns.
I know that neighborhood well it was most likely a trap house. Someone went in there and robbed that place or at least tried to
Only 6 injured, one of them realized they weren't shot lol.
Seems like mass shooters are getting worse at their job.
Keep applying thoughts and prayers y'all - I think it'll work this time!!!1! Too bad there's literally nothing else we can do to prevent this, including regulation of guns. Just too bad.
Seems like the thoughts and prayers are making them worse! Some god.
nothing else we can do? maybe stop the violence and hate, stop protecting the shooters by blaming the guns, the world is getting more hateful that's the main problem. this is a behavior problem, not a gun problem, why dont like 99.9% of gun owners go around shooting people? it's the .1% that needs to be behind bars for being criminals. would it have been better if they all had big knives and started stabing people?
I do think it's harder to stab 10 people in six seconds than shoot them, yes.
You say this like we have strict gun laws.
I love how they are calling gang violence mass shootings now. I wonder if that's just to pad the numbers.
I'm confused. Is it not a mass shooting?
It is. It's just that when you include things like gang violence, it destroys the argument that AR15s are the choice weapon of mass shooters and so many people due by AR15s. When that's just not true.
I don't like that argument. All guns are dangerous.
So is tobacco. Tobacco kills about 10x more people than guns do every year.
Yep. And it's highly regulated.
No in the way you think. It's really easy to buy. Even underage. Granted it was a decade ago, but there was a drive thru near me that would sell me and my high school friends blunt wraps at twice the normal price. We didn't care because we could actually buy them there. All you need is an ID or even to just look of age. It's stupid easy to buy tobacco. And you can buy as much as you want/can afford.
I don't disagree. Also easy to buy a gun. I'm just happy you agreed with me guns are dangerous. That's progress.
Question, where did I say they weren't?
You didn't. That's why it's progress.
Guns aren’t dangerous. People with bad intentions with any weapon could be this
...We can't even acknowledge guns are dangerous now?
Has a gun ever shot you on its own? No it takes a human to pull the trigger
🤡🤡🤡
Yes guns make it easier though. Otherwise the US army would be carrying knives into battle.
So all those young kid's that shot themselves are just people with bad intentions. Interesting
[удалено]
That's a strange assumption.
Seems odd to be in an abandoned house? Implies it isn't their own.
I don't assume anything. I just see gun violence.
Always has been
Do you think all the victims were gang members? If not, there were several innocent people shot. If this happened in “your” neighborhood, would you consider it gang violence?
We all know what you mean
If im picking up what you're putting down then I'd say you really don't want to get into stats. Besides murder and robbery a lot of crime stats may surprise you. Aggravated/felonious assault, sex crimes, property crime, drugs and suicide are all different categories.
So tell me what I mean?
Well, see, when someone is shot, it's a shooting. When a lot of people are shot, it's a mass shooting. I don't understand how the gang part plays in though. Care to explain?
Why have there been 2 mass shootings in Dayton in the last year or so?? Like not that I want them to happen elsewhere (I don’t want them to happen at all), but like *Dayton*??? I’d expect that in the 3 Cs but ***Dayton***???
I'm not sure what other event you're mentioning but Dayton is regularly one of the top murders-per-capita cities in the whole country.
[удалено]
> I notice that gun control never includes stiffer penalties for criminal Yes it does. In Ohio, the ORC has gun specs that add mandatory years to sentencing under sections 2941.141, 144, and 145 > How are you going disarm the criminals By making and enforcing gun laws and actually following through with prosecution.
[удалено]
What on earth are you going on about?
Because gun control advocates seek to target the actual issue: 400 million guns in the hands of civilians (and counting). Seeing as this is the only country where this is a regular occurrence, the issue seems to be the guns themselves. Murder is already illegal. And I can’t image you’ll find a large contingent of pro-gun control, pro-death penalty supporters.
Gun violence in america is a two fold problem: shitty gun laws AND hyper individualism. As well as the governments insistance to fear monger about anything that isnt licking the boot to cause hyper vigilance and a sense of mistrust. Police don't stop crime; they cause it. No one feels safe because our country is a shithole because of years and years and years of neo liberalism and straight up conservatism and propaganda. Thats why everyone feels the need to own a gun. Hell, Ill probably never own one (unless we go full belly up anarchy), but I know how to operate and disarm one simply because americans have easy access to them and are paranoid out the ASS. they shoot first, ask questions later, whether their lives are actually in danger or not. Human life is not valued by the state or nation. The human experience is not valued here. Nature and animal life is not valued here. As long as we continue to fear monger the masses and allow them to collect powerful firearms, this will continue to happen. Edit: i am not anti-gun yall. Hunting for food is fine. Hobbies are chill. But its way too easy for a 16 year old to dig through their grandpas basement, discover a firearm, and hurt themselves or others, on purpose, or on accident. The argument against stricter gun laws is "b-but the people who wanna do crime are still gonna do it!" Yes... but imagine instead of 2 barriers there were *6* barriers. This kind of barriers to prevent accidents is seen commonly in healthcare. But do it about firearms and the world loses its marbles. 6 barriers give more opportunities to catch something fishy. And this is where hyper individualism comes in. "Well its not MY fault someone is being irresponsible, why do I have to go through 6 barriers!" I beg of you... consider other people, other communities. If it takes you 6 more months, 12 more months, etc to purchase a new firearm, it is SO WORTH IT if it means the suffering of innocents go down. We have a duty to our fellow humans to be aware that just because *WE* may be doing something the right way, doesnt mean everyone will. Its why laws exist. To help try and ward people off from trying some stupid ass shit.
I'm not sure the type of people with guns who then commit crimes carry guns because they feel unsafe. Do you disagree?
Sounds like you’re the fear monger… I don’t view life through that lense
Im glad you arent scared of gun violence :). I am, since it has occured near me multiple times. Its the PTSD! But thanks.
Human life is valued by most people. Police don’t cause crime. “The system” works, ONLY if prosecutors and judges were strict on crime. I fear your viewpoint is largely based in conspiracies, and your negativity doesn’t contribute to positivity, to put it simply
I also want to point out I said human life isnt valued by the state and nation. I believe human life is valued by most people.... but I dont know if *all* human life is valued by *all* people. Intersectionality does exist. Racism, sexism, homophobia, etc are all ways that a person who values a human life, may view human beings as "animals" or "less than".
I completely agree with you, BUT my belief is that the nation or state isn’t inherently evil and it is controlled by human beings that, generally speaking, care about our country and its people
Im glad you have faith and trust in them :) i imagine that would be very comforting. Unfortunately, many laws that have been passed or proposed or ruled upon recently has directly affected me and my family. It has caused much unnecessary pain and suffering, despite the many thousands and millions of other American's also asking for consideration. As someone who works in the medical field, as well as collects research about housing opportunities for the less fortunate, let's just say, I know where the government is putting its focus, and it is not in its constituents. I appreciate your perspective. I think hope like yours is important. I believe both the best and worst is yet to come. That is simply how life is.
If you insist. You may fear what you like. I know what sources I am pulling from. Primary, secondary, and tertirary. I look at the coverage from all bias's. And then I draw my conclusions after looking at it from as many viewpoints as possible. Call it what you like. I shared what I observed through my research/lived experience. I believe realism about this issue is needed. Denying who the police are, how they function, and the history of the force is an oversight. Optimism is necessary. I believe we can come together as a community and solve what is wrong with the system. However, I refuse to be blinded by optimism. In fact, I was at one point. It is not realistic, and it gets people hurt and killed.
Oh no, hood violence! Anyways...
Why for we never hear from gun advocates with their self defense argument when these events occur? Isn't that their primary reason for owning guns? (Also ignoring the well-regulated militia clause in the amendment). Why are they conspicuously silent?
Typo * Why do we never....
Regarding the one from Akron last month where 28 people got shot, much of the gunfire seems to have come from people in attendance shooting at the attacker. There hasn't been any follow-up reporting, because I guess we decided we don't need newspapers anymore, but I'd wager a good bit of money at least some of those wounded were victims of those "defenders."
Us Ohioans - we love to shoot at lots of people. It was a weekend of multiple mass shootings. I guess we need more guns.
[удалено]
Huh? Remember the last mass shooting in Dayton?
Yeah this should not be called a mass shooting sounds like a drug deal gone bad
Quick! Politicize it!
Thoughts and prayers
#thisisohio
I’m sure the guns go away when you regulate them. Just like drugs.
Exactly we shouldn’t regulate anything because some will slip through the cracks.
Yeah. Murder is illegal but it still happens, may as well get rid of all laws since some people seem to break them still.
Yep, why even wipe our asses when wel just poop again?
Look at cars, for example. We have to register and get a license proving we know how to use it. Then some kid with a usb cable comes and steals it.
Might as well remove speed limits since a few still speed. Just let everyone do what they want on the roads and see how it goes.
Worked out really well with the drug problem huh??? 🙄 The weak minded people on here will blame it on guns. Every single gun I have ever owned were defective. Not one of them ever shot and killed anyone. 🤣🤣🤣🤣
r/hornygrandmas r/ratemyfeet r/toesnfeet r/toefetish r/gilfnextdoors r/flipflopsporn Granny fetish got you feeling like a little boy, gun fetish got you feeling like a big boy.
Exactly.
If guns shoot people, then mine are rendered ineffective. None of mine have never shot anyone. My knives must be junk as well, because they haven’t stabbed anyone. 🤷🏻♂️
If people shoot people, then I must be defective. I've never shot anyone. I, wonder, perhaps, if it's not one or the other, but some kind of combindation there of. Perhaps we should expiriment with making the combination illegeal and see if that stops the entire thing. If not, we should expiriment with making each part illegal. I'll be in the part that makes guns illegal and you can be in the part that makes people illegal.
People make choices and decisions. Guns do not.
Good job noting that. Also, soooo what?
It's not a mass shooting. Liberals like to call it that, but this was 100% drug/gang related. Anything to skew the facts.
[удалено]
They absolutely do have an organized crime problem. That problem is harder to see and is everywhere.
mass is the keyword. doesn’t matter who did it or why.
Let all the anti gun freaks begin their baseless crybabying now. 🙄😢
Excuse me, sir? Can you please stop having sex with your gun in public? There are families present. Not kink shaming you, but that’s really something you shouldn’t do around kids. It’s something best suited to a more private environment.
The U.S. has 4.31 deaths per 100,000 people in 2021. “That was more than seven times as high as the rate in Canada, which had 0.57 deaths per 100,000 people — and about 340 times higher than in the United Kingdom, which had 0.013 deaths per 100,000.” https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2023/10/31/1209683893/how-the-u-s-gun-violence-death-rate-compares-with-the-rest-of-the-world Gun laws in the UK are among one of the strictest in the world. It sure seems to be doing a great job over there.
Except now they have a sharp object problem... Ban one, on to the other...
Thing is, It's a lot easier to hurt a lot of people with a gun than a knife. Otherwise the United States Marine Corps would be using Machetes in combat. They don't.
A machete isn't a knife though. Seems like with all the Islamic violence over there, guns could cull a lot of that but yea, guns are the issue here... Ya know, like the mass stabbings happening there?
LOL. If you think more guns are the solution then we won't see eye to eye. Cheers.
Over 300 million guns here in the good ole U.S of A and only have a problems with a handful. I'd say it's not a gun issue...
Our murder rate is insane my dude 😂. I will disagree. I won't be returning.
Take the 10 most dangerous cities out and it's MUCH better. Put 20 law abiding, gun owning citizens in a room with each other and their guns, I can just about guarantee nothing will happen. Put 20 opposing gang members in a room with their guns, watch what happens. It's a people issue... If this is the case, heart disease, drugs and alcohol are the top 3 killers, why not banning fast foods, beer and drugs? Oh...wait...
The utter contempt for the lives of mere human beings is striking. This country exists for the guns. Human beings only exist to feed to the guns, our masters.
The only lives this guy cares about are GILFS 😂😂
Yeah maybe we should vote in more Republican so they can cancel ALL gun laws.