Hattip to Amanda Servello.

More to explorer


  1. I’m a bit confused here. I was led to believe mass shootings were, like racism and sexism, the exclusive domain of white men.

  2. I wonder what the source for this is. I mean, I’ve heard about this picture, but haven’t seen it. Sort of like a Bigfoot sighting. Now that I see it, I see just how naked the lies of the Press/Democrats are about the problem if this is true. I mean, it’s almost criminal falsehood at this point if this is accurate.

  3. Snopes, that left wing fact site, gave it a mixed rating which meant that the facts were true but there are other definitions of mass shootings.


    Bovine droppings! Going away the most common definition of mass shootings is four or more people. What this picture demonstrates is that most of the homicides in our country are a result of inner city gangs fighting each other over turf. The Dayton shootings, for example, in Chicago would be called a slow Saturday, and the El Paso shootings would be called a normal Saturday.

  4. Reminds me of when Shea was bringing up “japan doesn’t have these mass shootings” when Japan had JUST HAD a mass killings from an arson fire. That somehow didn’t count. You quick figure out that apparently in this world some deaths count for more than others…

    Yeah, I know the replies are already “well all those folks wouldn’t be shooting each other if we took away their guns.” Maybe we’d have better luck if we worried less about getting the guns out of the home and more about getting fathers into them.

  5. I live in Chicago: I have posted numerous times since El Paso/Dayton the broad definition of mass shootings, which is 4 or more victims in one place at one time. From June 1, 2019 until the Dayton incident, there were FIFTEEN mass shootings within the city limits of Chicago (more have happened since). Yet the memes I see are posted by social media “friends” many of them minorities, asking, “What do these shooters look like? #MAGA.” I hadn’t seen this meme yet but I responded that the Chicago shooters did not identify with a political group but I could cite neighborhoods. *****SILENCE*****. No one wants that information. It doesn’t fit the narrative.

  6. I think Snopes is right in pointing out that there is no hard definition as to what constitutes a mass shooting, while at the same time I would agree with those of you who think the broadest definition is the one that should be used. In the Snopes article they talk about how including gang violence can skew analyzing the motives of mass shooters as a whole, but I don’t share that concern. Obviously the motives for someone killing a bunch of people in a gang drive-by is going to be very different than that of a guy who takes an automatic weapon to a garlic festival, but the results both end up with people dead. It’s not hard to have two categories: gang-related mass shootings and non-gang-related mass shootings.

  7. The definition they’re attempting to gesture at, but can’t because to name it would show they’re playing fast and loose, is the active shooter subgroup of mass shooting– ie, “not part of another obvious crime such as murder/suicide, organized crime related violence, robbery or terrorism.”

    This is such a tiny subset of a tiny number of deaths that it’s crazy, and it also selects for basically “those who want to kill but don’t have many opportunities in normal life,”– which happens to be the basically bourgeoise or easily caricatured as the same. (A theme that pops up in other crimes is that frequently the killer just really likes killing.)

    The ultimate safe target.

    That their solutions have actually resulted in places being more likely to be targeted is somehow unworthy of consideration.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: