On the previous post, I was wondering how in the hell The Moms came up with the 24 school shootings for 2013. Bill Baldwin and Walt were kind enough to point out the link.
Same as with Slate and its list of people killed by guns and used by Illegal Mayors Against Guns, the Moms Demand follower used a list provided by the Daily Beast and let us say it brings the definition of creativity to the area of plain deception.
When you or anybody hears the expression “School Shooting” your mind immediately goes to a Columbine-Virginia Tech-Sandy Hook- type of attack: Gunman (men) going into a school and proceeding to massacre innocents. This is now ingrained deeply in the collective mind of this country. I am sure that both Moms Demand and The Daily Beast understand this fact, but they get deceptive in a “What the meaning of the word ‘Is’ is”. Here are some of the examples from The School Shootings You Didn’t Hear About—One Every Two Weeks Since Newtown.
- Gang shootings or suspected (2 cases)
- Suicide – No threat to anybody (5 cases)
- Suicide – Possible threat to others.
- Murder in front of a school while dropping kids off.
- One on One kills during sporting events (2 cases)
But I had to screen cap my favorites, specially the last two:
So basically, if it happened near the school building and there was a bullet involved, they call it a school shooting.
Is it so hard for these people to understand that they are hurting their already diminished reputation by pulling a stunt worthy of shysters in cheap polyester suits and loud ties? I don’t mind it one bit as it gives us more ammunition and people still undecided will feel betrayed by this idiocy.
And that is why we win.
Dang – I just went through and compiled it as well –
– first correction is that Mom’s came up with 28 so their 28 may have nothing to do with this list
Mom’s has never had fact on their side. It has always been about emotion, emotion for gun control, but since they can not separate the facts from emotion when the talk to the media/legislature they always come away looking like a lie with inflated stats and blood dancing.
I got five unsourced articles (hexes 5, 8, 14, 18, and 20),
Article says “Shootings that took place after hours on school grounds were not included.” But have included three during games (1, 7, 23 which is also a suicide).
The third cell, the homicide of Kristopher Smith, “Officials say the shooting has nothing to do with the school.”
Personally, I would not lump in college related shootings as “school shooting” (colleges are virtually cities unto themseles) of which they list 7 (including the Boston dirtbags), 2 of those are suicides (hex 19 may have been a terrorist wannabe with premature explodination in the dorms).
Throwing out the unsourced garbage, suicides, after hours events, and colleges,
x1 Shooting (no one shot)
x3 Shootings (someone shot)
x1 Shootings (homicide)
So if “shootings on school grounds when students are present” is not a good definition of “school shootings” then what is?
This is where we can present a good argument. Instead of being snarky or claiming victory, let’s be smart and define what a “school shooting” should actually be. We control the discussion and present intelligent and articulate talking points that make sense to readers.
An, fyi, any shooting on a school campus is more justification for armed teachers and officers on campus, so let’s make hay of that fact and not diminish those numbers. They can work for us.
School Shooting as I posted is already defined and is and unfortunate part of our culture.
I certainly agree that it should be defined what a “school shooting” should actually be.
Referring simply to ‘schools’ paints a picture that is just as misleading as referring to ‘children’ when the speaker/author includes teenagers, which they also include adults of 18 and 19; or shootings which most would probably take as someone actually shot somebody else, not suicides, or justifiable homicide, somebody trying to shoot somebody but missing, or discharge without intent to hit anybody.
Not arguing with anybody here, just the referenced article.
On the plus side, they’re no longer listing the Tsarnaev’s as “victims of gun violence”.
I’m a gun owner and CC permit holder. A friend told me the Mom’s FB page was interesting and that they were a reasonable group that wasn’t anti-gun, simply anti-violence. I checked it out and made three polite comments, one about the myth of the “gun show loophole” and one about gun registration in CT. I noted that I’m actually in favor of background checks, just not in favor of registration. I also mentioned that I think the open carry demonstrators tend to make gun owners look bad and I didn’t like their tactics. I was far more polite than most people on the site, calling gun owners “freaks” and “idiots”, etc. Wouldn’t you know, they blocked me and removed my posts. I guess even responsible gun owners aren’t welcome. Then I read their mission statement. Turns out they are just another anti-gun group more concerned with banning guns than actually preventing violence. It’s a shame that everything in this country is about “us vs. them”. No spirit of compromise or honest debate.