The All Time Greatest Random Mass Shooting Thread

I don't give two shits about the NRA, and the idea that avoiding bias would be a priority is hysterical.

I didn’t think so. It’s been a long time since I fired one.

Well, not if you're a scientist, which I think we've established you fucking aren't.

For you and I.
For a 90 year old granny?
Where's the Mythbusters?

A .22 "kicks" about as much as a BB gun.

Let’s continue to push the lie that scientists don’t have biases or agendas.

Oh, yeah, that'd knock a granny down.

That's why there's double-blind tests, and peer review.
The whole machinery is set up to filter the human bullshit out.

Who? Be specific.

Let's prove whether there's a bias or an agenda before we accuse folk of having them.

If the funding was not contingent on the outcome, where's the bias?

I notice you aren't commenting on the NRA demanding the GOP block ANY funding for this, even though it could easily go to scientists who might be pro-gun. It's almost like they expect that even a pro-gun scientist couldn't spin the facts that hard.

I absolutely do have biases. However, as a data scientist, it isn't my job to skew results of an analysis in any way. It's only to show the breakdown of the data. That data, then, is published. Anyone can take that data and use it any way they want. This is where the individual must use their own ability to determine if an editorial is biased and whether or not they agree with the bias. The data, however, doesn't lie. Data is data. It is what it is. Biases and agendas are human things. Not data things.

Feinstein and Biden are the obvious, common knowledge examples. They have stated outright their goal of outright bans, and any firearms legislation they promote WILL be viewed with that lens.

Factual data can be presented in a way that leads to false conclusions, can be selectively cited to give the desired impression. Will we have access to the raw data and be allowed to review the collection process and the methods for compiling the resulting stats, or are we expected to be satisfied with a "summary" read on camera by a politician with an obvious agenda?

UA- I want to scrutinize this data down to the quarks and electrons!

Also UA- A pink-hair raped a guy with her pinky? I believe it.

People talk. All the time. It doesn’t mean shit. Is there legislation to ban guns? The reason is because people who talk about banning guns (in the US) are not taken seriously.

Also, Feinstein and Biden are not the majority of leftists. In fact, I know more leftists who own guns than right leaning voters. And I know A LOT of right leaning voters. Leftists just don’t feel the need to scream about it at the top of their lungs.

Exactly what I’m saying. Facts and data are absolute. They don’t have a bias. It’s people who use that data for their own agenda and biases that lie. As a citizen, it’s your job to find the data, the facts, and act on that, not bullshit others want you to believe.

Death toll is up to 10 people. That's less than an hour from where I live.

God bless America.

So long as folks like Paladin can continue to stroke their guns, there's no problem. It's not the law-abiding gun owners that are the problem, you see.

Just another patriotic American exercising his second amendment rights!

Move along.

I don't know anything about this website, but I think this is an interesting claim.

A self-defense system might make you feel safer, but the odds of experiencing a lethal home invasion are actually quite rare, according to Professor Harold Pollack, co-director of the University of Chicago's Crime Lab. In an interview with The Atlantic’s Ta-Nehisi Coates, Pollack said:

"The fear is also easily out of proportion to the threat. I had the Chicago police run the number on homicides. In 2011, precisely one homicide listed "burglary" as the motive. Nationwide, there are about 100 burglary-homicides every year. When you compare that to more than 18,000 gun suicides, the conclusions seem pretty obvious.”

This report also outlined the likelihood of falling victim to burglary in more tangible numbers. Think of 1,000 dwellings in your city. Out of those the rate of burglary while an occupant was home was 8 per 1,000 (in 2007); the rate of burglary of unoccupied dwellings was 21 per 1,000. Additionally, most residential break-ins happen during the day, not at night, when no one is likely to be home and to avoid confrontation and getting caught.

B&E might get you a couple years
B&E where the homeowner gets hurt or killed? say goodbye to the next 10-life.

shooting a burglar is bordering on incel fantasy bucket list territory.

And so the circle of guntards continues.

@Paladin is overjoyed.

It was a white supremacist attack on a black area of Buffalo. Police are officially calling it a hate crime.

Well, you can't infringe his second amendment rights.

FREEDUMB!!!1!