Countdown to the next mass shooting

[Dill]

(11-09-2017, 12:03 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: No, they'd be disingenuous.  Since the point flew a few miles over your head I'll explain further.  Many (most?)  women don't even know they're pregnant until after that four week period would be up.  If I have to explain even further I'll actually be disappointed in you.

Lol, were did "thousands" come in.  When was the last time "thousands" of people were killed in one mass shooting?  If you didn't have hyperbole your post count would be halved.

Uh, yeah.

Again, point flew right over your head.  You're going to get a crick in your neck if you're not careful.

You believe so because I am.

Wait, you just said I made a correct point that countered your assertion and in the next sentence ridiculed me for not having made a factual or informed point.  Did you go off your meds or something?

Looks like, in your rush to set up your scorecord and finally check off that big WIN, you forgot to check your impressions against what I actually wrote.  Not sure I should keep giving you rope, but here goes:

You made a "correct point" about homicides and illegal drugs which no one was contesting and which does not address any point I made. So yes, of course I will gladly grant you your "facts." And still wonder at your carelessly policing my posts before actually reading them.  Again.

In response to Neb's question--"But where's the outrage for the pain, suffering and deaths caused by alcohol every year which is much more than what guns cause?" I questioned the guns/alcohol analogy.

My answer: There is not concentrated public, national outrage over alcohol/alcoholism only because the effects of alcohol abuse are distributed over time and space--not in mass groupings--so they do not generate the media attention that mass shootings do.  If a drunk driver kills two people in Jonesville, NY, at 10 am and another dies of cirrhosis in Sacramento, CA, at 10:10, and third beats his wife to death in New Orleans at 10:15, there is often local outrage among families affected (and this even though "people like to get drunk/high") but it does not rise  to national attention.   (You said this was called "prohibition"?? That "fact" certainly flew over my head.)

But if, HYPOTHETICALLY, FOR THE SAKE OF ARGUMENT, a large group of alcohol-related deaths somehow occurred at once--thousands, hundreds, dozens--then I suggest HYPOTHETICALLY we would see something like the media attention which follows a mass shooting, especially if they occurred every other month--and I hasten to add now that we would see that outrage in my hypothetical mass instances "even though people like to get drunk/high" because we so frequently see it in all those typical individual instances mentioned above.   

So "thousands" came in with Neb's question and the number of alcohol-related deaths in the US each year (88,000 in the last year, according to the National Institute for Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism), but which occur mostly one at a time in many different places.   (And no, I don't recall a mass shooting of thousands in the U.S.--so you get another "fact.")

And sorry but I still don't see "extremism" in pro-choicers who are ok with abortion before four weeks.  "Extremism" is a historically variable and malleable term suitable for propaganda, but not for responsible analysis. How often do you see people called "extremist" by one group also calling everyone else "extremists"? So you don't see me using the term.