White Supremecists Slay 49 in NZ Mosques

[Belsnickel]

(03-20-2019, 10:59 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Yes, they do it to distort the numbers.

Yes and no. 9/11 was an outlier, and an extreme one at that. Including it in the data set would do more to distort the numbers than starting it after. However, it's not a standard time frame for analysis. Looking at yearly, 5-year, and 10-year numbers is good for looking at trends. Using 9/11 as a mark like that is illogical.

(03-20-2019, 10:59 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Here's the thing though, 92% of what number?  If that number is 50k over ten years then alarm bells should be ringing.  If it's 92% of 500 over a decade then my original point stands, this isn't the problem we're being told it is.  A problem, yes, but not the national emergency it's being portrayed as.

But now we get into my overall point. In the US, right-wing extremism is the larger threat within our borders versus other forms of it. Since there is a global rise in right-wing extremist violence, which is also the case here, then it is the larger threat. Honestly, focusing on these events is much like focusing on mass shootings to talk about gun control. That's not how most firearm deaths occur, and right-wing extremism (or extremism of any ideological sort) isn't how most homicides occur. But these are the things that grab headlines so they get the attention.