BTW: my sources:
School shootings:
I counted:
Santana HS: 2
John McDonogh HS: 1
Red Lake HS: 5
Platte Canyon HS: 1
West Nickel Mines School: 5
Henry Ford HS: 1
Chardon HS: 3
Sandy Hook ES: 20
Reynolds HS: 1
Townville ES: 1
Freeman HS: 1
Aztec HS: 2
Marshall County HS: 2
M Stoneman Douglas HS: 14
Santa Fe HS: 8
STEM School Highlands Ranch: 1
Saugus HS: 2
Pleasantville HS: 1
Oxford HS: 4
Maybe, but it seems accurate AFAICT.
Russian bots use facts too. Not always, but sometimes.
Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections
In 1937 SCOTUS unanimously ruled poll taxes were fine (Breedlove v. Suttles).
Then in 1966 (couple years after the 24th amendment was ratified) declared them unconditional due to 14th amendment. One of the justices from the 1937 case was still on the court for the 1966 case (obviously one of the dissenting votes).
The lightning v school shooting seems like an interesting but useless piece of information designed to distract from the fact that itâs easy to get guns and shoot up a bunch of school kids.
itâs certainly the easiest way. but I suppose itâs also easy to just run over kids with your truck when school is over, but probably hard to navigate during rush hours
There will undoubtedly be stupid comments at the NRA Convention by many Republicans, including Trump, but all that their supporters will remember is that they are protecting their gun rights and they are praying for the affected families. Nothing negative will stick to these yokels.
I will explain this nuance to you with the assumption that your 4 posts on the subject are an innocent perusal of a tangent. It does not matter whether lightning strikes kill more kids than active shooters. Equating school shootings to lightning strikes implies they are similar in nature and cause. Lightning strikes originate from a natural phenomenon which we as humans can mitigate but not stop or control. School shootings originate from the social policy of gun ownership which we as humans have complete control over. We can rephrase the comparison lightning strikes to school shootings to be âgun ownership is just like the weather sometimes itâs bad.â
You may make the distinction between the natural phenomenon of the weather and the controllable social policy of gun ownership, but the casual reader will not. The casual readerâs brain will make the comparison and accept it (gun ownership is like the weather). This is marketing an idea without ever stating the idea, thus Nick equating it to a Russian bot.
I think the tangent can be drawn if we think gun deaths are as fortuitous as lightning strikes.
If gun deaths are 100% preventable, then I agree, 1 gun death is too many even if 5% of the population die by lightning strikes every year.
However, I think we can agree that gun deaths are not 100% preventable, even if we take every precaution, have the best mental facilities, best gun control laws, etc.
Thereâs a video circulating with a 13 year old kid going into stores to buy alcohol, cigarettes, lottery tickets, or guns. Unsurprisingly the kid was turned away for all other purchases but the gun. How staged it is, I donât know.
âGun deaths are not 100% preventable.â Wrong. Eliminate all guns eliminates gun deaths.
âeven if we take every precaution,â see above for a precaution you did not consider. if you add the clause âassuming we allow gun ownershipâ your point stands.
Note: I am not advocating for eliminating all guns or gun ownership just pointing out how the phrasing of topics generates acceptance of bad results.
Yeah, but thatâs about as reasonable as eliminating all clouds (or alcohol, if you so wish). Iâm talking about realistic measures here.
Are lightning strike deaths significantly higher in the US than other 1st world countries?
And more people die from car accidents.
Neither fact is relevant to a conversation about how the many simple things we could do to stop the slaughter of children.
Nor is this tangent by you relevant to the actual conversation being had about senseless gun violence.
But seriously, why twig up this thread with that crap?
I donât think this is the thread to do it for sure. Itâs insensitive.
But itâs an interesting thought experiment in a vacuum.
There are also a lot of kids that get shot each year when they are not in school, which makes Republicans push to harden our schools rather than other look for other opportunities to reform gun laws an even bigger joke.
But the number of lives SAVED by introducing seat belt legislation might be a relevant conversation. There was a lot of pushback about individual freedoms being trampled upon when mandatory seat belt laws were introduced but it is generally accepted now. And a lot of lives were saved.
I donât think lightning deaths are anything like this, at all, but itâs pretty reasonable to talk about the fact that school shooting are extraordinarily rare.
And comparing to lightning is an idiomatic way of saying that something is rare.
I think itâs also reasonable to counter that this is so horrible that it makes everyone feel sick, rare or not.
What I get from twigâs post is there have been very few deaths from school shootings in the past 20 years. I am shocked that the number is only just above 100 (now). It tells me that security measures that exist are close to sufficient. The execution of those measures in the Uvalde shootings are debatable.
This does not mean there is not a problem with access to guns in the US, as deaths in schools are not the only important measure. The number of school incidents is disturbing, as is overall gun violence. I am fine with mandatory waiting periods for guns, compromise on which types of guns/technology should be on the market, etc. There needs to be real concrete propsals. However, millions of people will still be up in arms (pun not intended) when another mass shooting takes place. They are very tragic but the will occur.