[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

"International court’s attack on Israel a sign of the free world’s moral collapse" "Pete Hegseth Is Right for the DOD" "Why Our Constitution Secures Liberty, Not Democracy" Woodworking and Construction Hacks "CNN: Reporters Were Crying and Hugging in the Hallways After Learning of Matt Gaetz's AG Nomination" "NEW: Democrat Officials Move to Steal the Senate Race in Pennsylvania, Admit to Breaking the Law" "Pete Hegseth Is a Disruptive Choice for Secretary of Defense. That’s a Good Thing" Katie Britt will vote with the McConnell machine Battle for Senate leader heats up — Hit pieces coming from Thune and Cornyn. After Trump’s Victory, There Can Be No Unity Without A Reckoning Vivek Ramaswamy, Dark-horse Secretary of State Candidate Megyn Kelly has a message for Democrats. Wait for the ending. Trump to choose Tom Homan as his “Border Czar” "Trump Shows Demography Isn’t Destiny" "Democrats Get a Wake-Up Call about How Unpopular Their Agenda Really Is" Live Election Map with ticker shows every winner. Megyn Kelly Joins Trump at His Final PA Rally of 2024 and Explains Why She's Supporting Him South Carolina Lawmaker at Trump Rally Highlights Story of 3-Year-Old Maddie Hines, Killed by Illegal Alien GOP Demands Biden, Harris Launch Probe into Twice-Deported Illegal Alien Accused of Killing Grayson Davis Previously-Deported Illegal Charged With Killing Arkansas Children’s Hospital Nurse in Horror DUI Crash New Data on Migrant Crime Rates Raises Eyebrows, Alarms Thousands of 'potentially fraudulent voter registration applications' Uncovered, Stopped in Pennsylvania Michigan Will Count Ballot of Chinese National Charged with Voting Illegally "It Did Occur" - Kentucky County Clerk Confirms Voting Booth 'Glitch'' Shifted Trump Votes To Kamala Legendary Astronaut Buzz Aldrin 'wholeheartedly' Endorses Donald Trump Liberal Icon Naomi Wolf Endorses Trump: 'He's Being More Inclusive' (Washed Up Has Been) Singer Joni Mitchell Screams 'F*** Trump' at Hollywood Bowl "Analysis: The Final State of the Presidential Race" He’ll, You Pieces of Garbage The Future of Warfare -- No more martyrdom! "Kamala’s Inane Talking Points" "The Harris Campaign Is Testament to the Toxicity of Woke Politics" Easy Drywall Patch Israel Preparing NEW Iran Strike? Iran Vows “Unimaginable” Response | Watchman Newscast In Logansport, Indiana, Kids are Being Pushed Out of Schools After Migrants Swelled County’s Population by 30%: "Everybody else is falling behind" Exclusive — Bernie Moreno: We Spend $110,000 Per Illegal Migrant Per Year, More than Twice What ‘the Average American Makes’ Florida County: 41 of 45 People Arrested for Looting after Hurricanes Helene and Milton are Noncitizens Presidential race: Is a Split Ticket the only Answer? hurricanes and heat waves are Worse 'Backbone of Iran's missile industry' destroyed by IAF strikes on Islamic Republic Joe Rogan Experience #2219 - Donald Trump IDF raids Hezbollah Radwan Forces underground bases, discovers massive cache of weapons Gallant: ‘After we strike in Iran,’ the world will understand all of our training The Atlantic Hit Piece On Trump Is A Psy-Op To Justify Post-Election Violence If Harris Loses Six Al Jazeera journalists are Hamas, PIJ terrorists Judge Aileen Cannon, who tossed Trump's classified docs case, on list of proposed candidates for attorney general Iran's Assassination Program in Europe: Europe Goes Back to Sleep Susan Olsen says Brady Bunch revival was cancelled because she’s MAGA. Foreign Invaders crisis cost $150B in 2023, forcing some areas to cut police and fire services: report Israel kills head of Hezbollah Intelligence. Status: Not Logged In; Sign In United States News See other United States News Articles Title: Trump To Address Nation Monday Over Mass Shootings, Says More Gun Control May Be Needed Source: Zero Hedge URL Source: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019 ... more-gun-control-may-be-needed Published: Aug 4, 2019 Author: Tyler Durden Post Date: 2019-08-05 10:44:33 by Deckard Keywords: None Views: 5114 Comments: 57 In the wake of multiple mass shootings over the weekend, President Trump told reporters in Morristown Airport before departing for the White House on Sunday that "hate has no place in our country and we're going to take care of it." As The Hill reports, Congressional Democrats, 2020 presidential candidates and others have rushed to draw comparisons between the motives of the El Paso shooter and Trump’s immigration rhetoric and suggested he helped fuel the environment that led to the attack. “Let’s be very clear about what is causing this and who the president is. He is an open avowed racist and encouraging more racism in this country,” former Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-Texas), whose hometown is El Paso, said Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union.” Notably, however, even Trump nemesis, former FBI Director, Jim Comey admitted in his latest op-ed (albeit in the 20th paragraph) that: "...according to a 'manifesto' widely attributed to him, the Texas terrorist who killed at least 20 people in El Paso on Saturday wasn’t directly motivated by Donald Trump..." The president ignored shouted questions about whether the El Paso shooter's anti-immigrant manifesto shared similarities with his rhetoric and noted instead that the shootings are part of “a mental illness problem.” The president then added that he had spoken to Attorney General William Barr, FBI Director Christopher Wray, the Ohio and Texas governors as well as members of Congress. “We have to get it stopped,” he said. “This has been going on for years, for years and years in our country.” He added that "perhaps" more needs to be done with respect to gun control.  Trump added that he will deliver a formal statement on Monday at 10 a.m. Monday at the White House. On Saturday, a gunman entered an El Paso, Texas Walmart, killing 20 people and wounding 26 others. Less than 24 hours later, at least nine people were killed and 26 more injured when 24-year-old Connor Betts of Bellbrook Ohio used a .223 caliber rifle to open fire at a crowd on East 5th street in the city's popular downtown Oregon district. Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread   Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 28. #1. To: Deckard (#0) Mass shooting deaths are on par with getting killed by lightning. You are not going to legislate away occurrances that are already extremely rare. Pinguinite  posted on  2019-08-05   11:26:27 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #8. To: Pinguinite (#1) Mass shooting deaths are on par with getting killed by lightning. Do you really believe that you can equate random physical characteristics of the Universe with irrational human behavior? buckeroo  posted on  2019-08-05   22:36:05 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #13. To: buckeroo, Pinguinite (#8) Pinguinite: Mass shooting deaths are on par with getting killed by lightning. Buekeroo: Do you really believe that you can equate random physical characteristics of the Universe with irrational human behavior? That was a really stupid question to ask. You must remember that Pinguinite is a libertarian. Anyone using sound practical judgment and having a discerning mind would be fully conscious of the fact that libertarians believe only what they want to believe. Therefore, instead of asking such a dumbass question – just check the data? Had you checked, then you would have found references showing the odds of death in mass shooting (US only): 1 in 11,125 while the odds of death by lightning strike (US only): 1 in 161,831. Conclusion: So it seems that it's actually a lot more likely for an American to die in a mass shooting than it is for us to die in lightning strikes. After realizing that we all have just witnessed one libertarian, Bucky, asking another libertarian, Pinguinite, if he “really believes” something – Then, this has gotta be the funniest thing we have read in a long while. Gatlin  posted on  2019-08-09   4:08:03 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #14. To: Gatlin (#13) 1 in 11,125 That number is bullshit. That would mean there are 29393 people killed in mass shootings in the usa each year. Not true. Which would mean 81 killed each day in mass shootings. I don't believe that. A K A Stone  posted on  2019-08-09   6:58:53 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #15. To: A K A Stone (#14) [The statistical odds of death in mass shooting (US only) is} 1 in 11,125 That number is bullshit. Bullshit? That would mean there are 29393 people killed in mass shootings in the usa each year. Not true. That [the computation of statistical odds] in no way mans “there are 29393 people killed in mass shootings in the usa each year. Which of course, is definitely “not true.” Which would mean 81 killed each day in mass shootings. I don't believe that. I don’t believe that either because the “statistical odds” does not “mean 81 killed each day in mass shootings. So, let’s examine what is true and what to believe. To begin, we must first understand that “statistical odds” are an “expression of relative probabilities” and in no way a prediction of something that will happen – is expected to happen – or a validation of anything that has happened. Are we clear on this? Hoping that we are, then let’s delve deeper and understand ... … the probability that an event will occur is the fraction of times you expect to see that event in many trials. Probabilities always range between 0 and 1. The odds are defined as the probability that the event will occur divided by the probability that the event will not occur. Now that we have that clear, we can then understand that if the probability of an event occurring is Y, then the probability of the event not occurring is 1- Y. I will cite you an example for further clarification: If the probability of an event is 0.80 (80%), then the probability that the event will not occur is 1-0.80 = 0.20, or 20%. So, we can now understand that the odds of an event represent the ratio of the (probability that the event will occur) / (probability that the event will not occur). Actually this can be expressed a follows in a formula: Odds of event = Y / (1-Y) In summary: The “statistical odds” by design allows for the calculation of a “relative risk” and should NEVER be looked upon as a “prediction.” I trust you now have a better perspective … Gatlin  posted on  2019-08-09   8:24:00 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #16. To: Gatlin (#15) Are we clear on this? No we are not even close. That statistics if determined by dividing the number of people in the country by the number of incidents. It is that simple. Made up numbers from your source are irrelevant. A K A Stone  posted on  2019-08-09   8:29:22 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #17. To: A K A Stone (#16) That statistics if determined by dividing the number of people in the country by the number of incidents. That be true of something that HAS happened, which is the way you are looking at it. That is not what the source was looking at. The number the source quoted is the “statistical probability” that something CAN happen. Are we closer to understanding? Gatlin  posted on  2019-08-09   8:41:13 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #18. To: A K A Stone (#17) You find the number “1-in-11,125” at a number of different source calculations. You can argue with ‘them” is you wish to. I have no reason to. I have obviously done a poor job of sharing this information with you, for which I apologize. Perhaps you can better understand the information if you read The odds that a gun will kill the average American may surprise you at https://www.businessinsider.com/us-gun-death-murder-risk-statistics-2018-3. This is yet another source that shows assaults by firearm kill about 13,000 people in the US each year, and this translates to a roughly 1-in-315 lifetime chance of death from gun violence. It also shows that the risk of dying in a mass shooting is about 35 times lower than that, with a 1-in-11,125 lifetime chance of death. This all I can possibly say on this. Enjoy your day … Gatlin  posted on  2019-08-09   9:22:08 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #20. To: Gatlin (#18) You find the number “1-in-11,125” at a number of different source calculations. You can argue with ‘them” is you wish to. I have no reason to. I have no reason to either. My comparison of deaths was lightning to mass shootings, not death by gunfire, which maybe you were too stupid to understand. Pinguinite  posted on  2019-08-09   11:03:37 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #22. To: Pinguinite (#20) (Edited) Mass shooting deaths are on par with getting killed by lightning. My comparison of deaths was lightning to mass shootings, not death by gunfire, which maybe you were too stupid to understand. The question: “Is mass shooting deaths on par with getting killed by lightning?” No it isn’t. I would need to be really stupid – which I of course am not – to understand and believe the fake statistic you pulled out of your libertarian ass. In 2007, 45 people were killed by lightning in the USA. The average is 31 deaths per year. https://www.weather.gov/safety/lightning- fatalities17 Last year there were 334 mass shootings resulting in 606 deaths. Overall there were 10,982 firearms homicides, not suicides, just murders. https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the- u.s.-2017/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8.xls You are over 19 times more likely to be killed in a mass shooting and 486 times more likely to be killed with a firearm than killed by lightning in the USA. Conclusion: Mass shooting deaths are DEFINITELY NOT on par with getting killed by lightning. Dictionary Definition of “on a par with” means “equal to.” Gatlin  posted on  2019-08-09   14:21:50 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #23. To: Gatlin (#22) Last year there were 334 mass shootings resulting in 606 deaths. Overall there were 10,982 firearms homicides, not suicides, just murders. I don't know where you get the mass shooting numbers you cite. Certainly don't see them on the link you gave. Also, using the "mass shooting" definition of 4 or more shooting deaths from a single incident, your stat doesn't fly because 606 deaths on 334 "mass shootings" only comes to an average of 1.8 deaths per "mass shooting". Wanna try again? Pinguinite  posted on  2019-08-09   15:32:22 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #25. To: Pinguinite (#23) I don't know where you get the mass shooting numbers you cite. Certainly don't see them on the link you gave. I am not going t spoon feed you or fall to your tactic of placing me on the defensive. If you cannot find the numbers there – Then feel free to use any of the many charts available to get the mass shooting numbers for last year. Gatlin  posted on  2019-08-09   16:32:42 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #28. To: Gatlin (#25) I am not going t spoon feed you or fall to your tactic of placing me on the defensive. If you cannot find the numbers there – Then feel free to use any of the many charts available to get the mass shooting numbers for last year. Fine. You made the claim and choose not to defend it. It is your libertarian right to do so. Pinguinite  posted on  2019-08-09   16:44:05 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   Replies to Comment # 28.         There are no replies to Comment # 28. End Trace Mode for Comment # 28. Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register]  Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com