11 School Shootings in 24 Days

[Ryika]

The problem with that reasoning is that the emotional heft is equal whether the correct number of shootings is 11, 3, or even 1. Any of those numbers of school shootings in a month is equally unacceptable and intolerable. So parsing whether the headline number is accurate rather misses the point entirely. And is often an attempt to actively obfuscate the issue and derail discussion of it in favor of the status quo.

There is no problem with that reasoning.

The OP talked about an "alarming number" of school shootings, which is clearly phrasing that is designed to make it seem like there had been a rise in school shootings, and that the last month has been bloodier than what we have seen in the past. This is simply not the case, and because of that, the number of shooting is of incredible importance, because in the last years only there have been a dozen or so months that have seen more school shootings than this January, and ended with far higher body counts.

This does not mean that my post invalidated the existence of the actual problem in any way, quite the opposite, it validates the problem, and I even made sure to point at the actual problem - 5 dead in 3 shootings - in my post, using neutral language, without trying to downplay it in any way.

If you think that the things that were said in this thread have made it seem like the actual problem doesn't exist, then you should have something along the lines of: "While it's true that the OP is overplaying the scope of the problem, but the actual problem is still real. Even a single dead is too much. <etc>", instead of concentrating on the fact that I pointed out that the statistic in the OP is misleading. Because correcting false information is important, nobody wins if both sides just make up their own statistics.

Trying to claim that people who point at misleading statistics are "harmful" instead of focusing on the people who invent and spread those statistics is just wrong, no matter how you look at it.

 

[Bugfatty300]

The problem with that reasoning is that the emotional heft is equal whether the correct number of shootings is 11, 3, or even 1. Any of those numbers of school shootings in a month is equally unacceptable and intolerable. So parsing whether the headline number is accurate rather misses the point entirely. And is often an attempt to actively obfuscate the issue and derail discussion of it in favor of the status quo.

The OP discussion is "alarming number of high school shootings" this month. So what is being obfuscated by fact checking the OP topic? Could one not just make a thread about school shootings in general instead of quoting (presumably) a false social media news feed headline?

 

[Manfred Belheim]

The problem with that reasoning is that the emotional heft is equal whether the correct number of shootings is 11, 3, or even 1. Any of those numbers of school shootings in a month is equally unacceptable and intolerable. So parsing whether the headline number is accurate rather misses the point entirely. And is often an attempt to actively obfuscate the issue and derail discussion of it in favor of the status quo.

Yes. Who needs facts and accuracy in reporting. Deliberate manipulation is fine.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

And Amazon can replace all the stores so no more mall shootings, and we can just listen to music on our phones so no more concert shootings, and Netflix solves theater shootings, and televangelists solve church shootings...and when we get to where no one is going anywhere there won't be any more drive by shootings, and we can all just hole up in our rooms and in a single generation all the problems are solved.

Maybe this is the answer to the Fermi Paradox.

But probably not.