this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2023
236 points (92.8% liked)

politics

19096 readers
3402 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's just a list of all shootings in the USA, that's data without analysis.

[–] SupraMario@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No it is not, its not been called out multiple times for how error prone it is. People who use it as factual loose all credibility with anyone who knows anything about gun violence.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Funny how I search for "gun violence archive unreliable" and I don't come up with anything... Except for the "Second amendment foundation"... Have you thought that maybe it's the people calling them out that are unreliable and that have an agenda that GVA goes against? 🤔

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/gun-violence-archive/

They provide their methodology and a source for all shootings. Just because Jo nobody calls them out doesn't make them unreliable.

[–] SupraMario@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Mother Jones only mention of GVA:

With multiple-victim shootings more broadly, sites like Gun Violence Archive and Mass Shooting Tracker offer aggregation of news reports and data that could potentially be useful for further in-depth analysis.

Wow... that's what I call "calling out bullshit"!

No mention at all in the other article.

Good job 👍

Playing with the definition of what is and isn't a mass shooting and only considering people that died in the victims count doesn't help your argument buddy.

[–] SupraMario@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Way to miss the point of the article.

Playing with the definition is how you get media numbers to be "we had 600 mass shootings in 3 weeks" headlines. It's disinformation designed for clicks, and you are the type that feeds into it... clearly

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not counting people unless they died diminishes the issue. Someone ending up paralysed from the waist down or ending up in a coma isn't a victim? Sure bud, anything to defend gun owners!

[–] SupraMario@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Stay in Canada, why the fuck do you care what we have issues with here...

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Your fucking guns get stolen and then make their way to Canada where they're used for criminal activities and murders. We have to deal with having fucking morons for neighbors, no fucking way will I not call them out.

[–] SupraMario@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Straw purchases which are already illegal here. You can whine all you want, but the guns aren't the issue.