Former Arizona GOP chairman, Randy Pullen, sent out a ridiculously racist tweet in response to the Democratic candidates saying the Black Lives Matter movement is legitimate:
If you ignore all the facts about gun violence this tweet makes sense, in a GOP echo chamber anyway. It is quite obvious that the fact that most mass killers and domestic terrorists are white, Christian males, has never crossed his mind. It is totally not racist either (insert sarcasm here).
As a matter of fact we saw this very thing earlier this summer when Dylann Roof walked into a historically black, South Carolina church and gunned down nine innocent people. His reason? He wanted to start a race war.
The GOP has always been in favor of gun control when it comes to black people. Remember the assault weapons ban that President Reagan signed into law after the Black Panthers armed themselves, legally?
“Open carry for all!,” says the GOP, as long as you are not brown, black or any other race but white, that is. Tin-foil-hat wearing, racist gun-humping white supremacists, however, are more than welcome to carry their assault rifles with them to grab a cup of joe!
This sick, racist double standard deserves ridicule, especially when a comment like this supports one of the main nightmares of the Republican party: The fictional gun grabs by Obama.
Apparently if you are a Conservative you are for gun grabs, and quite willing to make them happen, as long as they are segregated and the people who are doing the most killing get to keep theirs.
Just another way for terrified right-wing nutjobs to keep guns away from the groups they are oppressing.
Feature image via Twitter
I’m pretty sure the murder rate in Chicago would really go down!
Source for your info is…?
FBI Statistics - Go check it out
I tried, can’t really seem to find them.
That’s only because you really don’t want to. Besides, you know full well that data takes a while after the fact to become available. I do not believe that 2014 stats are fully available yet, for example. Just admit that you were wrong already and move along, stop being such a pathetic hack.
He provided, you haven’t.
Where is Jen’s source for the statement that “most mass killers and domestic terrorists are white, Christian males”??
A quick search on Google brings up several.
Yup, just you could easily do a quick Google search for the info you’re looking for. Why the double standard??
You are the one making the claim. The burden is on you.
Derp, just like it is on her.
Dude, if I wanted a comeback, I could have gotten better by wiping it off your mom’s chin.
Nice! LOL
https://www.fbi.Gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded/expanded-homicide-data
The data is 4 years old. Find something a little more recent. Although I admit you did deliver something.
See… It’s possible to find FULL LISTS… Now be a good boy and go look for more biased stuff in Google
And you haven’t still.
And you admit the data backs my claim?
It is still dated. Find something more recent.
You are probably unaware that this kind of statistical data takes years to compile… A 2 year lag is normal… Besides, it’s always the same trend every year! Can’t you see that?!
And like I said in a recent response, these are merely the reported crimes. Many crimes go unsolved, which skews the data.
Here is 2013… Want more humiliation?! Or do you admit the data backs it up?
https://www.fbi.Gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded-homicide
To a degree. The failing is in Police homicides.
Thank you!
You are still working with incomplete data, here, and if you really want to go deeper, then look to the fact that these are merely the reported cases. Many a crime go unsolved, and in the bigger cities, that skews things quite a bit.
Those are anedoctal evidences… I want full statistics to back that up… Not a Google look up… How about a DOJ or FBI lookup?
So a list of shootings and names is anecdotal. I think you need to look up anecdotal.
Is it THE FULL LIST? Yes or No?
Define full list.
List of all the victims of murder with guns in the US in any given year, sorted by race of the killer and/or victim
If it’s not a full list, it’s insufficient to make the point? It’s discredited because it’s not all? Now that’s tortured logic.
It is quite obvious that the fact that most mass killers and domestic terrorists are white, Christian males
Wow, is this really all you’ve got libturds?? This isn’t at all what Pullen was saying. The harsh, uncomfortable truth is that the vast majority of blacks are indeed killed by young black men. The 6% of the US population that are black men commit over 50% of all murders and assaults in this country, most of them against other blacks.
Now, Pullen is obviously being sarcastic, Republicans aren’t in the business of diarming law-abiding citizens like you libturds are, but he is right on the money with regards to who is killing whom here. And all you libturds can muster is “well, most domestic terrorists and mass killers are white, Christian,and male”?? Have you forgotten how rare both domestic terrorism and mass shootings are? No, you haven’t. You’re just a bunch of liars.
She can’t do third grade math.
Can you actually back up your statements? And why did you feel you needed an ad hominem in there as well?
Of course I can back up my statements. Looking up the DOJ statistics is not difficult at all. Of course, I don’t feel the need to do that when the author of this article doesn’t back up her silly, off-topic statement that “most mass killers and domestic terrorists are white, Christian males.”
I see no ad hominem in my post, I am directly attacking this author’s ridiculous argument, not her personally. Perhaps you should review the definition of the term:
https://en.wikipedia.Org/wiki/Ad_hominem
Jesus, you never stop crying, do you?
You people think there is a right to keep and bear arms now?
Reagan didn’t sign an “assault weapons ban”.
You’re right. He signed the Mulford act, which took away the right of the people to carry loaded weapons in public.
Reagan went on record as supporting such a ban after he was out of office, but he never signed any ban, that was Clinton in 1994.
It’s racist, doesn’t surprise me, but…it will never happen. Segregation is the last thing we need. And attacking/singling out black men for “gun control” will do nothing but heat the racial tensions even further.
Though, I assume the GOP wouldn’t mind an excuse to label black people as a danger, and have open season as it were.
It’s sarcasm. Republicans aren’t in the business of disarming law-abiding citizens like the Dems are. The point the guy is making is 100% correct though, as your side continually brings up whenever it suits your need: most black people are killed by other blacks, and most whites by other whites.
Just where is this “disarming of law-abiding citizens” taking place?
New York City, Illinois, Washington DC, California.
The Dems that run Chicago and DC disarmed ALL law-abiding citizens living in these cities with blanket handgun bans until the Supreme Court forced them to allow gun ownership in 2008. These are the FACTS, for as much as you wish they weren’t.
Unable to deal in the present? Where is Obama storing all those guns he’s taken? Probably at some FEMA camp
Unable to deal with reality? I answered your question, and showed you EXACTLY how the Dems have disarmed law-abiding citizens, and all you can do is go to some ridiculous strawman. Pathetic.
Do you know WHY those handgun bans in DC and Chicago no longer exist? It’s because of DC v Heller 2008, a Supreme Court decision that Hillary has gone on record repeatedly expressing her disagreement with. If the Dems had their way, those bans would still be in place, and EVERY city like them would also have handgun bans, not to mention the rest of the country. Your ignorance is as pathetic as your inability to accept the clear truth right in front of you.
There are much more black murderers than whites… So it’s only logical that it would lower the murder rate, specially if you consider the libturd argument about guns in general…
Again, evidence to your claim, and present it from a source other than a conservative website. And if you did that, you have to repeal the 2nd Amendment altogether, since blacks still have the same rights and all.
DOJ - Check it out
No. I asked you to provide evidence yourself. You need to provide the evidence to back your claim yourself, otherwise I have an easy time refuting you. No evidence is easily beaten with a “you’re wrong.” But it is your claim, you need the evidence.
So you don’t trust the DOJ?
If you provide it, I will believe it if it is factual. You just have to do so, like you did, but more recent. Also, your claim is slightly false, since whites rank up there as well, but the information is still incomplete until you incorporate the killings by police as well. And you would still have to revoke the 2nd amendment in full, since anything less would be unconstitutional, and only change the dynamics, not lessen them.
The most recent compiled data is 2013… I have given you the links. Not only do they prove my point but they prove it every year… Now do you believe it?
For the third time, many crimes go unsolved in many locations, which skews the data. Not to mention that cover ups can occur, and skew the numbers even more.
Slow down there Conspiracy Brother. For someone looking for “factual evidence,” you’re sure place a lot of emphasis on what comes across to the rest of as conspiracy theory. In either case, the margins are SO WIDE (black men, although they only make up 6% of the population, are responsible for over 50% of all murders and assaults in this country) that no amount of “underreporting” and/or “cover-ups,” even IF they were true (which they aren’t), they wouldn’t change this clear fact.
Here is the problem with your evidence as well. It only tells two different numbers- those who were convicted and those who were killed. You place much faith on these numbers being accurate. The sad reality is that these numbers are indeed skewed. I will admit that the “coverup” comment can only give a 2% margin, but the info doesn’t break down the information of the victims at all except by race. It doesn’t say who killed whom, it doesn’t tell the circumstances, and it doesn’t tell how many crimes were committed. Only convicted and killed.
Ok then, so what are you saying? That there is somehow an enormous margin of non-blacks committing crimes that are not recorded? You do know how unlikely this is, right? I’m sure that there is probably another 3-5% margin of error due to these other issues, but even taking these at their maximum, blacks are still way out in front in murders, assaults, and a large number of other violent crimes.
Here is the problem. Since it doesn’t list the who-killed-who, it doesn’t list circumstance, namely for mass murderers, especially in school shootings. So those numbers of victims could bleed into the murders, such as gang members killing each other. Much like the Civil War is considered to have the most American deaths than WW1 and 2 combined just due to the number of Americans fighting in it to be close to 100%. If we kill each other, we are both victims and murderers at the same time. The information is simply convicted and murdered. A more comprehensive breakdown would help immensely.
Mass shootings don’ matter in this analysis, because they are so rare as to be entirely statistically insignificant.
I want to understand what you’re getting at here, but the best I’m coming up with is that you seem to believe that some of these murder victims “deserved” it? Is that what you’re saying?
The vast majority of these are not actually “mass” shootings. The problem is that we really don’t all have the same definition of the word. Statistically, most of what you are calling “mass” shootings take place in people’s homes, with people know know each other shooting each other. What I’m talking about are the type of PUBLIC mass shootings that get people so worked up and that always make the news for as long as they can keep them going. These are very rare, and almost all of them happen in gun free zones like like schools and shopping malls. If you’re talking about ANY instance in which more than one person is killed, well then sure, your version of “mass” shooting is statistically significant. Of course, this definition isn’t helpful at all.
The public tends to be afraid of public mass shootings, not of shootings from their family members. Unless you’re suicidal or involved in gangs or drug violence, you’re so unlikely as to be shot to death as to be entirely statistically insignificant. You’re more likely to die in just about any other way.
Typical mental gymnastics. If it doesn’t fit your definition, it doesn’t exist.
“Mental gymnastics”? LOL. These “gun tracker” people are the ones manipulating the data so it appears to say what they want it to say. There are simply no “gymnastics” involved in recognizing that public mass shootings are incredibly rare. There are no “gymnastics” involved in admitting that you are less likely to die in a mass shooting not of your own making than by just about any other method imaginable. Sounds like to me like you’re hoping for gun confiscations, much like Hillary has recently announced. Keep your filthy paws off my gun rights.
People who run a site like this “mass shooting tracker” clearly don’t care about people’s lives, they only care about restricting guns, about control. Why aren’t they keeping track of ALL types of murders? Is the only thing that’s important to them to take away our big, scary guns??
No other 1st world nation faces this level of violence, and the kind of opposition to even common sense reform. No one is taking away guns en masse, like you have been led to believe by the people who want to, *gasp* sell more guns, and will create any lie and hysteria they can to do so. Politifact confirmed an Alternet stat- 90% of Americans and 74% of NRA members do prefer common sense gun reform.
yawn … the idea of a “first world nation” is simply your arbitrary designation. There is no other country like the US on earth. Canada, Norway, England, France, etc, etc, all these countries have their problems and their strengths. We have ALWAYS been a rather violent place, and our gun laws have no bearing on that fact.
No one is taking away guns en masse”?? Really? Your stupid straw man argument aside, Australia did just that in 1996, now didn’t they? No matter that these buybacks had no effect on crime in that country, but I just heard Hillary (not to mention Obama at least twice now) lauding these laws and calling for the US to look into passing laws just like these. Hillary has made no bones about the fact that she wants to disarm the American people as much as she can. So has Obama. So did the Dems running DC and Chicago between 1982 and 2008, as no law-abiding citizen in those cities could legally own a weapon to defend themselves.
You’re right, 90% of Americans DO prefer common sense gun reform. The problem is getting that 90% to agree on what actually constitutes “common sense” reform.
And who was the one woh passed a ban on assault weapons? Oh yeah, it was your golden boy Ronald Reagan. And “First World Nation” was created during the Cold War to denote a democratic nation.
And that is still a piss poor excuse to not try to change anything. “We have always been a violent nation” is one of the most convoluted reasons ever to hand over a tool whose main design is on destruction to people who are violent, and love violence. And yes, Australia did just that, and haven’t had a mass shooting since. You also discounted the 74% of the NRA members wanting gun reform. The NRA, the people who advocate for gun rights, nearly 3/4 of them think reform is a swell idea. Also, you come yup with those statistics, where are the sources?
Ironically, the Mulford Act passed with the same racial connotation this one is placing.
Also, strawman? You actually have to knock down a strawman, and there has to be ample evidence. Laws, Executive Orders, Bills. Evidence, in other words.
But the sad thing is, by advocating against any gun reform, you say, in a sense, that killing kids is okay, it’s just something we have to live with.
Who was the one who passed a ban on assault weapons? That would be BILL CLINTON in 1994 you buffoon. The 1994-2004 Federal Assault Weapons Ban was passed years after Reagan left office. The Mulford act had nothing to do with “assault weapons.” Do you even know what you’re talking about at all?
You simply don’t understand our history very well if you’re making claims like this. The point is that gun control has NOTHING to do with our crime rates. Crime goes up and down in this country, but our gun laws have never been shown to have any effect on those crime rates. Ever. I dare you to find even a single example of such an effect. I dare you to actually meet me on real terms, not on your ridiculous, offensive “you don’t care about children” bulls*** that everyone knows is pure garbage.
Australia [banned guns], and haven’t had a mass shooting since.
WRONG and WRONG. Australia has had at least 4 mass shootings since their buyback in 1996, and their number of mass shootings BEFORE the ban was likewise very low. Plus, their overall homicide and suicide rates remain unaffected. Their gun buyback had ZERO effect.
I’m glad to see you openly admitting that the Dems DO want gun confiscation like this. Maybe now at least you’ll stop mocking those of us who point it out, because it’s clearly true. You just admitted above that you know Hillary and Obama BOTH want Australian-style confiscation. The only reason that they haven’t taken guns away en masse yet is because we have stopped them dead in their tracks. I can’t believe you have the GALL to suggest otherwise.
You want Australia stats and citations? Did you know how many Australians owned guns before 1996? SEVEN percent. And after? FIVE percent. What percentage own guns in the US? We don’t for sure, but recent polls put the number somewhere between 32%-47%. Enormous difference right there.
Buyback had no effect on homicide rates:
http://www.smh.Com.Au/news/national/buyback-has-no-effect-on-murder-rate/2006/10/23/1161455665717.html
Mass shootings since 1996
Monash shootings (2002) - http://www.smh.Com.Au/articles/2002/10/21/1034561430158.html
Hectorville Siege (2011) -https://en.wikipedia.Org/wiki/2011_Hectorville_siege
Sydney Café Hostage Situation (2014) - http://www.cnn.Com/2014/12/15/world/asia/australia-sydney-hostage-situation/index.html
Hunt Family Murders (2014) - http://www.dailymail.Co.Uk/news/article-2906200/Farmer-DID-shoot-three-children-wife-years-immense-stress-recovery-brain-injury-murder-suicide-shocked-quiet-community.html
You know, for a guy demanding citations and “evidence” from people like me, you’re not doing very well providing your own evidence/ citations for the dubious claims you’re making.
Unless you can show convincing evidence to support your claim that “90% of Americans and 74% of NRA members do prefer common sense gun reform,” I’ll go ahead and believe the latest polling numbers from CNN (which has become rabidly anti-gun in recent years), which state that the majority of Americans think current laws are about right or even too harsh, and doubt that expanded background checks would keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill or convicted criminals.
http://www.cnn.Com/2015/09/14/politics/cnn-poll-guns-immigration-abortion-2016/
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.Com/2013/12/04/cnn-poll-support-for-stricter-gun-control-fades/
Still waiting on any “evidence” from you.
You really don’t want me to present the evidence that I have, as you have simply ignored it and ran away when I presented it before. So, here goes again:
1. Hillary and Obama are BOTH on record as supporting an Australian-style mandatory gun buyback program (i.e. mass gun confiscation). A simple Google search will bring this up immediately.
2. The uber-liberal cities of Chicago and DC banned all handgun ownership between 1982 and 2008. These bans were overturned by the 2008 Supreme Court Heller ruling, and Hillary Clinton and other prominent Dems have repeatedly voiced their disagreement with the Heller decision. Were it up to them, these cities would still have gun bans in place.
Take #1 and #2 and put them together and they paint a very clear, stark picture of the type of gun regulations the Dems are looking for. Massive gun confiscations and draconian laws that make gun ownership all but impossible for most Americans. Thanks, but NO thanks Dems!
Well, in fairness, There isn’t much out there that’s current. I’m not sure why, maybe they’re going PC and not keeping these types of records anymore.
http://www.bjs.Gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=922
http://www.amren.Com/news/2015/07/new-doj-statistics-on-race-and-violent-crime/
Interestingly enough, these latest statistics appear to show a rather dramatic drop in the likelihood of blacks to commit violent crime. Older stats show that number at about 7 times that of whites, while these new numbers appear to show a drop to only 2.5 times more likely than whites to commit violent crime. Hmmmm … I wonder what’s going on?