logo Sign In

Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo — Page 818

This topic has been locked by a moderator.

Author
Time

Mrebo said:

If time travel becomes possible I’m going to travel back in time and punch Hitler in the nose.

Or you could look him up where he’s currently working? 😉

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

Mrebo said:

It’s a lot of people shot in a short time frame. I thought the gun control advocates would care but it’s not a story that get lots of play because it’s not a mass shooting.

Gun control advocates do care. It’s the media that doesn’t care because it isn’t an exciting enough story to get attention.

It’s fodder for discussion. I’m not sure what Frink is saying with his comment.

He was obviously saying that you wrote your post to make it sound like 60 people were shot in a single mass shooting in Chicago.

The Person in Question

Author
Time

moviefreakedmind said:

Mrebo said:

It’s a lot of people shot in a short time frame. I thought the gun control advocates would care but it’s not a story that get lots of play because it’s not a mass shooting.

Gun control advocates do care. It’s the media that doesn’t care because it isn’t an exciting enough story to get attention.

That’s what I think too.

It’s fodder for discussion. I’m not sure what Frink is saying with his comment.

He was obviously saying that you wrote your post to make it sound like 60 people were shot in a single mass shooting in Chicago.

I wrote it to describe what happened in Chicago: 60+ people were shot. It’s obvious that leaves out a lot of detail (for instance some people died) but that’s what the link is for. It’s not like it was actually a water gun shootout at a water park, so I don’t see how my inexact headline was misleading in an important way. 60+ people were shot, a dozen dead.

If the remarkable thing is that it wasn’t a mass shooting, well okay.

The blue elephant in the room.

Author
Time

You obviously wanted to make it seem like 60 people were shot in Chicago at once.

The Person in Question

Author
Time

For the purposes of discussing it as a political issue, I didn’t think it mattered. I don’t see what is gained in trying to make it sound like a mass shooting, except maybe people would care less about it because it isn’t? Again 60+ people shot, a dozen dead…and the issue is that I didnt specify it’s not a mass shooting. It’s a weird objection. If I were in support of banning guns, would the same objection be made to my post?

The blue elephant in the room.

Author
Time

I don’t really object, I’m just confused as to why you’d phrase it that way and then wonder why people thought it was misleading.

The Person in Question

Author
Time
 (Edited)

If you had repeated the headline, which says “66 shot, 12 fatally, in Chicago weekend shootings,” then no objection.

You edited it and then object when I point out that you did so. “60 shot in Chicago” is technically correct (assuming it was 60 at the time and later upped to 66, which is neither here nor there), but completely misleading at the same time.

Author
Time

TV’s Frink said:

If you had repeated the headline, which says “66 shot, 12 fatally, in Chicago weekend shootings,” then no objection.

You edited it and then object when I point out that you did so. “60 shot in Chicago” is technically correct (assuming it was 60 at the time and later upped to 66, which is neither here nor there), but completely misleading at the same time.

I didn’t so much as edit as briefly give what I thought were important facts.

It’s not “completely misleading” and I think you’re fixated on the wrong thing here. 60 people shot (later updated) was more than technically correct. I know you’re not saying we should take those victims less seriously so I’m not sure what your point is.

You made an assumption, which was fair enough since we’re used to seeing major headlines about mass shootings, but can you tell me why it is important to specify up front whether it was all a single shooting incident? Again, I don’t (and didn’t) see any value in trying to mislead in the way you think. I thought such a short violent period resulting in so many shootings was notable and relevant to the topic of gun control.

The blue elephant in the room.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Mrebo said:

can you tell me why it is important to specify up front whether it was all a single shooting incident?

Because multiple/many instances of gang violence, domestic violence, robbery, et al. in a highly populated area are separate issues than someone purposefully shooting into a crowded concert from a nearby hotel room window or else running down scores of people on the sidewalk with a truck.

The circumstances involved with, and the societal impact of, one person shooting sixty people versus sixty people shooting one person each, is significant enough to be relevant to the story. Omitting such information skews the response people will give, which is to say it leads people to become misinformed based on (understandably) inaccurate assumptions.

TV’s Frink said:

chyron just put a big Ric pic in your sig and be done with it.

Author
Time

Mrebo said:

I thought such a short violent period resulting in so many shootings was notable and relevant to the topic of gun control.

So don’t make it look like you’re talking about something else then.

Author
Time

chyron8472 said:

Mrebo said:

can you tell me why it is important to specify up front whether it was all a single shooting incident?

Because multiple/many instances of gang violence, domestic violence, robbery, et al. in a highly populated area are separate issues than someone purposefully shooting into a crowded concert from a nearby hotel room window or else running down scores of people on the sidewalk with a truck.

If the topic is gun control, aren’t any of these shootings equally relevant to whether we bolster background checks, limit who can have guns, or ban guns altogether?

You say they are separate issues, which I take to mean not all necessarily about gun control. It’s a fair point if you think there are different kinds of solutions. I made the same point many pages ago responding to a post by Collipso. If you don’t want to click, Collipso said there, “Is it ever going to end?” with a copypasted link that included, “central-michigan-university-shots-fired.”

If you didn’t click on the link he gave, you might’ve jump to the conclusion there was a big mass shooting at a school. Nobody apparently jumped to that conclusion nor faulted Collipso for not making it clear that that wasn’t what happened. You could say he didn’t “edit” a headline but that’s a stylistic nitpick. The response back then was that it was about guns and the need to restrict them. The fact that it wasn’t a mass shooting was not mentioned by anyone other than me.

All that said, the violence in Chicago this past weekend was really bad even for Chicago. I’d be curious what different solutions people might think are warranted to address it than we see proposed for mass shootings.

The circumstances involved with, and the societal impact of, one person shooting sixty people versus sixty people shooting one person each, is significant enough to be relevant to the story. Omitting such information skews the response people will give, which is to say it leads people to become misinformed based on (understandably) inaccurate assumptions.

The societal/emotional impact and the journalistic hooks are different, I grant you. I do hope people click on the link and maybe express their views on the topic.

The blue elephant in the room.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Of course it’s equally relevant to gun control. What view is there to express? I want strict gun control. I’ve been saying that forever. And I call out all of those assholes that stop talking about gun control the second they forget about the last big school shooting.

The Person in Question

Author
Time

moviefreakedmind said:

Of course it’s equally relevant to gun control. What view is there to express? I want strict gun control. I’ve been saying that forever. And I call out all of those assholes that stop talking about gun control the second they forget about the last big school shooting.

I don’t understand Frink objecting that my post was “completely misleading” nor fixating on how the post was worded.

When I saw the Collipso post I assumed it was another mass shooting. I was surprised to find that wasn’t the case but I didn’t think an important issue was the assumptions I made or the presentation of his post. I thought the particular facts of that case qualified as a different issue and I explained that. I was basically told they’re not really different in an important way.

I think a concentrated bout of shootings with so many victims and so many perpetrators presents a powerful set of facts for gun control than a lone nutbar or a domestic dispute that happens to occur on a campus. If someone wanted to rhetorically call what happened in Chicago a mass shooting to draw attention to it I think that would be fair.

The emotional appeal isn’t the same to many people as you say. Maybe Frink thinks its not worth commenting on the story for the reasons you give: there’s nothing to really say. I don’t know, but I don’t understand thinking my abbreviated description was problematic, as they say.

The blue elephant in the room.

Author
Time

Let me help you out with an example. If I post a headline that says “Eight police officers shot dead in Washington, D.C.” and it turns out that that article was actually about the total number of fatal shootings of police in 2018, that’s much different than the way the headline sounded. I can’t believe I have to explain this. I don’t think that Frink is saying that he doesn’t care about the Chicago shootings because it wasn’t a huge mass shooting. He’s obviously just saying that you, most likely intentionally, made it seem like it was mass shooting when it wasn’t. It’s kind of frustrating to be mislead and fucked around with, don’t you agree? If I post a headline that says “81 killed in Oklahoma tornados” and it turns it’s actually just a total death toll over a period of time, with a different title than I posted, you’d probably be misled. I don’t get why you are pretending that this is an unreasonable thing to object to.

The Person in Question

Author
Time

moviefreakedmind said:

Let me help you out with an example. If I post a headline that says “Eight police officers shot dead in Washington, D.C.” and it turns out that that article was actually about the total number of fatal shootings of police in 2018, that’s much different than the way the headline sounded. I can’t believe I have to explain this. I don’t think that Frink is saying that he doesn’t care about the Chicago shootings because it wasn’t a huge mass shooting. He’s obviously just saying that you, most likely intentionally, made it seem like it was mass shooting when it wasn’t. It’s kind of frustrating to be mislead and fucked around with, don’t you agree? If I post a headline that says “81 killed in Oklahoma tornados” and it turns it’s actually just a total death toll over a period of time, with a different title than I posted, you’d probably be misled. I don’t get why you are pretending that this is an unreasonable thing to object to.

All of this.

The actual headline was perfectly clear. You changed it to make it less clear. And don’t think you did it by accident.

Author
Time

‘Rashida Tlaib: First Muslim woman to be elected to US Congress after winning Michigan Democratic primary’…

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/rashida-tlaib-michigan-primary-election-muslim-congress-woman-democrat-13th-district-a8482066.html

Best of luck to her, I hope she does great, and will serve her constituents and Party well for a long, long time to come.
 

A little patience goes a long way on this old-school Rebel base. If you are having issues finding what you are looking for, these will be of some help…

Welcome to the OriginalTrilogy.com | Introduce yourself in here | Useful info within : About : Help : Site Rules : Fan Project Rules : Announcements
How do I do this?’ on the OriginalTrilogy.com; some info & answers + FAQs - includes info on how to search for projects and threads on the OT•com

A Project Index for Star Wars Preservations (Harmy’s Despecialized & 4K77/80/83 etc) : A Project Index for Star Wars Fan Edits (adywan & Hal 9000 etc)

… and take your time to look around this site before posting - to get a feel for this place. Don’t just lazily make yet another thread asking for projects.

Author
Time

Hopefully she’ll do as many progressive things as Conyers did. I know he’s disgraced now, but he did a lot of good in Congress.

The Person in Question

Author
Time

So why is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez a “box of rocks” as our non-box friend Mrebo put it and our non-box friend Jay agreed with? I’m listening to an interview with her (granted it’s Pod Save America so they’re softball questions) and she sounds reasonably intelligent to me.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

^^ Certainly hope so mfm - the more diversity in and around Govt - the better understanding and awareness of issues and differing points of view. Hopefully with more representation of, and for, the people they represent - not just big business and/or lobbyists.

 


 

‘Dear Ivanka: celebrities flood Trump’s Instagram over family separations’…

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/aug/08/dear-ivanka-trump-instagram-campaign-celebrities

^ an intriguing last paragraph in that article too.

 

A little patience goes a long way on this old-school Rebel base. If you are having issues finding what you are looking for, these will be of some help…

Welcome to the OriginalTrilogy.com | Introduce yourself in here | Useful info within : About : Help : Site Rules : Fan Project Rules : Announcements
How do I do this?’ on the OriginalTrilogy.com; some info & answers + FAQs - includes info on how to search for projects and threads on the OT•com

A Project Index for Star Wars Preservations (Harmy’s Despecialized & 4K77/80/83 etc) : A Project Index for Star Wars Fan Edits (adywan & Hal 9000 etc)

… and take your time to look around this site before posting - to get a feel for this place. Don’t just lazily make yet another thread asking for projects.

Author
Time

what post of mine, mrebo?

Author
Time

TV’s Frink said:

So why is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez a “box of rocks” as our non-box friend Mrebo put it and our non-box friend Jay agreed with? I’m listening to an interview with her (granted it’s Pod Save America so they’re softball questions) and she sounds reasonably intelligent to me.

She’s great. People on the right (and the corporate left) hate her because she’s unapologetically progressive and isn’t bought and payed for like everyone else. Her youth is also something that people are holding against her, even though she’s got more experience than Trump.

The Person in Question

Author
Time

So… about that religious freedom stuff that’s been going on lately. Y’know how I said it was more a license to discriminate than anything? Well, how do we define this springing up in the wake of the religious liberty movement?

(NOTE: Despite the headline, this article is mostly about TERFs, Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists. Lesbians themselves aren’t really a focal point.)

https://www.forbes.com/sites/peterjreilly/2018/08/03/lesbians-want-a-church-of-their-own-and-irs-approves/#76bac1f621c2

Author
Time

Huh. They sound like terrible people. Not really a surprise, seeing the people who tend to have power in other churches.