You could just respond with why my suggestion won't work for your situation.
I mean, you offered up what you do, so it's up for discussion.
Shooting in West Point......
- Thread starter OG Goat Holder
- Start date
I mean, you offered up what you do, so it's up for discussion.
Well it happened like 16-18 hours ago and other things are happening. We launched air strikes against ISIS targets in Syria and the ICE shooting in Minneapolis is dominating national stories. A shooting in rural Mississippi, whether done by a black guy or a white guy, will not get the viral coverage you apparently think it should.
I could explain that it’s not in my nature to cower in a corner in my own house while somebody knocks on my door because I am a 17ing man, but that would be lost on you. I could explain that if I have my pants on, I have a pistol on me. I could explain that because of that, it’s not unusual for me to answer my door armed just like it’s not unusual for me to eat lunch armed, run errands armed or go about my daily life armed, but that would also be lost on you.
Well maybe because of Minnesota, and Venezuela, and Iran, and immigration, and the President, and ICE, and Gaza, and Russian shadow tankers, and Greenland, on and on and on. You make a bag of hammers look smart.
So you would greet your son with a Glock? That’s what went on here.
At this point I have to respect your refusal to give in. Tip of the cap.
No, just sticking to reality
mass shooting of six people, hardly a mention in the national media.
But, yes. As stated, if I’ve got pants on, I’m armed, so I’d answer the door for family carrying a firearm…
Yes, It's getting random mentions nationally, but for the most part it's getting little to no attention. Had it been a white guy shooting a minority, the media would be going hysterical about racism with a little "white nationalism" sprinkled in. ESPECIALLY if it was a white cop shooting a minority, even though more whites are shot by cops every year. Had it been a white guy shooting other whites, the media would be going hysterical about "mass shootings," how we need more "common sense gun lawns," and/or how whites are inherently angry, etc.
It's easily Googled and how anyone can deny how the media cherry picks these stories to keep us divided is beyond me.
How in the hell were you still claiming this at 7pm, when it had been shown to you hours earlier that there has been a bunch of national coverage?
What exactly are you looking for here? Like how do you measure if there is enough coverage?
This feels like when a 5 year old plays a game where only they know the rules and they keep changing them when others play and win.
In response to the subject of unknown danger at the door, you said that there is a reason why you answer the door with a lock in your hand.
Apparently that reason is...you wear pants and it happens to always just be on you.
Ha, OK then. That is obviously not what you were claiming earlier.
You said you answer unknown knocks with your gun in your hand. That isn't even close to 'I just always have it on me'.
Those are fundamentally different.
The the mass shooting in Utah on Wednesday get more attention? Less? I never heard about it, but I don't go to cnn.com or foxnews.com anyway.
As I replied to him, yes, it's getting mentions nationally, but had it been a white shooting a minority, the media would be going BAT$#!T crazy drumming up the narrative about racism. Had it been a white shooter in this situation, the media would be going hysterical about "mass shootings" and "white nationalism." I think even a few years ago the FBI claimed "white nationalism" was the biggest threat here in the US after a few mass shootings.
I'm amazed how people like you can't see the bias in the media and how these shootings are cherry picked and treated differently.
You said there is a reason why yout answer the door to strangers with your gun in your hand, as well as a lot of skepticism.
That is totally different from just having a gun on you.
How do you measure if there is enough coverage? It's an undefinable complaint and as such, the complaining can always continue.
How do you NOT see it? How can you NOT tell the difference? The talking heads, national media and social media go absolutely APE$#!T after shootings that meet certain criteria, that I have already named. I've even seen them mention "white terrorism" as being the biggest problem after some mass shootings.
Last edited:
This doesn't answer my question.
How much coverage is needed for coverage to be acceptable? @85Bears said there isn't enough coverage...so then what is enough?
This isn't a difficult to understand question. It is a difficult to answer question though...because it can't be answered. The complaining can then forever continue, since coverage will never be enough.
And again I believe it was a few years ago the FBI even claimed "white nationalism" was the biggest threat to America after a mass shooting. Yes, after a quick Google search they did. I'm not sure how you "measure it," but you're in complete denial if you can't see how shootings are treated differently in the media and social media. I just can't help you there.
Look you idiot. These savage murder occurred on the boonies late on a Friday night. In Mississippi. Coverage took a little time. But you two are really showing your true colors by being so upset about the coverage of the massacre that the massacre itself. My God y’all are pathetic humans
I do see they are treated differently.
Once more- that wasn't what I was asking about though.
It was claimed that this incident wasn't covered, then that it wasn't covered enough.
So I have repeatedly asked what 'enough' would be for this incident.
What are you even talking about?
Who are 'you two', exactly?...and in what way am I upset about the coverage?
Why don’t you ask the parents of that 7 yo little girl what they think about the coverage you disgusting life form?!
When I mentioned "differently" that included the issue of how much. I'm not sure how much is "enough," but the media and social media will certainly obsess over shootings longer that meet certain criteria, completely blowing facts out of proportion and report complete bull$#!t while practically ignoring other shootings. You won't hear about this shooting in West Point tomorrow, but if certain demographics checked the boxes, the media and social media would be obsessed about it for weeks.
Last edited:
My point being that y’all’s focus was on the coverage (race) instead of on the victims and family. It’s very telling. Not that we needed clarity about y’all’s politicaly radical positions
Completely agree. It’s sad that this thread devolved from being about a family killed, including a 7 year old, to media coverage and freaking white nationalism. Ridiculous.
?
What in the 17 sort of question is this?
It lacks logic.
A claim was made, a ton of responses documented that the claim was incorrect, yet the claim continued.
It is insane that someone can't ask what would be an acceptable amount of coverage when someone has claimed there isn't enough coverage.
I have yet to mention or even hint at the race of anyone involved.
That has not been a focus of mine at all.
I also haven't discussed my political positions.
Might want to get the right story to back up your claim.
Mississippi sheriff says 6 dead in shootings at multiple locations, suspect in custody
A Mississippi sheriff says a series of shootings left six people dead on Friday, including the suspect's ex-wife and stepfather. The suspect was identified as Richard Dale Crum, 52.www.foxnews.com
Oh schitt. So the shooter was white and the victims were white. This thread is just proof that some people don’t care what the facts are, they just want to push a political agenda.
Nothing on my Twitter feed this morning about it - News or Trending, Nothing
Watched some Fox, CNN and HLN, Nothing.
So the fact that the shooter and victims were white completely disproves the point that 85Bears was trying to make that black people committing crimes is covered up by the media while white people committing crimes is amplified by the media. The fact is, shootings that happen in rural Mississippi don’t really move the national needle.