Anti-Gun Control argument fail...

[Eleanors38]

18. "Confirmed: Heat-seeking Missile Flies up Gun-controllers' Own Arse."

The politics of "mass shootings" probably led to this hat & cane attempt at blaming Obama for something. But what do you expect from the intellectual fire power of prohibitionists?

"Mass shootings" is a rather new definition. It holds that a mass shooting is one in which 4+ people are shot in one setting (not including the shooter). MSM has feverishly jumped on this new & improved category, neglecting the old FBI definition of Mass Murder, which holds that 4+ victims are KILLED in one setting (not including the shooter). That old definition is why Mother Jones concluded rather ruefully a few years back that the U.S. averaged slightly over two (2) mass murders/year since 1982. Yep, Two.

But with the All-New Mass Shooting definition, the "mass" becomes really Massive. And one can concoct a Yuge rise in MS incidents because -- viola! -- the only data one can compare to longitudinally is the old 2/year FBI standard of Mass Murder.

Mass Shooting (bigger number) ------------------------- Mass Murder (2/yr).

Apples -------------------------------------------------------------------------------Oranges.

____________

Washington Post article of Feb 26, 2016 "We have three different definitions of 'mass shootings,' and we probably need more" [It is Wapo, after all.]. Comment section:

"We need clarity. We don't need to believe that "mass shooting" means a certain number, then see a news story claiming that we have 3 "mass shootings" a day -- only to later find that the reporter has created a new definition that enables those stunningly high figures." JD Connelly.

____________
It should come as no surprise how the politics of stylized body counts involving the charged word "Mass" can be used against a president who speaks for some gun control; after all, the data can be force-fitted whenever, as WaPo says, "we need more."