Vox Accidentally proves that mass shootings are more likely in Blue states...

[TFOGGER]

http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/20/progressive-outlet-accidentally-proves-blue-states-have-42-percent-more-mass-shootings/


Progressive Outlet Accidentally Proves Blue States Have 42 Percent More Mass Shootings
http://cdn01.dailycaller.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/12346671_10208141865810111_1524710919_n4.jpgANDREW FOLLETT
(http://dailycaller.com/author/andrew-follett/)Energy and Environmental Reporter
(http://dailycaller.com/author/andrew-follett/)





10:07 PM 06/20/2016


608











608
Share








http://cdn01.dailycaller.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/gun-e1465497744325.jpg
Gun, Butsaya, Shutterstock
Blue states have 42 percent more mass shootings than red states after adjusting for population, according to data published by Vox, a progressive media outlet, and examined by The Daily Caller News Foundation.
Vox published its data after the Orlando terror attack last Sunday, and it suggests that blue states, which tend to have extremely strict gun laws, are ironically much more likely to have mass shootings than red states with less strict gun laws.
Do You Think Blue States Are Generally More Dangerous Than Red States? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to Daily Caller news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy (http://dailycaller.com/footer/privacy-policy/) and Terms of Use (http://dailycaller.com/footer/terms-of-use/).

TheDCNF’s analysis found that 543 of the mass shootings listed by Vox occurred in blue states while only 330 occurred in red states. If adjusted to account for differences in the size of population, blue states have .381 mass shootings per 100,000 people, while red states have a mere .267.




Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/20/progressive-outlet-accidentally-proves-blue-states-have-42-percent-more-mass-shootings/#ixzz4CF1XSayV

[Sawin]

What about gun free zones, hmm? Bet it's skewed a heck of a lot higher still.

[TFOGGER]

What about gun free zones, hmm? Bet it's skewed a heck of a lot higher still.

You would be correct.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2014/10/11/report-92-percent-of-mass-shootings-since-2009-occured-in-gun-free-zones/


On October 9, the Crime Prevention Research Center (CPRC) released a revised report showing that 92% of mass public shootings between January 2009 and July 2014 took place in gun-free zones.The CPRC report was released in response to an Everytown for Gun Safety study (https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.everytown.org/images/MassShooting_v7_CS6_WEB.pdf) claiming only 14% of mass public shootings took place in gun-free zones. Everytown actually claimed 86% of such incidents occurred in places where guns were allowed.
CPRC showed (http://crimepreventionresearchcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/CPRC-Mass-Shooting-Analysis-Bloomberg2.pdf) that the 86% claim rests on Everytown’s “inclusion of attacks in private homes” and “numerous errors in identifying whether citizens can defend themselves.” For example, Everytown “[ignores] rules that prevent general citizens from carrying guns [for self-defense]” in certain cities, and they fail to recognize that “allowing police to carry guns is not the same thing as letting civilians defend themselves.”
So Everytown might count an attack in a public area in Los Angeles as a mass shooting where guns are allowed because certain guns are allowed in the city with a permit. However, they miss the fact that L.A. County issues a minuscule number of concealed carry permits, and many of the ones that are issued are granted only “to wealthy [political] donors.”
Using the same numerical standard that Everytown used–four or more people killed–but taking all rules and regulations against firearm possession into account, CPRC showed that only 8% of mass public shootings occurred in places where citizens could have guns for self defense.

[Sawin]

So...what's wrong with the liberal mind that they cannot comprehend the truth that gun-free zones are a failed policy that puts children and innocent sheep in grave danger?

[Skip]

It's worse for their narratives when you factor in that red states have more gun owners and more guns (%/population) and yet have less mass shootings.

Could people/values be part of the equation? Nah, it's got to be the guns.

[TFOGGER]

So...what's wrong with the liberal mind that they cannot comprehend the truth that gun-free zones are a failed policy that puts children and innocent sheep in grave danger?

You make the assumption that libs actually want to protect the sheep. They are actually trying to terrify the sheep, so they stampede in a particular direction. Gun free zones have nothing to do with safety, and everything to do with expanding government control of our lives.

[Sawin]

You make the assumption that libs actually want to protect the sheep. They are actually trying to terrify the sheep, so they stampede in a particular direction. Gun free zones have nothing to do with safety, and everything to do with expanding government control of our lives.

^Truth.

[Zundfolge]

https://www.sadtrombone.com/?autoplay=true

[Irving]

So...what's wrong with the liberal mind that they cannot comprehend the truth that gun-free zones are a failed policy that puts children and innocent sheep in grave danger?

Because they don't.

[jhood001]

I would love to see the percentage of physical space in the U.S. that is a gun free zone. It has to be minuscule. Comparing that percentage to the 92% mentioned above REALLY puts things into perspective.