Fbi statistics question

Factual Questions
1

So today I got sucked into (willingly, I admit) debates with “false flag” nuts about the recent shootings of the reporter and camera man in Virginia. I started watching you tube videos and saw a video saying the FBI stats for 2012 show that NO murders were committed in NEWTOWN, CT, where all those kids were murdered at the school.

Sure enough, it does show zero murders. And so does citydata-crime site. I am sure there is a simple explanation and I can’t think of a better place to ask than here.

Thanks in advance.

2

someome needs a good snopesing:

Short version: the attack was handled by state police, therefore were reported under statewide statistics, not local statistics.

3

Right - because of course the federal government is so EEE-VUL that they would kill 20 children and 6 teachers, and yet wouldn’t dare falsify an FBI record. That would be a federal offence, you know.

4

thanks!

5

Remember, any actual conspiracy will contain a tiny mistake, where somebody forgot to cover one small aspect of it. Even conspirators are human and make mistakes.

Conversely, all of real reality is totally 100% all the time perfectly consistent.

So to spot a conspiracy, all you have to do is spot any gap or inconsistency in your own or anyone else’s knowledge or understanding of an event and Bingo!: there’s your Incontrovertible Proof. Bonus points if you spot this inconsistency in the early reports before the conspirators have a chance to cover their tracks and correct any early E&O they may have made in their cover story.

And the beauty of this approach is that it’s infallible. Once you subscribe to it you’ll understand everything everywhere with such clarity. The scales have truly been lifted from your eyes.

:smack::smack::smack:

6

By the way, the city-data crime site has a lot of errors, and a lot of missing information. Just FYI. I wouldn’t rely on it as a definitive source of information.

7

What this all seems to imply is that FBI statistics are pretty much unreliable, to be point of being basically bogus, simply because of the inconsistencies and arbitrariness of what sources they draw their data from, and what other sources they don’t draw their data from.

(The same has been noted, elsewhere, of their hit-and-miss collection of statistics about police shootings.)