Well, I mean, they do.
May I assume that the OP won’t be returning to defend this assertion?
Please try to keep up with the class. The obvious subject of the first comment was mass shootings. Your assignment: For each – oh, let’s make it three to be sporting – white male mass shooter others on the thread can name, name one non-white-male mass shooter (US examples only – obviously, our policies only apply in our territory). I’ll start us off with Eric Harris, Dylan Klebold, and Dylann Roof. Your turn…
John Allan Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo. That’s two.
Okay, it’s 3-2 for the white guys. White has the ball.
Chief Fox should have been fired for using it’s instead of its.
Although I’m not aware of an official definition, the most common definition of mass shootings are usually something like four or more dead in a single incident. What single incident in which either of those two were involved qualifies?
They are (were, in Muhammad’s case) serial killers, which incidentally is another demographic dominated by white males, but the Beltway attacks don’t quite qualify as mass shootings in the same way that the Aurora movie theater, or Newtown, or the Nickel Mines school shooting, do.
Note, by the way, that Muhammad and Malvo were accomplices in the same murder spree (the DC area sniper shootings), carried out in 2002, as were Harris and Klebold in the 1999 Columbine shootings.
Notorious mass shootings since then in civilian public spaces in the US include the 2007 Virginia Tech massacre (Korean-American male), the 2009 Binghamton murders (Vietnamese-American male), the 2011 Tucson shooting at an event with Congresswoman Gabby Giffords (white male), the 2011 California salon shooting (white male), the 2012 Aurora movie theater shooting (white male), the 2012 Oakland college shooting (Korean male), the 2012 Sikh temple shooting (white male), the 2013 Sandy Hook school shooting (white male), the 2014 Isla Vista murders (biracial white/Malaysian male), the 2015 Umpqua Community College shooting (white male), and the 2015 San Bernardino murders (Pakistani-American male, Pakistani female).
So the people most disproportionately prominent among perpetrators of mass shootings appear to be males of East and Southeast Asian descent, who make up less than 1% of the US population. Where are the calls for profiling them?
That does it - I’m done keeping score.
Sorry, that should have been “make up less than 3% of the US population”. Still super-overrepresented as mass shooters, though.
That doesn’t appear to be the case. Using data tallied by Mother Jones, 45 out of 75 mass shootings were done by white people (almost always men). That’s 60% which is about the same as the percentage of white people.
Non-Hispanic whites are 64% of the population, but Mother Jones doesn’t specify who it includes in “Latino.”
:dubious: We’re talking about white men being overrepresented as mass shooters, and you’re fudging that by comparing the percentage of white male mass shooters to the percentage of white people in the general population. I call foul.
That is a strawman argument. I have never suggested that. But if someone were walking around with explosives and wouldn’t say who their cohorts are maybe a bit of waterboarding would be in order,
Indeed. 44 of the 75 shooters listed there are white men. There are a few “others”. 59% of the mass shooters are white men, compared to 32% or so of general population.
No, it’s called reductio ad absurdum. Your argument is that racial profiling is an effective tactic, and that we should therefore employ it. That argument would also justify coerced confessions.
But if you have no interest in the spirit of the Constitution, much less its letter (as your subsequent statement makes clear), it won’t be a very effective argument from your point of view.
Is the implication that these things happen at comparable (or proportional) frequencies borne out by any evidence?