Lol again with the fake news. Are you pretending to be Trump or whats going on here ?

The Holocaust – between 4 and 17 million deaths (racial motivation)
Holodomor and Soviet famine – between 2.5 and 8 million deaths (political motivation)
European colonisation of the Americas – between 2 and 100 million deaths
Nigerian Civil War – 1 to 3 million deaths (ethnic motivation)
Cambodian Genocide – 1 to 3 million deaths (Communist ideological motivation)
Rwandan genocide of 1994 – 500k to 1 million deaths (ethnic motivation)
Expulsion of Germans after WW2 – 500k to 3 million deaths (ethnic motivation)
Zunghar Genocide – 480 to 600 thousand deaths (ethnic motivation)
Circassian Genocide – 400k to 1.5 million deaths (political and ethnic motivation)
Armenian Genocide – 1.5 million deaths (ethnic and religious (against the Christian minority) motivation)
Decossackisation – 300 to 500 thousand deaths (political and ethnic motivation)
Assyrian genocide – 275 to 750 thousand deaths (ethnic and religious (against the Christian minority) motivation)
Utashe Genocide (aka The Holocaust in Croatia) – 270 to 655 thousand deaths (racial motivation)
Greek Genocide – 200k to 1 million deaths (ethnic and religious (against the Christian minority) motivation)
Darfur Conflict – 178 to 400 thousand deaths (ethnic motivation).

These are the top 15 genocides according to death toll and of these. Christian minorities were actually on the receiving end of three of these genocides.

Another list. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genocides_by_death_toll

And another one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_and_anthropogenic_disasters_by_death_toll


But hey. Facts don't matter for your kind of hate driven keyboard warriors.

Opps... I believe it was your classmates that attacked the Capital and were arrested. I think the death toll was like 6 or something? You may have missed it. It was just a little blurb in the newspaper on a Friday.

BTW, you got little mustard your cheek right there. I know you can't see it but everyone else can.

I looked up some stats just to see.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1123070/police-shootings-rate-ethnicity-us/

30 per million blacks fatally shot by police.
12 per million whites fatally shot by police.

So cops are roughly twice as likely to kill a black person, per racial group.

https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045219gg

US being 76% white and 13% black, that works out to an aggregate ratio of roughly 9 whites killed per 4 blacks, per capita. In the end the death toll is high all around, white people aren't getting away scott free.

We should also consider poverty. Poverty and crime tend to track one another. It's safe to assume that areas with more crime will be more likely to experience police encounters, and hence more police shootings on average.

https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/poverty-rate-by-raceethnicity/?currentTimeframe=0&sortModel=%7B%22colId%22:%22Location%22,%22sort%22:%22asc%
22%7D

White poverty rate (9%) is roughly half of black poverty (22%), which implies that crime is also half as frequent among whites, which is roughly similar to the per capita difference in police shooting rate.

30/12 is 2.5
22/9 is 2.44
2.5 > 2.44, so it implies bias against blacks, but not as big as I expected.

As far as total people killed, cops kill plenty people of all races. The numbers don't look as lopsided as I expected, which surprises me.

I appreciate the solidarity among black people. They at least try to hold authorities to account.

White people couldn't care less when cops kill whites. They just shrug it off as 'well the guy must have done something to piss off the cop, so it was probably their own fault anyways'. You can sit on liveleak watching cops kill white people all day, but other white people never get worked up about it. It's a shame they don't have the same sense of unity as black people do.

I wish the protests were about police abuse in general. Or even goverment abuse. There are so many issues that need fixing (e.g. civil forfeiture, repeatedly trying people for the same event by tweaking charges until a conviction sticks, government budget being infinitely larger than a defendant's budget, government freezing a defendant's funds so they can't afford lawyers, etc).

-scheherazade

Death toll forecast:

Stewpid people - 97%
Collateral damage - 3%

"There's no other legal tool available to the public capable of mass murders with so little effort."

I disagree. Petrol and cars/trucks. Both are legal and easily used to commit mass murder (and have been). I'll add swords (long knives) into this with a caveat - you need to be a highly trained swordsman to commit such an atrocity.

Cars are so dangerous that they have killed more people in the US in the last 50 years by accident than guns have on purpose. It took 50 years of concerted effort by subsequent US administrations to get the yearly death toll by cars lower than that of firearms (the curve for cars only recently dipped below that of firearms).

Knives can cause as much or more vascular damage than a typical firearm wound. The difference is that knives require the smallest interpersonal confrontation distance (it is hand to hand combat - people don't like this), and to consistently achieve high levels of vascular damage requires a higher degree of training.

The right of non-restricted people to own firearms has little affect on murder rates. E.g. Australia has a higher rate of firearm ownership now than before its lauded firearms laws came into effect in 1997. The majority of studies done on this topic conclude that the restrictions had no effect (or no measurable effect) on the continued reduction in firearm fatalities.

I think the greatest issue in the US is that some people see the use of firearms as a solution to some problems where it is not a good solution. I.e. it is a cultural issue.

I can't imagine the death toll if it had hit that office building that everyone was running out of.

I'm basically done with defending WikiLeaks as well, after the shit they pulled with the leaks of Turkish data. Completely irresponsible, that one.

However, WikiLeaks doesn't need credibility -- the data does. And the data they published vis-á-vis Clinton/Podesta/DNC is, as of now, solid. There was one fake document, but that was shown to have been injected by someone other than WL.

"Strong bias" -- oh, I do have a strong bias. Plural, as in biases, actually. For instance, I'm disinclined to take anything the US intelligence agencies say at face value, given how they manufactured more than one casus belli. I don't put much weight into (un-)official statements in general, but especially since all the misinformation they spread about issues like the coup in Honduras or the actions of Nazi militias in Ukraine.

In this particular case, however, my argument is much simpler: Occam's razor seems much more likely than malicious intent. Propaganda outlets on both sides are run by people. Maybe the propaganda outlet Sputnik intentionally twisted the content of email, or maybe they just fucked up, like people are wont to do. Maybe someone intentionally fed Trump this bad info, maybe his people are just as incompetent as he is.

There are too many parts in this that include people who have more than once proven themselves to be utterly incompetent, or in complete ignorance of even the concept of truth. I don't think Trump gives a shit about truth or facts, he strikes me as the typical blowhard who spouts whatever shit comes to mind, and spins stories on the fly like a 4-year-old when caught red-handing.

No need for a conspiracy there, with all this incompetence, naiveté and plain disregard for facts.

So when they keep on pushing the Russian angle in this, it just seems like a desperate attempt to conjure up the old unifying enemy. Why worry about Russian propaganda when there's plenty on FOX and MSNBC/CNN? Why worry about Russian hackers when you accept the unbelievably insecure method of eletronic votes, partly without paper trails, and completely controlled by private companies?

It's just very strange to an outsider like me to see them focus on perceived external influences when the internals are a complete clusterfuck. And this presidential election is the biggest clusterfuck I've seen in 30 years, which doesn't mean much, admittedly.

That said, we can't just be looking at it from the outside with binoculars, not when people are back to full-blown Cold War rhetoric. When the ruling class in the US and/or the ruling class in Russia start their pissing contests and other forms of grandstanding, it's usually brown people who pay the price, like they have been in Syria for the last couple of years. And Libya. And Yemen. And Somalia. And Afghanistan, And Iraq. And Pakistan.

Personally, all the rhetoric about "standing up to Russian aggression" and similar nonsense makes me keenly aware that the bridge just outside my hometown was constructed with a shaft to place explosives in, to slow down advancing Soviet troops... so yes, I would very much like to bitch-slap all these warmongerers on both sides, but particularly the ones in the US since they are currently the ones racking up the highest death toll.

Edit: I should have made it clearer. Yes, WL is absolutely biased against Clinton and they do seem to act in support of Trump. Assange in particular. Which bums me out to no end, since I actually met the guy in person when they presented WL at the 26C3.

We have always been a gun violence culture up until the post WW2 era. Think frontier, wild west, duels, and mafia shootouts. We glorify violence everyday, we even give sickos who shoot up groups of people mass media coverage. For a person who wants to go out in a blaze of infamy, we are custom tailored to give them their last 15 minutes of 'fame'.

Again, we have a nebulous definition of what it takes to get on the watch list. I could be placed on it simply by stating something to the effect that "I support ISIS", even though I don't. Restricting people who manage to end up on a government list is the same as removing their right to a firearm after committing a felony offense, only you have removed every single bit of their right to a legal defense. There is no due process to being placed on a US watchlist, you get put on and fuck you if it was a mistake. Maybe they'll take you off later, who knows?

I am not going to defend a slippery slope argument on this, I don't have to. It's already happened in the years since 2001. The Patriot Act, meant to be a well intended set of rules to help us protect ourselves, has been perverted to lessen quite a few of our rights. Not only our rights, but other countries. We have violated their security, spied on their people and leaders, and we perform acts of war on their territories with impugnity. All because we lost two buildings and 2,996 people; a heinous act, but one our government exploited to put us into 2 wars with a death toll to people who may not even be our enemies that dwarf our loss. In short, we fucking have the slippery slope process down to a SCIENCE.

@Mordhaus

The idea of US being a gun violence culture just makes no sense to me. A gun ownership culture among a subset of the population sure, but a culture of resolving conflict with violence? No, it's a product of gun availability. The numbers ChaosEngine quoted on guns / 100 people really is the unique differentiator that makes murder rates some 5-20x the developed country average.

Poverty leading to crime, poor mental health treatment are the tinder but the easy access to weapons is what leads to the death tolls to combust incomparable to any other developed country. Also if legislators can't pass gun control after Sandy Hook, or even restrict people on or previously on the terrorist watch-list from buying guns then the idea of any kind of slippery slope is farcical.

This seems pretty naive to me. Isis has killed thousands of people, according to a CNN report:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/10/07/isis-s-gruesome-muslim-death-toll.html

According to the syrian observatory for human rights, Isis has murdered 3200 people in Syria alone. Other reports place the death toll in Iraq at 7000 people.

They have millions of dollars at their disposal, they are allied with Boko Haram, and they not just in Iraq and Syria but all over North Africa.

To say they are weak is naive..weak organizations don't have millions of dollars, territory all over the middle east and murder thousands of people.

Hmm, let's see... Hiroshima and Nagasaki, a quarter of a million people murdered (to no end, the war was already effectively over).

Americans have killed more than that in subsequent years (in fact, some estimates place a higher death toll of Iraqi civilians alone at American feet). I remember during the invasion of Iraq, American forces shot heavy ordinance (M1 Tank main gun, I believe) at a hotel full of journalists.

As the man says, "I'm afraid of Americans...."

Yeah... it's Muslims who blow shit up around the world.

Good news. Heard from her and her family. They are safe, as they live about 40 km away from the port. They said the death toll is in the low to mid hundreds right now.

There comes a point where you just need to swallow your pride and accept defeat. Hamas is never going to win a war against Israel. Their continued efforts have achieved nothing but the destruction of their own country and the people within. Politics and religion are not worth the death toll.

Now, someone is inevitably going to rant about sovereignty and freedom and all that. Tell me... should Germany have continued fighting after the fall of Berlin? Should Japan have continued fighting after Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Should Native Americans be launching rockets and bombing government buildings? No. You accept defeat and start taking the road to recovery.

Absolutely correct. Well put.

http://videosift.com/video/End-3-billion-a-year-aid-to-Israel

Using precision guided missiles and mortars to kill innocent children playing on the beach.

http://videosift.com/video/Israel-bombs-and-kills-kids-on-beach-NBC-fires-reporter

News reports obsess over the number of rockets fired from Gaza, comparing them to Israel's missile response. Never mentioning that Israel's missiles destroy entire city blocks and whole families whilst Gaza rockets (fireworks) have had nearly no effect on Israel whatsoever,
The hypocrisy of stating Israel is under attack, yet it's safe to holiday there, there has been nearly no impact from rockets whatsoever, and how dare any airline stop flights, is stunning.
The numbers speak for themselves. Gazan death toll is over 1000, 80% civilian. Israel is 30-ish, and that is 90% soldiers due to their ground invasion.

Israeli death toll : 30 (mostly soldiers)
Palestinian death toll: over 600 mostly civilians.

I don't applaud the rocket attacks, but this is not a proportional response.