(05-20-2018, 01:43 AM)B2hibry Wrote:

(05-19-2018, 10:35 PM)rollerjag Wrote: You quoted an article with no link, I found the link. Every point in the article you linked was addressed, every single one of the incidents was described. There was no attempt to mislead. You cited an article, did no follow-up, parroted its conclusion verbatim. I know reading is hard, here's a saltine.

Did you even attemmpt to read the articles? If you read the CNN article you posted, can you keep a straight face and say it was not misleading? Just because certain incidents meet the CNN framework doesn’t make them legit in the “school shooting” dept. I’m seeing you might have the reading down but there is a disconnect in the comprehension department. 

So let us go with the high CNN number of 22...gun problem, security issue, or kids have gone mental?

Yes, I read your article, which had no link. Then I found the article, which I read Yes, the headline said there have been 22 school shootings in 2018, which is a fact, then in the beginning of the article they listed, quite clearly, what criteria was used to determine a school shooting, and then a synopsis of all 22 shootings. It was only misleading if you only read an article which told you it was misleading. Why do you think the article you linked had no link to the CNN article? In your eagerness to believe anything negative about CNN, did you bother asking yourself that question?

You cited an article, extolled it's contents, with 0 research. And you called me a parrot.

---