Google maps shows location of San Bruno shooting • Hacker News Board

Re: Google maps shows location of San Bruno shooting

#41

Post by lolsal » Tue, Apr 03, 2018, 10:41 PM UTC

dabeeeenster wrote: post #21

m52go wrote: post #13

Folks, the number of shooting crimes (including school shootings) in the United States is going down. I know times like this are the worst times to mention this fact, but it's true [0]. The media frenzy makes this look like some kind of out-of-control epidemic, but that's just not the case. This does not mean we should do nothing about them...any shooting is an event that should not happen. But it's important to real…

"The media frenzy makes this look like some kind of out-of-control epidemic, but that's just not the case." That's exactly the case. Just because numbers are going down doesn't make it any less of an epidemic. "people are approaching the topic emotionally rather than rationally and proposing extreme reactions" Suggesting people don't own assault rifles is not an "extreme reaction".

> That's exactly the case. Just because numbers are going down doesn't make it any less of an epidemic.

'Epidemic' is usually used to refer to the rate of spread of something. This sort of hyperbole is exactly why it's hard to have honest or productive discussions about this topic.

> Suggesting people don't own assault rifles is not an "extreme reaction".

I would assert that it depends on whether or not you feel altering (or violating) the Bill of Rights is an "extreme reaction". Getting the USA constitution modified takes a lot of effort and is a big deal.

Re: Google maps shows location of San Bruno shooting

#42

Post by CobrastanJorji » Tue, Apr 03, 2018, 10:42 PM UTC

ryanx435 wrote: post #25

just_testing wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is one of those statistics where there are only two distinct values that matter: - Zero shootings - Too many shootings Any number bigger than zero is too much and we should do our best as a society to decrease it to zero.

Anything more than zero shootings is too much? What a ridiculous assertion. What about deaths from car accidents? What about deaths from hammer? Choking on your toothbrush? Jaywalking? Infections resulting from not washing hands? Carbon monoxide? Your absolutism is dishonest and unhelpful.

Yes, there are too many deaths from all of those things, except possibly the toothbrush thing.

You may be joking about "Infections resulting from not washing hands," but hospital-acquired infections, which can easily come from exactly this, kill something like 100,000 people a year.

Re: Google maps shows location of San Bruno shooting

#43

Post by pasabagi » Tue, Apr 03, 2018, 10:43 PM UTC

matte_black wrote: post #32

dabeeeenster wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The media frenzy makes this look like some kind of out-of-control epidemic, but that's just not the case." That's exactly the case. Just because numbers are going down doesn't make it any less of an epidemic. "people are approaching the topic emotionally rather than rationally and proposing extreme reactions" Suggesting people don't own assault rifles is not an "extreme reaction".

First off, the term assault rifle probably isn’t what you think you’re referring to. Second, the reason effective conversations can’t be had on gun control is because of how emotional and out of touch the anti-gun crowd gets. A lot of this is due to activists and the media riling people up. Gun owners are all about safety and personal responsibility, and many do support sensible gun control laws. The problem is, as s…

Coming from a country where people don't have guns, I don't really see the problem with no guns. They're an awful public health risk. They have basically no advantages. Even for their use in suicide alone, they would be just as reasonable to ban as any commodity you could name - for instance, heroin, or dynamite, or crystal meth.

Re: Google maps shows location of San Bruno shooting

#44

Post by joshumax » Tue, Apr 03, 2018, 10:43 PM UTC

I'm working with a team to create a consensus-based distributed alert system for emergencies [1], and as horrible as shootings are (having personally been stuck in the middle of mass panic due to a gun threat I can say it's insanely frightening), providing spatial and statistical tools to display, model, and alert dangerous events like shootings will be critical in helping reduce response times and increase assistance to victims, as well as figure out commonalities between events. It's interesting to see Google try to tackle that problem through augmenting emergencies over Google maps.

1: http://proximityapp.xyz

Re: Google maps shows location of San Bruno shooting

#45

Post by rbritton » Tue, Apr 03, 2018, 10:44 PM UTC

johnny313 wrote: post #28

m52go wrote: post #13

Folks, the number of shooting crimes (including school shootings) in the United States is going down. I know times like this are the worst times to mention this fact, but it's true [0]. The media frenzy makes this look like some kind of out-of-control epidemic, but that's just not the case. This does not mean we should do nothing about them...any shooting is an event that should not happen. But it's important to real…

> Folks, the number of shooting crimes (including school shootings) in the United States is going down. This is not supported by other analyses that look at the issue. FiveThirtyEight looked at several measures of school shootings / mass shootings and came to the opposite conclusion. [0] [0] https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/no-matter-how-you-measu...

You're comparing two different numbers. The parent is referring to net firearm crimes while the data you cited is "mass shooting deaths".

If you check CDC data through 2016 (https://wonder.cdc.gov), the non-suicide firearm-related death rate is effectively flat for the date range they have data for, varying at most by about 0.1%.

Re: Google maps shows location of San Bruno shooting

#46

Post by CodeMage » Tue, Apr 03, 2018, 10:44 PM UTC

matte_black wrote: post #32

dabeeeenster wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The media frenzy makes this look like some kind of out-of-control epidemic, but that's just not the case." That's exactly the case. Just because numbers are going down doesn't make it any less of an epidemic. "people are approaching the topic emotionally rather than rationally and proposing extreme reactions" Suggesting people don't own assault rifles is not an "extreme reaction".

First off, the term assault rifle probably isn’t what you think you’re referring to. Second, the reason effective conversations can’t be had on gun control is because of how emotional and out of touch the anti-gun crowd gets. A lot of this is due to activists and the media riling people up. Gun owners are all about safety and personal responsibility, and many do support sensible gun control laws. The problem is, as s…

> First off, the term assault rifle probably isn’t what you think you’re referring to.

It probably doesn't mean what I think, either, yet we're all still perfectly capable of understanding GP's point.

> Second, the reason effective conversations can’t be had on gun control is because of how emotional and out of touch the anti-gun crowd gets. A lot of this is due to activists and the media riling people up.

I don't think it's intellectually honest to blame it all on "anti-gun crowd", especially since we're talking about a highly heterogeneous group. It would be equally dishonest to just blame it all on "pro-gun crowd" being overly emotional and riled up by NRA.

> Gun owners are all about safety and personal responsibility, and many do support sensible gun control laws.

I'm sure all gun owners are all about safety and personal responsibility, just as much as every gun-control activist is for banning all guns.

Here's an interesting question: if so many gun owners really do support sensible gun control laws, how come this country hasn't had sensible gun control laws put in place to deal with this problem? And let's not pretend it's not a problem, either.

> Nothing can be done unless people start taking a rational, sober approach to these issues.

I completely agree. A rational, sober approach to these issues does not go down the path of laying blame exclusively on one side of the debate, no matter which side that is.

Re: Google maps shows location of San Bruno shooting

#47

Post by tacomonstrous » Tue, Apr 03, 2018, 10:44 PM UTC

lolsal wrote: post #41

dabeeeenster wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The media frenzy makes this look like some kind of out-of-control epidemic, but that's just not the case." That's exactly the case. Just because numbers are going down doesn't make it any less of an epidemic. "people are approaching the topic emotionally rather than rationally and proposing extreme reactions" Suggesting people don't own assault rifles is not an "extreme reaction".

> That's exactly the case. Just because numbers are going down doesn't make it any less of an epidemic. 'Epidemic' is usually used to refer to the rate of spread of something. This sort of hyperbole is exactly why it's hard to have honest or productive discussions about this topic. > Suggesting people don't own assault rifles is not an "extreme reaction". I would assert that it depends on whether or not you feel alte…

>I would assert that it depends on whether or not you feel altering (or violating) the Bill of Rights is an "extreme reaction". Getting the USA constitution modified takes a lot of effort and is a big deal.

No, it doesn't mean that at all. It just means that we interpret the 2nd amendment differently. There is clear precedence for limits on arms ownership. It's just a question of where they should be.

Re: Google maps shows location of San Bruno shooting

#48

Post by matte_black » Tue, Apr 03, 2018, 10:45 PM UTC

pasabagi wrote: post #43

matte_black wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First off, the term assault rifle probably isn’t what you think you’re referring to. Second, the reason effective conversations can’t be had on gun control is because of how emotional and out of touch the anti-gun crowd gets. A lot of this is due to activists and the media riling people up. Gun owners are all about safety and personal responsibility, and many do support sensible gun control laws. The problem is, as s…

Coming from a country where people don't have guns, I don't really see the problem with no guns. They're an awful public health risk. They have basically no advantages. Even for their use in suicide alone, they would be just as reasonable to ban as any commodity you could name - for instance, heroin, or dynamite, or crystal meth.

Come spend some time with gun owners here in the states, and you won’t see a problem with people owning guns either.

Re: Google maps shows location of San Bruno shooting

#49

Post by timkpaine » Tue, Apr 03, 2018, 10:45 PM UTC

CobrastanJorji wrote: post #42

ryanx435 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anything more than zero shootings is too much? What a ridiculous assertion. What about deaths from car accidents? What about deaths from hammer? Choking on your toothbrush? Jaywalking? Infections resulting from not washing hands? Carbon monoxide? Your absolutism is dishonest and unhelpful.

Yes, there are too many deaths from all of those things, except possibly the toothbrush thing. You may be joking about "Infections resulting from not washing hands," but hospital-acquired infections, which can easily come from exactly this, kill something like 100,000 people a year.

And many of these are more highly regulated than guns.

Re: Google maps shows location of San Bruno shooting

#50

Post by lolsal » Tue, Apr 03, 2018, 10:45 PM UTC

just_testing wrote: post #15

m52go wrote: post #13

Folks, the number of shooting crimes (including school shootings) in the United States is going down. I know times like this are the worst times to mention this fact, but it's true [0]. The media frenzy makes this look like some kind of out-of-control epidemic, but that's just not the case. This does not mean we should do nothing about them...any shooting is an event that should not happen. But it's important to real…

This is one of those statistics where there are only two distinct values that matter: - Zero shootings - Too many shootings Any number bigger than zero is too much and we should do our best as a society to decrease it to zero.

Is this statistic different other statistics about homicides and other forms of death?

- domestic violence that results in homicide - homicides in prison - automobile related deaths - drug overdoses - suicides

I think most people would agree that life is precious and should be preserved. I'm not sure most people would agree that we could get any of the above statistics to zero.