Hey Straw and Gun Control people - what is your plan for this?

[Straw Man]

The powerball winner you posted was the 5th largest powerball win in history at 478 million.  Your article also states the odds of winning, somewhere as 1 in 232 million.  So we have a population of 230 million and odds of winning are near similar numbers, yet how long has the pot continued to rise because no one wins multiple weeks In a row.  That powerball winner was the anomaly,  you idiot, which is also it's newsworthy.  You don't see the news covering kittens being born or idiots losing arguments on the Internet, because kittens are born all the time and idiots like you lose arguments on the net all the time.

My perspective is certainly not the only one that counts, but no honest person would do as you are now and debate the above situation being the rare occurence.

After Lying multiple times, omitting facts,  changing the subject multiple times to cows, mass killing in other countries, etc; you are finally back to arguing the definition of a word. It's sad that your whole argument rest on ignorantly arguing the definition of a word.

Can you provide your list of San Jose lottery winners since there have been so many. I'm skeptical to believe it happens all the time.  And once again, we are talking about jackpot winners, not scratch off 5 buck winners

No one said those things wouldn't happen again. I said they happen at a rare rate.  I initially thought you were just being stubborj, now I just question your competence and literacy

feel free to point out my "lies"

the definition you provided doesn't have a math formula or anything objective in it

it's talks about what is "unexpected" which would have to then require someone's judgement (and oddly it doesn't require that to be solely your judgement)

winning a a lottery is a rare event yet it's not unexpected that there will be a winner

If you insist that a thing that is defined as an anomaly is objective and also based strictly in the "iwantmass" falllacy of "event/population"
then simply find a published and generally accepted definition that states that

Can you do that?

How about you provide a definition of anomaly that at least says that it's objective.  You'd think they would at least include that term in the definition

For example  "an amomaly is an objective classification based on the number of times an event happens divided by the population of the group to which that event occurs.  If it happens less than .00001 is the generally accepted cut off point for an anomaly"

You'd think something objective would be clearly defined as shown above and not open to interpretation

[iwantmass]

feel free to point out my "lies"

the definition you provided doesn't have a math formula or anything objective in it

it's talks about what is "unexpected" which would have to then require someone's judgement (and oddly it doesn't require that to be solely your judgement)

winning a a lottery is a rare event yet it's not unexpected that there will be a winner

If you insist that a thing that is defined as an anomaly is objective and also based strictly in the "iwantmass" falllacy of "event/population"
then simply find a published and generally accepted definition that states that

Can you do that?

How about you provide a definition of anomaly that at least says that it's objective.  You'd think they would at least include that term in the definition

For example  "an amomaly is an objective classification based on the number of times an event happens divided by the population of the group to which that event occurs.  If it happens less than .00001 is the generally accepted cut off point for an anomaly"

You'd think something objective would be clearly defined as shown above and not open to interpretation

I'm not going to recount all your lies. I've already pointed them out  a few times throughout the thread.  It usually occurs just before I say something to the effect "There you go lying again."  One instance was where you attributed something you said to me.   In you we are talking about the person that is losing so badly, that you are trying to pin me down to a numerical value for anamolies.  A person like that will never admit they lie, so it would be a waste of my time to reproduce em.

You are pathetic.  You are literally debating an event that is the 5th biggest of its kind, that has odds of occuring 1 in 320 million times, yet still takes months to occur, amongst a population of 320 million, is not an anomaly.   That makes you an idiot

It's to the point that the only thing you concede to be an anomaly is the occurence of 2 headed cows.  So by that parameter, anything that occurs more often than to headed cows, up to and including the 5th biggest powerball pot in history, which went without a winner for months in order to reach that point is not an anomally.  Once again, that makes you an idiot.

If you aren't competent enough to understand the definition of a word, that isn't my problem.  Blame your parents shitty genetics and your previous educators.

I'm still waiting for your frequent list of San Jose lottery winners.   I suspect I won't get that, as you've already ignored the request several times
 

[Straw Man]

I'm not going to recount all your lies. I've already pointed them out  a few times throughout the thread.  It usually occurs just before I say something to the effect "There you go lying again."  One instance was where you attributed something you said to me.   In you we are talking about the person that is losing so badly, that you are trying to pin me down to a numerical value for anamolies.  A person like that will never admit they lie, so it would be a waste of my time to reproduce em.

You are pathetic.  You are literally debating an event that is the 5th biggest of its kind, that has odds of occuring 1 in 320 million times, yet still takes months to occur, amongst a population of 320 million, is not an anomaly.   That makes you an idiot

It's to the point that the only thing you concede to be an anomaly is the occurence of 2 headed cows.  So by that parameter, anything that occurs more often than to headed cows, up to and including the 5th biggest powerball pot in history, which went without a winner for months in order to reach that point is not an anomally.  Once again, that makes you an idiot.

If you aren't competent enough to understand the definition of a word, that isn't my problem.  Blame your parents shitty genetics and your previous educators.

I'm still waiting for your frequent list of San Jose lottery winners.   I suspect I won't get that, as you've already ignored the request several times
 

just recount one of my lies so I have a clue if you even know what a the word "lie" means

I'm only asking because you clearly have no clue what the word anomaly means and even when you posted the definition (which is quite simiple) you still seem utterly clueless

here's a link to San Jose lottery winners

http://bfy.tw/70Eh

Not sure why you think that's important.  As I've mentioned I'm not shocked when someone wins the lottery but apparently you are so better make sure you're sitting down when you click that link just in case you faint or something

Let me know if you'd like to find winners from the entire state of California

I know that would "absolutely shock" you as well

[iwantmass]

just recount one of my lies so I have a clue if you even know what a the word lie means

I'm only asking becauuse you clearly have no clue what the word anomaly means and even when you posted the definition (which is quite simiple) you still seem utterly clueless

here's a link to San Jose lottery winners

http://bfy.tw/70Eh

Not sure why you think that's important.  As I've mentioned I'm not shocked when someone wins the lottery but apparently you are so better make sure you're sitting down when you click that link just in case you faint or something

Let me know if you'd like to find winners from the entire state of California

I know that would "absolutely shock" you as well

I gave you an example of 1 of your lies. Your tried crediting me with something you said. I don't have the desire to sift through the last few pages. It's all there just as I said. I called it out a few times

That isn't a link to a list of San Jose lottery winners. That page contains a few winners.  Is that it?

Given that you don't think something that has odds of 1 out of 320 million is an anomaly, when autism has a 1 in 68 chance and is deemed a medical anomaly, you'll have to forgive me if I don't take your version of the facts.  1 in 320 million seems like much rarer of a circumstance than 1 in 68.

You didn't know what a strawman argument was and you gave yourself the screen name, and you didn't know what an anomaly is.  I think it's time you post a pic of the definition again and go on some rambling rant

I said I would be shocked if someone  I had a connection with won the lottery. This is where you are lying again by omission of the facts.  Seeing a random person win the lottery out of a population of 320 million is eventually going to happen, as it just did this weekend after several months of no winner. You ignored that part too

We should keep this ball roling. At the rate you recycle failed arguments, we will be back to a  stabbing in France in no time

[Straw Man]

I gave you an example of 1 of your lies. Your tried crediting me with something you said. I don't have the desire to sift through the last few pages. It's all there just as I said. I called it out a few times

That isn't a link to a list of San Jose lottery winners. That page contains a few winners.  Is that it?

Given that you don't think something that has odds of 1 out of 320 million is an anomaly, when autism has a 1 in 68 chance and is deemed a medical anomaly, you'll have to forgive me if I don't take your version of the facts.  1 in 320 million seems like much rarer of a circumstance than 1 in 68.

You didn't know what a strawman argument was and you gave yourself the screen name, and you didn't know what an anomaly is.  I think it's time you post a pic of the definition again and go on some rambling rant

I said I would be shocked if someone  I had a connection with won the lottery. This is where you are lying again by omission of the facts.  Seeing a random person win the lottery out of a population of 320 million is eventually going to happen, as it just did this weekend after several months of no winner. You ignored that part too

We should keep this ball roling. At the rate you recycle failed arguments, we will be back to a  stabbing in France in no time

LOL - you know I lied but you can't actually remember it but I'm supposed to know what it is?

How many winners do you need. I don't recall that being defined in the "iwantmass" fallacy

let me know when you can find a definition of an anomaly that actually conforms with your idiotic "iwantmass" fallacy

The only defintion you provided say they are totally subjective (i.e. dependent on expectation)

Convenient how you totally ignore that. 

Heck check out this idiot in the UK

He expects another terrorist attack

Doesn't he know these events are anomalies and by expecting it to happen he's violating the "iwantmass" fallacy of anomalies (you know, the one that no one anwhere follows)

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/31/europe/uk-met-police-commissioner-terror-attack-comments/index.html

Met police head expects terror attack in UK

Stupid Europeans measuring terrorist attack in terms of # of attack / days (i.e. time)
Don't they know time is totally irrelevent in the "iwantmass" falllacy of anomalies.
They are making the classic mistake that everyone except you seems to make

'One ISIS attack every 84 hours' spurs dread and anger in Europe
http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/31/europe/isis-attacks-escalating-europe/index.html

Shit, if these dopey Europeans lived in the US they'd probably look at mass shooting and try dividing them by the number of days in the year and start to seem them as normal and expect them to happen again

[Straw Man]

I gave you an example of 1 of your lies. Your tried crediting me with something you said. I don't have the desire to sift through the last few pages. It's all there just as I said. I called it out a few times

That isn't a link to a list of San Jose lottery winners. That page contains a few winners.  Is that it?

Given that you don't think something that has odds of 1 out of 320 million is an anomaly, when autism has a 1 in 68 chance and is deemed a medical anomaly, you'll have to forgive me if I don't take your version of the facts.  1 in 320 million seems like much rarer of a circumstance than 1 in 68.

You didn't know what a strawman argument was and you gave yourself the screen name, and you didn't know what an anomaly is.  I think it's time you post a pic of the definition again and go on some rambling rant

I said I would be shocked if someone  I had a connection with won the lottery. This is where you are lying again by omission of the facts. Seeing a random person win the lottery out of a population of 320 million is eventually going to happen, as it just did this weekend after several months of no winner. You ignored that part too

We should keep this ball roling. At the rate you recycle failed arguments, we will be back to a  stabbing in France in no time

BTW - dipshit, I've been on this board for years and have explained many times exactly why I chose my screenname.  It was based on watching Republicans using the Strawman argument over and over again on TV and never being challenged on it.

Clearly you've forgotten your own post

You also said you'd be shocked if someone in your town won the lottery or died of cancer or had an austic child

Who's lying again?

I would absolutely be shocked if someone in my town/i knew won the lottery, died of cancer, or gave birth to an autistic child.  If it were something common, I wouldn't have to rely on an example from the National media.

I bet you are not afraid to go to movie theaters, frequent the gay clubs you love so much, or attend marathons.  Because +99% of the time those things operate in a normal fashion, free of mass murders.  In fact, as I've repeatedly mentioned and you've continually ignored, you don't have or know anyone with 1st hand experience of a mass shooting.  I bet you know a few autistic kids....

You don't get to come here and argue the occurrences of anomalies.  Mass shootings are anomalies and your last shred of hope is to quibble over the definition of the word, which means you are dumb or desperate.

What you won't do is have an expectation of a mass shooting happen to anyone you know, in your city, or in your favorite gay club

In fact you said someone in your town again in this post

What's the lie again?

What exactly is your argument at this point? Of course mass murders are anomalies.  You yourself said they are happening every other month in France.  Never mind that these attacks don't have anything to do with guns in all/most cases.

I did say I would be shocked to see those things happen within the my town. To which you responded that I must live in a really small town if I don't know a lottery winner.  I asked you to tell me the names of the lottery winners that you know, and I'm still awaiting your answer.

Once again, the fact that you have to rely on national media to.identify with any of these things speaks volumes to their rarity.

There is no fallacy in my argument or flaw to my judgment.  My argument has made you look like an idiot every time that you post, to the point you can't even stick to the original topic.  You are actually childish enough to argue the very definition or context of anomolies, just because you are having your ass handed to you.

You've  argued the definition of a word, outright lied a few times along the way, changed the subject to funny cows occurrences, tried to change the subject matter to mass murders in general, and actually changed the local from the United states to not only another country but another continent.  

Did I miss anything?  

[iwantmass]

BTW - dipshit, I've been on this board for years and have explained many times exactly why I chose my screenname.  It was based on watching Republicans using the Strawman argument over and over again on TV and never being challenged on it.

Clearly you've forgotten your own post

You also said you'd be shocked if someone in your town won the lottery or died of cancer or had an austic child

Who's lying again?

In fact you said someone in your town again in this post

What's the lie again?

You were incapable of identifying a strawman argument until I pointed out that you were using one in another thread and you actually argued with me that it wasn't a strawman argument.  You've also made more than 1 attempt to use one in this thread, so I find it odd that you would have a problem with republicans using them.  People use them when their own argument isn't strong and lacks merit....as Republicans will...and as you have multiple times in this thread.

Speaking of 1 of your attempts at a strawman argument, your attempt to use France was where you told 1 of your lies.  You attempted to attribute to me the idea that there is nothing to be done about their recent violence and I should tell them there is  nothing to worry about it.  You literally tried attributing your stupid argument to me.  I called you out on it as I've said twice recently.

So it basically sounds like someone pointed out that Republicans were using this argument strategy,  and you chose to name yourself after it without knowing what it means.  Just as I said earlier, a  pseudo intellectual. Go read.manchurian candidate on the plane for the lady next to you to see, dumb dick

[iwantmass]

LOL - you know I lied but you can't actually remember it but I'm supposed to know what it is?

How many winners do you need. I don't recall that being defined in the "iwantmass" fallacy

let me know when you can find a definition of an anomaly that actually conforms with your idiotic "iwantmass" fallacy

The only defintion you provided say they are totally subjective (i.e. dependent on expectation)

Convenient how you totally ignore that.  

Heck check out this idiot in the UK

He expects another terrorist attack

Doesn't he know these events are anomalies and by expecting it to happen he's violating the "iwantmass" fallacy of anomalies (you know, the one that no one anwhere follows)

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/31/europe/uk-met-police-commissioner-terror-attack-comments/index.html

Met police head expects terror attack in UK

Stupid Europeans measuring terrorist attack in terms of # of attack / days (i.e. time)
Don't they know time is totally irrelevent in the "iwantmass" falllacy of anomalies.
They are making the classic mistake that everyone except you seems to make

'One ISIS attack every 84 hours' spurs dread and anger in Europe
http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/31/europe/isis-attacks-escalating-europe/index.html

Shit, if these dopey Europeans lived in the US they'd probably look at mass shooting and try dividing them by the number of days in the year and start to seem them as normal and expect them to happen again

Your whole argument and refusal to acknowledge the idea of an anomaly is a stubborn lie.  Your initial thread where you said you've just accepted there is nothing we can do is a dramatic hissy fit of a lie. It's what you do

I don't need any set number of winners. I just figured as common as they are it would be helpful to your argument to provide more.  You actually helped mine by listing so few....

I don't have a fallacy and continuing to say I do doesn't help your argument.  No competent person would deny things happening at probability chance of 1 in 320 million isn't an anomaly.  You wouldn't otherwise either, you just literally have lost every other argument you've presented here

When have we ever said anomalies weren't ever to be expected again.  Stop trying so hard.  Autism happens 1 in 68 pregnancies per your numbers, yet it is a medical anomaly.  We fully expect it to happen again.  I think you are trying to stick to this unexpected thing way too mich, because it's all you got.  Of course he expects another another terrorist attack....eventually.... somewhere.  

I think you are confusing anomaly with nonexistent.  They aren't the same. Anomalies actually happen

Once again what do knife attacks and truck attacks in France have anything to do with mass shootings here?  Also, Europe isn't a country,  it's a continent.  So you've literally gone from arguing mass shootings in a country to mass violence in a completely different continent.  I don't really see where it helps your argument.  Do.you need me to explain what argument strategy you are using here?

[Straw Man]

You were incapable of identifying a strawman argument until I pointed out that you were using one in another thread and you actually argued with me that it wasn't a strawman argument.  You've also made more than 1 attempt to use one in this thread, so I find it odd that you would have a problem with republicans using them.  People use them when their own argument isn't strong and lacks merit....as Republicans will...and as you have multiple times in this thread.

Speaking of 1 of your attempts at a strawman argument, your attempt to use France was where you told 1 of your lies.  You attempted to attribute to me the idea that there is nothing to be done about their recent violence and I should tell them there is  nothing to worry about it.  You literally tried attributing your stupid argument to me.  I called you out on it as I've said twice recently.

So it basically sounds like someone pointed out that Republicans were using this argument strategy,  and you chose to name yourself after it without knowing what it means.  Just as I said earlier, a  pseudo intellectual. Go read.manchurian candidate on the plane for the lady next to you to see, dumb dick

Go ahead and post it and we'll see who is correct (hint - the answer will be me)

I'm guessing you'll respond by saying you can't remember it now

Hmmm, why no response to my proof that you did in fact say you'd be shocked to find out someone in your town won the lottery

You said I was lying right?

[Straw Man]

Your whole argument and refusal to acknowledge the idea of an anomaly is a stubborn lie.  Your initial thread where you said you've just accepted there is nothing we can do is a dramatic hissy fit of a lie. It's what you do

I don't need any set number of winners. I just figured as common as they are it would be helpful to your argument to provide more.  You actually helped mine by listing so few....

I don't have a fallacy and continuing to say I do doesn't help your argument.  No competent person would deny things happening at probability chance of 1 in 320 million isn't an anomaly.  You wouldn't otherwise either, you just literally have lost every other argument you've presented here

When have we ever said anomalies weren't ever to be expected again.  Stop trying so hard.  Autism happens 1 in 68 pregnancies per your numbers, yet it is a medical anomaly.  We fully expect it to happen again.  I think you are trying to stick to this unexpected thing way too mich, because it's all you got.  Of course he expects another another terrorist attack....eventually.... somewhere.  

I think you are confusing anomaly with nonexistent.  They aren't the same. Anomalies actually happen

Once again what do knife attacks and truck attacks in France have anything to do with mass shootings here?  Also, Europe isn't a country,  it's a continent.  So you've literally gone from arguing mass shootings in a country to mass violence in a completely different continent.  I don't really see where it helps your argument.  Do.you need me to explain what argument strategy you are using here?

I'm following the definition that you provided

why have you chosen to ignore that?

I'm keeping these replies short from now on because you seem to have ADHD

[iwantmass]

Go ahead and post it and we'll see who is correct (hint - the answer will be me)

I'm guessing you'll respond by saying you can't remember it now

Hmmm, why no response to my proof that you did in fact say you'd be shocked to find out someone in your town won the lottery

You said I was lying right?

I have no desire to dig up the thread to identify that you don't know what a word means.  You've demonstrated that we'll enough here with anomalies as with your multiple failed attempts to actual strawman arguments in this very thread

You've been incorrect this entire thread, thus changing your argument multiple times.

I would be shocked if there was a lottery winner in my hometown of 110k because there has never been 1.  I also provided the full context of that multiple times to include some personal connection.  You quoted it the first 2 times and hyper focused on my 3rd quote of which I abbreviated.  You providing a Google with 3 winners in a 1 million person San jose. I didn't really feel the need to debate that.

See the next thread. You are lying

[iwantmass]

I'm following the definition that you provided

why have you chosen to ignore that?

I'm keeping these replies short from now on because you seem to have ADHD

You aren't following the definition.  You are trying to be as Literal as you can with every word of the definition to exploit it to your needs.  You know what the word means and you know mass shootings are anomalies, it just doesn't fit your political leanings or shitty debate.  You are relying fully on desperation at this point.

It's not my definition.  I don't fill dictionaries

You are keeping the threads short and ignoring the rest of that post because it makes you look like a fucking idiot, as you have the whole thread.

Once again, after multiple failed attempted to change the subject of the argument, your sole argument is refusing the defintion of anomaly.  You don't think you are winning, I know you arent, and no one else reading this thread thinks you are winning.  

I wouldn't respond to the France or Europe thing either if I were you.  The sad thing is you already tried it once and felt confident/foolish enough to try it again

How does a person that tries to change the subject multiple times, due to his weak argument, claim that the person dominating the argument has ADHD. I haven't wavered from my original argument at all.  You on the other hand....

[Straw Man]

You aren't following the definition.  You are trying to be as Literal as you can with every word of the definition to exploit it to your needs.  You know what the word means and you know mass shootings are anomalies, it just doesn't fit your political leanings or shitty debate.  You are relying fully on desperation at this point.

It's not my definition.  I don't fill dictionaries

You are keeping the threads short and ignoring the rest of that post because it makes you look like a fucking idiot, as you have the whole thread.

Once again, after multiple failed attempted to change the subject of the argument, your sole argument is refusing the defintion of anomaly.  You don't think you are winning, I know you arent, and no one else reading this thread thinks you are winning.  

I wouldn't respond to the France or Europe thing either if I were you.  The sad thing is you already tried it once and felt confident/foolish enough to try it again

How does a person that tries to change the subject multiple times, due to his weak argument, claim that the person dominating the argument has ADHD. I haven't wavered from my original argument at all.  You on the other hand....

Is this your post and is this the definition of an anomaly that you'd like to use

Yes or No

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anomaly

There you go. Webster dictionary actually uses autism as an example of an anomaly.  Wanna guess how much more common autism is than mass shootings? I'm sure Webster dictionary isn't good enough for grasping at straws man, but I'll agree with them on this 1

[iwantmass]

Is this your post and is this the definition of an anomaly that you'd like to use

Yes or No

Yep, that's it and it's use of autism as an example.

You can refute the definition of a word all you want, just because you lost a debate in horrible fashion, even after attempts to change the subject multiple times. It just makes you look stupider.

It all boils down to you having no leg to stand on so you are actually debating the definition of a word that provides an example, that happens exponentially more than mass shooting.  No one thinks you are right here

[Straw Man]

Yep, that's it and it's use of autism as an example.

You can refute the definition of a word all you want, just because you lost a debate in horrible fashion, even after attempts to change the subject multiple times. It just makes you look stupider.

It all boils down to you having no leg to stand on so you are actually debating the definition of a word that provides an example, that happens exponentially more than mass shooting.  No one thinks you are right here

great

is this the definition ?

just want to make sure there is no confusion on your part

[iwantmass]

great

is this the definition ?

just want to make sure there is no confusion on your part

I'm not playing your games because you are a poor loser. Come back to me when you actually have something that resembles a real argument. This is why you are a liar, because you would stoop to arguing the definition of a word because you are too stupid to win an argument based on the merit of its material....because it was a dishonest liberal argument to begin with.  It's why I always beat you, because I tell the truth and you don't.  That and I'm significantly more intelligent too

[Straw Man]

I'm not playing your games because you are a poor loser. Come back to me when you actually have something that resembles a real argument. This is why you are a liar, because you would stoop to arguing the definition of a word because you are too stupid to win an argument based on the merit of its material....because it was a dishonest liberal argument to begin with.  It's why I always beat you, because I tell the truth and you don't.  That and I'm significantly more intelligent too

there is no game
you've already said you made that post
just trying to confirm that is the definition you're using so we're both on the same page

yes or no

should be a pretty easy answer

[iwantmass]

there is no game
you've already said you made that post
just trying to confirm that is the definition you're using so we're both on the same page

yes or no

should be a pretty easy answer

Yep, its the definition that you continue to attempt to misinterpret to cover for your weak argument.  I'm not sure which is worse, that you understand this word and refuse to admit it because you are losing, or naming yourself after an argument tactic that you neither undertsand nor can identify to satisfy your pseudo intellectual needs.

Are we going to bring up mass violence in france and funny cows next?

[Straw Man]

Yep, its the definition that you continue to attempt to misinterpret to cover for your weak argument.  I'm not sure which is worse, that you understand this word and refuse to admit it because you are losing, or naming yourself after an argument tactic that you neither undertsand nor can identify to satisfy your pseudo intellectual needs.

so we agree that an anomaly is something unusual or unexpected

unusual or unexpect to whom?

[iwantmass]

so we agree that an anomaly is something unusual or unexpected

unusual or unexpect to whom?

I'll use a word you are comfortable with this entire thread.  It is your fallacy in thinking that you hear about shootings via the media on a daily basis is the same as the random events themselves.  Your premise is that if you hear about something daily in an up-to-infinite population, then it is common place.  So basically, you are saying its not an anomaly for me to see something on the news.  That is no representation of the event itself

It is unusual/unexpected for a night club to experience a mass shooting. It is unusual/unexpected for a marathon to experience a mass shooting.  It is unusual/unexpected for a movie theater to experience a mass shooting.  You get the idea

It is unusual to be a participant at any of the above and expect a mass shooting.  No one goes to any of these venues anywhere and expects shootings to occur.

You are too stupid to realize that the event you are describing is the actual event of "hearing about shootings from the media".  That isn't the event, that is receiving information for media which covers newsworthy events.

[Straw Man]

I'll use a word you are comfortable with this entire thread.  It is your fallacy in thinking that you hear about shootings via the media on a daily basis is the same as the random events themselves.  Your premise is that if you hear about something daily in an up-to-infinite population, then it is common place.  So basically, you are saying its not an anomaly for me to see something on the news.  That is no representation of the event itself

It is unusual/unexpected for a night club to experience a mass shooting. It is unusual/unexpected for a marathon to experience a mass shooting.  It is unusual/unexpected for a movie theater to experience a mass shooting.  You get the idea

It is unusual to be a participant at any of the above and expect a mass shooting.  No one goes to any of these venues anywhere and expects shootings to occur.

You are too stupid to realize that the event you are describing is the actual event of "hearing about shootings from the media".  That isn't the event, that is receiving information for media which covers newsworthy events.

again

same question

to whom are those events unexpected

[iwantmass]

again

same question

to whom are those events unexpected

The event, itself, is unexpected to anyone attending the venue and the venue itself, otherwise no one would go to them

You are a special kind of stupid

I've already told you that you don't get the luxury of the last word.  You've lost every single facet of this argument

[Straw Man]

The event, itself, is unexpected to anyone attending the venue and the venue itself, otherwise no one would go to them

You are a special kind of stupid

I've already told you that you don't get the luxury of the last word.  You've lost every single facet of this argument

so you're telling us that you believe that different people can't have different expections of whether an event will happen or not

you're saying that is not possible?

[iwantmass]

so you're telling us that you believe that different people can't have different expections of whether an event will happen or not

you're saying that is not possible?

Not at all.  An idiot like yourself will lie about his expectations to satisfy his losing argument. As you well demonstrate, even idiots like you are allowed to have expectations, however unreasonable they may be.

Can you tell me your expectations of where the next attack will occur, since you expect these things.  I would like a specific venue.  Let's not say I expect a mass shooting to happen somewhere.  You've already said sample size doesn't matter, so I will assume you will say where doesn't matter either...up to infinite space

Do you accept that autism is deemed a medical anomaly as seen by pubmed and virtually every doctor that is well studied on the subject?

[Straw Man]

Not at all.  An idiot like yourself will lie about his expectations to satisfy his losing argument. As you well demonstrate, even idiots like are allowed to have expectations, however unreasonable they may be.

Can you tell me your expectations of where the next attack will occur, since you expect these things.  I would like a specific venue.  Let's not say I expect a mass shooting to happen somewhere.  You've already said sample size doesn't matter, so I will assume you will say where doesn't matter either...up to infinite space

so you're saying it's possible for me to expect a mass shooting event to happen in this country (as I've previously defined in this thread as 4 or more people being shot or killed) sometime in the next day or two somewhere in this country