Local News

[Typhon]

Based on the latest data from the Associated Press and USA Today Mass Killing Database, which tracks incidents in which four or more people are killed (excluding the perpetrator) within a 24-hour period, there have been just 17 mass killings in the U.S. this year — the lowest annual total since the database began in 2006.

Some media sources have chosen to redefine what a mass shooting is, in an attempt to increase the numbers.  I guess they are happy to make the public think that things are worse then they actually are.

[Charger]

It's a clickbait game these days...

And ofcourse saying that the number of mass shootings has gone DOWN wouldn't be a very selling headline so ofcourse the media tries to find a way to get more sensational headlines...and if that requires some new or alternate facts so be it. That is the media world we live in nowadays. Sadly.

[Zzzptm]

There's a difference between a mass killing and a mass shooting and I can't believe I'm getting into that parsing on Christmas Day...

The definitions themselves are not morphing over time, but have been constant. The variance is between different organizations and how they account the mass events. A common theme to most measures is that a mass shooting is an event in which 4 or more persons are injured or killed, not including the perpetrator. Mass killings are a subset of mass shootings, in which 4 or more persons are killed in an event. By that measure, there were 19 mass killings in the USA. There were 22 more events in which 3 persons were killed. 61 events in which 2 were killed. 415 total mass shootings for the year so far.

And while I'm glad that there are fewer total mass killings involving 4 or more deaths, the fact that we still have to parse our murders in the USA like that is terrible. Japan has had 1 killing involving 4 people not including the perpetrator in the last 25 years, and one more in which 3 persons were killed plus one more for the perpetrator. That's 1 or 2 per 25 years as compared to about one and a third every month in the USA.

Canada had 3 mass shootings in 2025 and one mass killing. Canada has around 40 million people, the USA around 340 million. Proportionally, that would have around 26 mass shootings and, of those, 8-9 mass killings in Canada. The number of mass killings also tracks with the Canadian murder rate, which is less than half of that in the USA and is the closest to the US among industrialized, Western nations. (Russia may be industrialized, but its murder rate is somewhat larger than that of the USA's.)

As for not reporting the 2025 numbers, it's not bad reporting or anything: there are reporting organizations that simply are waiting for the finalized numbers to be available, and that won't be until early January. The stats have to be compiled from all US law enforcement jurisdictions, and those take time to trickle in, especially when there are already so many murders in the USA that they don't even all make the local news when they happen.

But the bit about redefining mass shootings, nope. Not true. I've been following those reporting organizations for years and their definitions are constant. They're not trying to hype numbers to sell ads, they're trying to do honest reporting on an issue that impacts people beyond just a raw death toll. There's final expenses, psychological damage, hospital nightmares, recovery struggles, lifelong sacrifice and hardship for the survivors along with their families... it's so much more than a raw death toll, the full reporting of the impact of gun violence in the United States of America.

[Typhon]

^^^^^^
I guess you and I watch different media.   

It's a clickbait game these days...

And ofcourse saying that the number of mass shootings has gone DOWN wouldn't be a very selling headline so ofcourse the media tries to find a way to get more sensational headlines...and if that requires some new or alternate facts so be it. That is the media world we live in nowadays. Sadly.

I don't disagree, but it doesn't change the fact that these numbers are at a 20 year low.

[Charger]

Looks like Venezuela might finally be free from decades of dictatorship and oppression as US forces have captured the brutal dictator Nicolas Maduro!

Good news and maybe finally there's a light at the end of the misery tunnel of the Venezuelan people.

[Typhon]

^^^^^^
Indeed, President Trump is scheduled to give a press conference at 11:00 AM eastern standard time, about this matter.

[Zzzptm]

Trump pardoned the Honduran narcopresident and kidnapped the Venezuelan one. Looks like Maduro didn't know the same people the Honduran guy did. As for the flow of drugs, most of the cocaine made in Colombia goes through Mexico, not Venezuela. The fentanyl being made in China is also mostly transshiped through Mexico.

The Honduran ex-president wrote a fawning letter to Trump, and then Trump pardoned Hernandez, who used his office to ally with the Sinaloa Cartel for the shipment of drugs into the USA. He had 44 journalists, lawyers, and political opponents murdered. And he got off with a pardon because he wrote a nice letter.

You know who else wrote nice letters to Trump? Jeffrey Epstein. Explains why we're not seeing those documents of his being released in full. I refuse to cheer for the sex offender in chief, and this thuggery he's unleashed on Venezuela is the height of hypocrisy. It's obvious he doesn't care about law and order, he just cares about people towing his line or not.

As for the light at the end of the tunnel for Venezuela? It's an American muzzle flash. They're losing one dictator and getting another. As an added bonus, with nothing done about Maduro's supporters, something like the hell of Iraq could easily emerge in Venezuela, with factional combat between local militias squabbling over the power the expect to hold when the USA finally leaves another failed nation-building attempt.

Trump's leadership is one massive act of projection - create enemies and then accuse them of the things he's done, is currently doing, or is about to do. Drain the swamp? The man is making it deeper and thicker, because that's the environment he thrives in. Same kind of environment that gave us the likes of Jeffrey Epstein.

[Charger]

^^^
Now that post kind of violates your own rules about politics now doesn't it?

You might want to rethink that.

All I'll say about the matter is that Venezuelans all over the world are rejoicing the end of brutal dictatorship that has caused MILLIONS of people to leave their country.

There are more happy people in the world now that there were few days ago. And to me that is a big win!

[Typhon]

You know who else wrote nice letters to Trump? Jeffrey Epstein. Explains why we're not seeing those documents of his being released in full.

There is zero evidence the President Trump had anything to do with Epstein's crimes.  Even Alan Dershowitz, Epstein's own lawyer, admitted that his client had no connection with Trump.

Of course capturing Maduro was a good thing, and if anybody else had done it, you would be congratulating them.  But because President Trump did it, then you have to find fault with it.

We already know your a Trump bigot, but at least try to control it.

[Zzzptm]

... and if anybody else had done it, you would be congratulating them.  But because President Trump did it, then you have to find fault with it.

We already know your a Trump bigot, but at least try to control it.

This is why I don't want the political stuff to get brought up. It leads to personal attacks.

I do not enjoy the false accusation. I am against all extrajudicial measures against leaders and governments. I am not situational in wanting some other person to do a deed that I condemn another for: I do not want *anyone* to do such a thing, and will find fault with *anyone* doing such a thing.

As for the last statement, I am deeply hurt by those words. The worst one is the "we". If there really is a "we" here that I'm not part of, then it's time for me to go. If there's not a "we" that I'm not part of, then there's zero place for language like that. I am not here for the verbal abuse, and that is exactly what the quoted part is - verbal abuse. And the stuff after the "we" is no better - implying that I'm off the handle or otherwise uncouth and unlearned. That crosses a line.

I'm not going to stoop to the level of personal attacks or verbal abuse, and I expect those in my company to hold to the same rule. When I make a mistake, I expect those I'm with to accept not only my apology, but my sincere efforts to do better in the days ahead. When those in my company make mistakes, I want to be there to see them making positive changes for the better.

[Charger]

^^

Well you opened the political door this time so that one's on you buddy. You gotta be able to take it when you deal it too...

That's why I said you broke your own rules here...and frankly that outburst of yours was already bit uncalled for as I was rejoicing the liberation of the Venezuelan people and you had to turn something good and positive into a...well not. And there was ZERO reason for such an outburst.

And we are a we...little bickering won't change that! And it deeply hurts ME that you would imply that it would.

And now let's put a stop to this and just be happy that after decades of oppression the Venezuelan people can breathe freely!

[Zzzptm]

Well, I know I discussed the politics, but I didn't go to personal comments. The "we" that Typhon used felt very exclusionary, like I wasn't in it. I didn't go, because I felt like it wasn't the truth.

Charger, I want to acknowledge that you feeling hurt from my comment is not what I wanted to happen, but it did. I have to own that action and apologize for it, and strive to do better in the future. When I say to people, "I got a buddy in Finland...", I'm referring to you. That's more important to me in this whole scenario, and a relationship I value and want to retain.

I acknowledge that I was deeply disappointed with the news of the kidnapping of Maduro and that in my opinion the charges used to justify his kidnapping were hypocritical, given the pardon granted to Honduras' ex-president Hernandez.

To that end, I'll come back to the discussion, but I'll let a night's rest and a calmer thought help me express what I want to convey. I want you to be right, Charger, that the only we here is all of us, and I know that to make that true requires my effort along with everyone else.

***

Regarding the Venezuela situation, Maduro's the only one gone. The rest of the Chavista government is in place. The vice-president is assuming responsibilities in the absence of the president and the rest of the apparatus is in control of the army, courts, civil service, and so forth. That's what the celebrants are waking up to. Yes, Maduro's gone and I haven't seen any tears shed over his personal fate. I'm of the opinion that he was a poor political operator that didn't know who he needed to be close to in order to survive.

Right now, Trump's statements about how Venezuela will be run don't yet have legs to stand on and the rest of Maduro's government is still in charge, just minus Maduro. And though Delcy Rodriguez has been a close ally of Maduro's, she seems to have kept her nose clean as far as drug trafficking, so there isn't any sort of pretext to remove her from power. "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss" is in play, and the Venezuelan people don't have any other change right now.

We also don't know how this move impacts matters with Venezuela's allies, which includes Russia. Sudden moves taken without consultation don't go down well with the powers that expect some sort of consultation on the matter. Not saying that this leads to war or economic sanctions necessarily, but it does put wrinkles on traveling abroad for summit meetings, among other things. My biggest concerns out of this are that Russia increases its aggressive moves and that China finds a way to capitalize on the situation. With Trump now making threats against Rodriguez, the situation is anything but resolved, let alone happily.

[Typhon]

^^^^^^
You are over reacting a bit.  You made some wild accusations against out President, which is suppose to be okay, I guess.  But when I point out that you're being biased again, then I'm the bad guy.  To be clear, it's not that I dislike you because of this.  I just get disappointed that you won't give the man a fair shake.   

[Zzzptm]

It's one thing so say I've got a bias and another to call me a bigot. But we can move forward. There's always a way to tell the truth without using it to inflict hurt, and that's what I'm working towards in our dialogue.

***

So for Trump's situation with me... he's really racked up a lot of penalties in my view. "Grab 'em by the pussy" from his first campaign stands out, along with the revelations that he'd walk right in to the dressing rooms at beauty pageants. Then there's the mess with the Playboy models, his infidelities, and then his sexual assaults. Those all speak to his personal character, which I find to be on a level worse than Bill Clinton. And while others have accused Clinton and Trump of having "had relations", I'm still of the mind that that's beyond the pale, likely a throwaway one-liner in Epstein's emails. But I am concerned that while Trump claimed to never have been on Epstein's jet, records now show at least eight flights Trump had on that jet. It undermines Trump's statements, to be sure. Dershowitz' comments are not impartial, as he's still Epstein's lawyer, so he is bound to provide a defense for his client, but Dershowitz also has personal connections to Epstein, having been on his island in a social context. While not entirely damning, it raises a flag of concern.

On that front, I see too much stacked against Trump to take his comments at face value and feel that this is a person who is hiding a dark secret, given the stalling on releasing Epstein Files documents and redacting some to an entirely unreadable extent. To Trump's credit, his campaign promise to release all the Epstein Files was something that got me to say, "Well, that's at least one good thing he'll do!" but now he's clearly not doing that very thing, and that's setting off warnings in my mind. It's highly suspicious and makes not sense politically, especially given how important it is as an issue to his base.

In the matter of policy, I find the tariffs to be an unmitigated disaster, passing on costs to American consumers and disrupting businesses, putting a big headwind on job growth. The DOGE initiative cost far more than it saved, and we now have situations like in the Social Security Administration where there's a massive backlog of cases for giving assistance to retirees who have issues with their benefits. I think of the folks missing their checks and then having to face issues with paying bills, rent, and for groceries. Trump's comments about the affordability crisis being a "hoax" come across as insensitive and absolutely false. Yes, the rate of inflation has declined, but the inflation rate is still running up prices that had a large kick up in the wake of the pandemic. We haven't seen any of those numbers come down, and with wages flat/declining and job growth flat/declining, we've got a very real affordability crisis with no clear policy on how to address the stagflation we have right now. Raising interest rates to first quash the inflation was the Paul Volcker solution back in 80s, but such a move seems like it would mean the death of the Fed as an institution, given Trump's stated insistence to lower rates.

On a personal level, I had a case against a federal contractor that dismissed me and other employees after we made inquiries regarding pay arrangements. The office that handled the case also dealt with discrimination claims, including those involving age, disability, gender, religious beliefs, and race. My case wasn't in that category, it was one purely about being wrongfully terminated because I had asked about whether or not we were going to have any changes to our compensation - I'd been there over 2 years and never had an adjustment in compensation. After Trump was inaugurated, that office got shut down, not just the DEI part of it that he was hostile to. Beyond my personal situation, I understood that loads of other cases that pointed to corruption in federal contractors were being dropped with my case and that that corruption was, in effect, being green-lit by Trump administration policy. Not so much in the wording, but definitely in the application of said policy.

Coming around to foreign policy, the methodology of the tariffs made zero sense and served to create chaos where none was needed. The inconsistency in applying the tariff regime was bad enough: legal challenges put question marks on some tariffs, and we have tariffs that were threatened back in July that are yet to materialize, but businesses have to be prepared for them being potentially suddenly implemented, and the necessary hedges introduce further costs to trade. Trump and Vance's first meeting with Zelenskyy was a disaster, and we have not seen any true progress towards peace in Ukraine. The attacks on Iran during negotiations showed further that Trump's USA is a bad faith actor. The Israel-Hamas ceasefire failed to hold. Trump's cozying to Putin and denigration of allies - even threatening them with invasion - puts real question marks on the value of a deal with the USA. Trump is practically handing over the American Century to China with his bad-faith moves, the recent kidnapping in Venezuela being his most recent gift to China in terms of legitimizing them as a more trustworthy and stable ally on the world stage.

I find that Trump has overall made poor choices for his advisors, disregards experienced guidance on delicate topics, and writes checks with his mouth that he leaves for others to cash. Even if I dropped all that and started fresh today, I've got the headline that Trump once again threatened to take over Greenland, prompting Denmark to say "enough is enough" and the UK PM to announce that the UK stands with Denmark. Trump's had his fair shake chances, and he's burned through them all and then some.

[Charger]

^^^
You do pretty poor job in adhering to your own rules...

I am not amused.