Back in the days of streaking, TV wouldn't a bare rear end. They never started showing streakers.
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Posted 13 June 2014 - 02:25 PM
The glory days of streaking were the 70s. Streaking survived without foxsports, which didn't even exist then.
TV wasn't invented in the early seventies....got it.
I'd hate to borrow your habit of pointing and laughing.....but I did see these things on the telly back then....
Posted 13 June 2014 - 03:50 PM
..but I did see these things on the telly back then....
Not naked things running across football fields.
Posted 13 June 2014 - 04:14 PM
Posted 13 June 2014 - 04:21 PM
Posted 13 June 2014 - 05:00 PM
Criminologist Grant Duwe has researched mass killings in the U.S. and found some surprising statistics.
“Mass murder rates and mass public shootings have been on the decline,” Duwe told Here & Now. “But what we did see was an especially bad year for mass public shootings [in 2012]…. The number of victims who were killed and wounded was greater than in any previous year in U.S. history.”
Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public UnawareNational rates of gun homicide and other violent gun crimes are strikingly lower now than during their peak in the mid-1990s, paralleling a general decline in violent crime, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of government data. Beneath the long-term trend, though, are big differences by decade: Violence plunged through the 1990s, but has declined less dramatically since 2000.
Mass Shootings Are on the Rise—and Falling
When it comes to sheer numbers, our rate for mass shootings is not what's really troubling
In the wake of Monday’s Navy Yard shooting, there has been much lamentation that mass shootings are on the rise in America. “If you have been thinking that we live in an era that is more marked by this type of mass bloodshed than any era before,” remarked Rachel Maddow, “I am sad to tell you you are right. It did not used to be this way, but more and more, this is part of how we live.”
The problem with this claim is that it isn’t true – or to be more charitable, it’s “true” in such a limited way as to be meaningless.
Maddow is defining “this type of mass bloodshed” as mass shootings in which 12 or more victims were killed. There have been 12 such shootings in the United States since 1949, and half of them have taken place in the last six years, which on its face sounds, as Maddow suggests, like a very ominous trend.But anyone familiar with statistics should be made immediately suspicious by what statisticians refer to as the “cut point” for Maddow’s analysis. Why did she choose 12 victims? The answer is because it created the appearance of a statistically significant trend, where no such trend exists.http://ideas.time.co...ing-up-or-down/
Posted 13 June 2014 - 09:17 PM
To be fair, it wasn't their own research. They were interviewing the professor who just released the study from which the graph came from.
There goes one of those letter networks again. Next thing you know they will have accurate polling.
Posted 13 June 2014 - 09:24 PM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users