This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
2018 NRA boycott article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to governmental regulation of firearm ownership; the social, historical and political context of such regulation; and the people and organizations associated with these issues, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
The current reference for
BlackRock being part of the boycott (
link) only says that BlackRock had heard from investors who no longer want their money associated with the firearms industry
and intends to speak to gun manufacturers
. To me that sounds like they haven’t actually cut any ties yet, they’re just thinking about it… —
Galaktos (
talk)
20:09, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the link on NRA talk. I've nust linked it from the lead of National Rifle Association. Hopefully that sticks. Legacypac ( talk) 06:17, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
Is this article reporting or activism? The whole article reads as if the intent is a call to arms (no pun intended). Stating which companies haven't joined is an attempt to single then out for additional scrutiny. That section should be removed as inappropriate for Wikipedia. Springee ( talk) 12:28, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
I've removed the section. If this is an organized movement with a published list of additional companies to target a link to that list along with a statement such as "addition organizations are being contacted [link]" may be ok. I think this article needs more eyes to review it. I'm trying to decide what is the appropriate venue to request external review from uninvolved editors. Springee ( talk) 13:06, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
Are all the cited sources significant? Consider ref 10, GunsDownAmerica. It's linked in the text to say FedEx is being pressured. Different sources are used in the list of companies. Why link to the advocacy group vs WP:RS? Since this isn't an organized movement there isn't a single group we can cite to state the opposition of the movement. Looking at the list of citations there are quite a few low quality sites.
Springee (
talk)
16:08, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
I not only found RS discussing which companies were targeted, but one RS reporting that Mother Jones is reporting on who is being targeted. Legacypac ( talk) 18:31, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
The details about the companies that haven't joined is far more extensive than those who have joined. Why would FedEx merit a separate section. That is really looking like the intent of this article is advocacy rather than encyclopedic reporting. Springee ( talk) 00:09, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
[3] Bank of America looking to discuss relationship with gun manufacturers. Blackrock discussing with comlanies they are investing in. Legacypac ( talk) 05:58, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
Short Reuters article on BoA and Blackrock [5] Idea of having credit card processors prohibit the use of cards to buy assault weapons. [6] like they banned crypto currency purchases a few months ago Legacypac ( talk) 07:57, 26 February 2018 (UTC) From a week ago - the NYTimes editorial that sparked the banks closing off sales idea "How Banks Could Control Gun Sales if Washington Won’t" [7]. From the next day Business Insider "Banks are mulling a creative way to enforce gun control even if the US government doesn't make a single change" [8] Good overview of how financial pressure is already being put on gun manufacturers (the nation) [9] Legacypac ( talk) 08:13, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
This article is not actually about real concerted "boycott" that is national in nature, but instead this article clearly represents the WISHES of some for a "boycott." This article is political warfare and is not encyclopedic. This article is not about anything real or trackable. A couple of companies ceasing business alliances from an entity, does not create an encyclopedic event. Whoever created this article is hoping "the 2018 boycott" BECOMES real. Delete this article as it does not comply with wikipedia standards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.2.80.228 ( talk) 12:56, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
There are now two major insurance companies, Lockton Companies and Chubb Limited, in the list of corporations that severed ties. Compared to companies removing NRA discounts and membership benefits, these fall in a different category since they are discontinuing actual insurance products [10]. I wonder if the paragraph that explains "severed ties" should be expanded to describe this, or if this should be captured somewhere else.-- DarTar ( talk) 15:17, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
User:MrX I've reorged the page and heading levels to do that. I've put in an insurance section as a level one section. Fell free to expand. Legacypac ( talk) 16:51, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
I worry about the accuracy of some of the statements regarding Fed Ex. Multiple times in the article, statements are listed such as it being "the only major non technology company that has not severed ties with the NRA.[42][17][43]" The wording "only major" I find is problematic because what "major" means is subjective. We should be listing what publications called them "The only major" ones or else we should change the the wording. -- Deathawk ( talk) 03:52, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
I put a version of the Vista Outdoor section on this page in the Vista Outdoor page but ran into some resistence.
We may want to add sections in the Fedex page and maybe other articles depending on availability of sources and weight. Legacypac ( talk) 05:44, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
I tried to organize Companies section into logical headings, grouping the Fedex part under affinity marketing but was partially reverted with an insulting edit summary. Having "companies involved" as a heading means there is not enough levels to deal with the affinity marketing group splitting out severed and retained as subheadings that are visually distingishable and obviously related to the text explanation covering them rather than seperate sections like Insurance and Vista Outdoor that are being targeted for different types of support. The "companies" heading adds nothing to the reader's understanding as the page obviously is talking about companies. Legacypac ( talk) 18:08, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
My version: [11] Changed to: [12] with this comment [13] Legacypac ( talk) 18:30, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
The problem was that the initial change left too many level 2 headings. Truthfully I can see a compromise, but it should be split between "Companies Involved" and "other companies" or something of that nature. Having four separate heading seemed like overkill. --- Deathawk ( talk) 05:39, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
Not clear if anyone was boycotting, but https://www.salon.com/2018/02/28/dicks-sporting-goods-is-doing-what-republicans-wont-do-standing-up-to-the-nra/ Legacypac ( talk) 18:51, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
The growing NRA counter boycott of companies that have moved against the NRA or gun sales should fit into the scope of this page. Legacypac ( talk) 01:09, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
Is this directly rated to the boycott though? It's worth noting certainly, but this page us about a very specific subject and I'm worried that including the news about Dick's muddies that purpose. Deathawk ( talk) 02:19, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
I've added Walmart action and rolled the Dick's section into a gun dealers section. Obviously Walmart tuned into the boycott and rising anti-gun sentiment with thier announcement. Putting them in their own section sets it apart from the affiliate marketing companies. This is an evolving situation were there is no set list of participents. Legacypac ( talk) 05:28, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
User:Deathawk as for "companies involved" see the Section Heading issue above. I tried to change that. Legacypac ( talk) 05:34, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
According to ORES (WMF's machine learning service), the most recent revision of this article put its squarely within the B article quality class.-- DarTar ( talk) 23:02, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
I've been negative on this article but I will hand it to people that many of the issues are being addressed. I would note that there are several news stories noting a backlash related to this boycott. I think it should be mentioned in the article in the interest of NPOV.
It would probably be worth having a section that tries to gather both positive and negative feedback/sentiment related to the movement. Springee ( talk) 01:46, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
The sincerity of some of the companies that have severed ties should also be mentioned. Many were in a position where it wasn't expensive to sever ties. Delta, minus the tax breaks which were in flux anyway, clearly didn't lose much NRA business. Fedex is cited as having a rather extensive business relationship thus severing ties would be more than just a political gesture. [ [30]]. Springee ( talk) 02:17, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
Oh I'm not sure about not losing business. Delta's move annoyed some NRA members. I can't see how a member discount would be useful anyway on air tickets given how they are priced. So yes it was a symbolic move. Legacypac ( talk) 02:33, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
Is it appropriate to comment about the huge surge in NRA memberships (@500,000 at last count) since David Hogg and company urged these boycotts? 2600:6C44:4A7F:F673:5DC8:433F:148F:BE5 ( talk) 19:09, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
Since the NRA membership numbers are unverified any claim of a surge is questionable. Legacypac ( talk) 19:24, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
I have noticed the sources going back and forth between assault rifle, assault style rifle, and assault weapon. Technically difference between the two is the capability of the assault rifle to fire fully automatic, where as the assault weapon is semi-automatic only. Which is in line with the APs stylebook on the terms. For this article unless specifically quoted, I purpose changing assault rifle and assault style rifle to assault weapon to more accurately describe the items they are talking about. PackMecEng ( talk) 18:01, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
There is absolutely nothing "assault" or "military style" or "assault style" or "weapons of war" about the AR-15 or other semi-automatic weapons such as used in Parkland and Las Vegas. ALL of those references should be STRICKEN from the page, or at least stated as being incorrect assumptions. Listen to the Nuge: [1] Mike03car ( talk) 02:39, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
References
Why is this section in the article? What is the relevance with respect to the topic? None of the sources tie it to the boycott. Springee ( talk) 11:10, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
Actually background is important. The sources talk about a counter boycott, so the history of the NRA blacklisting brands is relevant. Anyone reviewing edit histories can see which editors are whitewashing and even the big name media is picking up on the effort of these editors. Legacypac ( talk) 06:41, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
I've started a WP:ORN topic related to this material. [ [35]] Springee ( talk) 03:49, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
It's very clear how you edit to remove anything that does not fit the NRA narrative like the NRA is complaining about a boycott after they have targeted their opposition and even nearly put Smith and Wesson out of business with a boycott. Legacypac ( talk) 06:12, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
It's been 10 days since the NORN question was posted. Uninvolved editors agreed the material inclusion was OR. The same here. The editor who restored the section hasn't weighed in on the matter. Per consensus and policy I've removed the material. Springee ( talk) 02:51, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
Notice the template near the top and be careful. -- BullRangifer ( talk) PingMe 03:39, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
NRA game dropped from Apple store, but not by Apple. [36] Legacypac ( talk) 14:44, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
Just a couple of observations as a reader
Loesch's total tone deaf response as an NRA spokesperson sure did not help. Should be in the body too. Legacypac ( talk) 23:38, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
FedEx was recently moved into the severed ties section, although not because of the 2018 NRA boycott (or recent mass shootings), but because of its recent decline in business with the NRA among several other business with the program they had. That being said, is it appropriate to list the company in that section? The placement would seem to misled readers since its the first appearance in the article, and the mention of it doesn't coincide with the gun debate according to sources and statements by the company. (1 – Reuters), (2 – The Hill) (3 – The New York Times) Adog104 Talk to me 01:22, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
There has been some dispute over whether this is a neutral term or a if it's a pejorative in violation of NPOV, such as the edit
here. This issue has come up before. "Assault weapons"is are clearly a neutral term, is frequently used in RS to describe such weapons, and the content shouldn't be removed, although I welcome other thoughts on the matter.
ModerateMikayla555 (
talk)
18:25, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Struck comments from confirmed sockpuppet ModerateMikayla555/ ModerateMike729. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Darryl.jensen/Archive § 07 July 2019. — Newslinger talk 13:02, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
What is the group on Wikipedia that discusses gun violence in America? Infinitepeace ( talk) 02:58, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
2018 NRA boycott article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to governmental regulation of firearm ownership; the social, historical and political context of such regulation; and the people and organizations associated with these issues, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
The current reference for
BlackRock being part of the boycott (
link) only says that BlackRock had heard from investors who no longer want their money associated with the firearms industry
and intends to speak to gun manufacturers
. To me that sounds like they haven’t actually cut any ties yet, they’re just thinking about it… —
Galaktos (
talk)
20:09, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the link on NRA talk. I've nust linked it from the lead of National Rifle Association. Hopefully that sticks. Legacypac ( talk) 06:17, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
Is this article reporting or activism? The whole article reads as if the intent is a call to arms (no pun intended). Stating which companies haven't joined is an attempt to single then out for additional scrutiny. That section should be removed as inappropriate for Wikipedia. Springee ( talk) 12:28, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
I've removed the section. If this is an organized movement with a published list of additional companies to target a link to that list along with a statement such as "addition organizations are being contacted [link]" may be ok. I think this article needs more eyes to review it. I'm trying to decide what is the appropriate venue to request external review from uninvolved editors. Springee ( talk) 13:06, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
Are all the cited sources significant? Consider ref 10, GunsDownAmerica. It's linked in the text to say FedEx is being pressured. Different sources are used in the list of companies. Why link to the advocacy group vs WP:RS? Since this isn't an organized movement there isn't a single group we can cite to state the opposition of the movement. Looking at the list of citations there are quite a few low quality sites.
Springee (
talk)
16:08, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
I not only found RS discussing which companies were targeted, but one RS reporting that Mother Jones is reporting on who is being targeted. Legacypac ( talk) 18:31, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
The details about the companies that haven't joined is far more extensive than those who have joined. Why would FedEx merit a separate section. That is really looking like the intent of this article is advocacy rather than encyclopedic reporting. Springee ( talk) 00:09, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
[3] Bank of America looking to discuss relationship with gun manufacturers. Blackrock discussing with comlanies they are investing in. Legacypac ( talk) 05:58, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
Short Reuters article on BoA and Blackrock [5] Idea of having credit card processors prohibit the use of cards to buy assault weapons. [6] like they banned crypto currency purchases a few months ago Legacypac ( talk) 07:57, 26 February 2018 (UTC) From a week ago - the NYTimes editorial that sparked the banks closing off sales idea "How Banks Could Control Gun Sales if Washington Won’t" [7]. From the next day Business Insider "Banks are mulling a creative way to enforce gun control even if the US government doesn't make a single change" [8] Good overview of how financial pressure is already being put on gun manufacturers (the nation) [9] Legacypac ( talk) 08:13, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
This article is not actually about real concerted "boycott" that is national in nature, but instead this article clearly represents the WISHES of some for a "boycott." This article is political warfare and is not encyclopedic. This article is not about anything real or trackable. A couple of companies ceasing business alliances from an entity, does not create an encyclopedic event. Whoever created this article is hoping "the 2018 boycott" BECOMES real. Delete this article as it does not comply with wikipedia standards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.2.80.228 ( talk) 12:56, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
There are now two major insurance companies, Lockton Companies and Chubb Limited, in the list of corporations that severed ties. Compared to companies removing NRA discounts and membership benefits, these fall in a different category since they are discontinuing actual insurance products [10]. I wonder if the paragraph that explains "severed ties" should be expanded to describe this, or if this should be captured somewhere else.-- DarTar ( talk) 15:17, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
User:MrX I've reorged the page and heading levels to do that. I've put in an insurance section as a level one section. Fell free to expand. Legacypac ( talk) 16:51, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
I worry about the accuracy of some of the statements regarding Fed Ex. Multiple times in the article, statements are listed such as it being "the only major non technology company that has not severed ties with the NRA.[42][17][43]" The wording "only major" I find is problematic because what "major" means is subjective. We should be listing what publications called them "The only major" ones or else we should change the the wording. -- Deathawk ( talk) 03:52, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
I put a version of the Vista Outdoor section on this page in the Vista Outdoor page but ran into some resistence.
We may want to add sections in the Fedex page and maybe other articles depending on availability of sources and weight. Legacypac ( talk) 05:44, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
I tried to organize Companies section into logical headings, grouping the Fedex part under affinity marketing but was partially reverted with an insulting edit summary. Having "companies involved" as a heading means there is not enough levels to deal with the affinity marketing group splitting out severed and retained as subheadings that are visually distingishable and obviously related to the text explanation covering them rather than seperate sections like Insurance and Vista Outdoor that are being targeted for different types of support. The "companies" heading adds nothing to the reader's understanding as the page obviously is talking about companies. Legacypac ( talk) 18:08, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
My version: [11] Changed to: [12] with this comment [13] Legacypac ( talk) 18:30, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
The problem was that the initial change left too many level 2 headings. Truthfully I can see a compromise, but it should be split between "Companies Involved" and "other companies" or something of that nature. Having four separate heading seemed like overkill. --- Deathawk ( talk) 05:39, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
Not clear if anyone was boycotting, but https://www.salon.com/2018/02/28/dicks-sporting-goods-is-doing-what-republicans-wont-do-standing-up-to-the-nra/ Legacypac ( talk) 18:51, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
The growing NRA counter boycott of companies that have moved against the NRA or gun sales should fit into the scope of this page. Legacypac ( talk) 01:09, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
Is this directly rated to the boycott though? It's worth noting certainly, but this page us about a very specific subject and I'm worried that including the news about Dick's muddies that purpose. Deathawk ( talk) 02:19, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
I've added Walmart action and rolled the Dick's section into a gun dealers section. Obviously Walmart tuned into the boycott and rising anti-gun sentiment with thier announcement. Putting them in their own section sets it apart from the affiliate marketing companies. This is an evolving situation were there is no set list of participents. Legacypac ( talk) 05:28, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
User:Deathawk as for "companies involved" see the Section Heading issue above. I tried to change that. Legacypac ( talk) 05:34, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
According to ORES (WMF's machine learning service), the most recent revision of this article put its squarely within the B article quality class.-- DarTar ( talk) 23:02, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
I've been negative on this article but I will hand it to people that many of the issues are being addressed. I would note that there are several news stories noting a backlash related to this boycott. I think it should be mentioned in the article in the interest of NPOV.
It would probably be worth having a section that tries to gather both positive and negative feedback/sentiment related to the movement. Springee ( talk) 01:46, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
The sincerity of some of the companies that have severed ties should also be mentioned. Many were in a position where it wasn't expensive to sever ties. Delta, minus the tax breaks which were in flux anyway, clearly didn't lose much NRA business. Fedex is cited as having a rather extensive business relationship thus severing ties would be more than just a political gesture. [ [30]]. Springee ( talk) 02:17, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
Oh I'm not sure about not losing business. Delta's move annoyed some NRA members. I can't see how a member discount would be useful anyway on air tickets given how they are priced. So yes it was a symbolic move. Legacypac ( talk) 02:33, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
Is it appropriate to comment about the huge surge in NRA memberships (@500,000 at last count) since David Hogg and company urged these boycotts? 2600:6C44:4A7F:F673:5DC8:433F:148F:BE5 ( talk) 19:09, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
Since the NRA membership numbers are unverified any claim of a surge is questionable. Legacypac ( talk) 19:24, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
I have noticed the sources going back and forth between assault rifle, assault style rifle, and assault weapon. Technically difference between the two is the capability of the assault rifle to fire fully automatic, where as the assault weapon is semi-automatic only. Which is in line with the APs stylebook on the terms. For this article unless specifically quoted, I purpose changing assault rifle and assault style rifle to assault weapon to more accurately describe the items they are talking about. PackMecEng ( talk) 18:01, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
There is absolutely nothing "assault" or "military style" or "assault style" or "weapons of war" about the AR-15 or other semi-automatic weapons such as used in Parkland and Las Vegas. ALL of those references should be STRICKEN from the page, or at least stated as being incorrect assumptions. Listen to the Nuge: [1] Mike03car ( talk) 02:39, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
References
Why is this section in the article? What is the relevance with respect to the topic? None of the sources tie it to the boycott. Springee ( talk) 11:10, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
Actually background is important. The sources talk about a counter boycott, so the history of the NRA blacklisting brands is relevant. Anyone reviewing edit histories can see which editors are whitewashing and even the big name media is picking up on the effort of these editors. Legacypac ( talk) 06:41, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
I've started a WP:ORN topic related to this material. [ [35]] Springee ( talk) 03:49, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
It's very clear how you edit to remove anything that does not fit the NRA narrative like the NRA is complaining about a boycott after they have targeted their opposition and even nearly put Smith and Wesson out of business with a boycott. Legacypac ( talk) 06:12, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
It's been 10 days since the NORN question was posted. Uninvolved editors agreed the material inclusion was OR. The same here. The editor who restored the section hasn't weighed in on the matter. Per consensus and policy I've removed the material. Springee ( talk) 02:51, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
Notice the template near the top and be careful. -- BullRangifer ( talk) PingMe 03:39, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
NRA game dropped from Apple store, but not by Apple. [36] Legacypac ( talk) 14:44, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
Just a couple of observations as a reader
Loesch's total tone deaf response as an NRA spokesperson sure did not help. Should be in the body too. Legacypac ( talk) 23:38, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
FedEx was recently moved into the severed ties section, although not because of the 2018 NRA boycott (or recent mass shootings), but because of its recent decline in business with the NRA among several other business with the program they had. That being said, is it appropriate to list the company in that section? The placement would seem to misled readers since its the first appearance in the article, and the mention of it doesn't coincide with the gun debate according to sources and statements by the company. (1 – Reuters), (2 – The Hill) (3 – The New York Times) Adog104 Talk to me 01:22, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
There has been some dispute over whether this is a neutral term or a if it's a pejorative in violation of NPOV, such as the edit
here. This issue has come up before. "Assault weapons"is are clearly a neutral term, is frequently used in RS to describe such weapons, and the content shouldn't be removed, although I welcome other thoughts on the matter.
ModerateMikayla555 (
talk)
18:25, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Struck comments from confirmed sockpuppet ModerateMikayla555/ ModerateMike729. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Darryl.jensen/Archive § 07 July 2019. — Newslinger talk 13:02, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
What is the group on Wikipedia that discusses gun violence in America? Infinitepeace ( talk) 02:58, 4 September 2020 (UTC)