Getting emailed reports of gunfire near MLK S and South Irving. Several medical units were dispatched to a house on Irving about an hour ago, but SPD could not confirm whether there was a shooting.

More info as it’s available.

Update: Central District News says:

A 911 caller reports that a girl has been shot in the 2700 block of S. Irving. Gunshot wounds to the foot and right arm. Medics on scene.

Update: According to the Seattle Police Department, officers were called to the 2700 block of S Irving Street around 10:15 p.m. after receiving reports of gunfire.

When police arrived, they found a 22-year-old woman who had been shot in the hand and foot. The woman was transported to Harborview and police do not believe her injuries are life-threatening.

No arrests have been made. SPD’s gang unit is handling the investigation.

Jonah Spangenthal-Lee: Proving you wrong since 1983.

96 replies on “Shooting In the Central District”

  4. The troll with a thousand names has no facts. Calling them facts over and over doesn’t make them facts, any more than he is any better than the most violent black man on earth.

  6. Nope – doesn’t work that way. You’ve been flouting a bunch of figures without saying where you got them or who compiled them. Gee, wonder why that is.

    No, YOU prove that they’re accurate. I will fully apologize to you if you can. Scout’s honor.

  10. That’s as good as admitting that those figures came either out of your ass or off of some white supremacist site. Not that I had any doubt.

  13. LOL! Those numbers don’t match the BS you’ve been throwing around. Why do you have to make up shit if the real stats basically tell the same story?

    A: Because you’re a poor, poor pitiful loser.

    Still, you at least provided some facts. My apologies are proffered as promised. Too bad you still have to make illogical leaps to make your racist case.

  14. Ha, I open this thread and knew exactly its contents. The racists here on Slog never fail to see a shooting as an opportunity to show how ignorant and backward they are. But hey, keep on keeping on racists. You’re not convincing anyone of your “facts” and if anything you are making people less likely to be racist. So, um, good for you?

  16. The numbers do not in any way contradict the fact that blacks disproportionately commit violent crime:

    from the first link:
    http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/ra…

    “Racial differences exist, with blacks disproportionately represented among homicide victims and offenders

    In 2005, homicide victimization rates for blacks were 6 times higher than the rates for whites.”

    “In 2005, offending rates for blacks were more than 7 times higher than the rates for whites”

    “Homicide Type by Race, 1976-2005 – Offenders – Black – 52.2%”

  17. Therefore, blacks make up only about 12 to 13% of the USA, which makes teen/adult black males about 3% or less, which means that less than 3% of the USA commits over 52% of all homicides in the USA.

  18. So what? 93% of homicides are committed by men, and men are involved in many female-perpetrated homicides as well.

    You don’t have the balls to even say what you’re hinting at, loser.

    You can have the last word.

  20. So what?!?

    I’m just going to pretend that having a group that makes up only 3% of the population but that commits over 52% of all murders and over 34% of all rapes is just no big deal, because that is the wimpy liberal politically correct douche thing to do.

    Maybe if I keep denying and/or ignoring the problem it will magically vanish!

  25. uuuuh…. flawed?

    His conclusions/points seem to simply be that black males commit a vastly disproportionate amount of violent crime, and also that merely pointing that fact out gets the pointer-outer called a racist.

    It looks like he proved all his points to me, and I really don’t want to have to admit that, but facts are facts.

  27. Matt from Denver, per his offer @ 56, owes the apparently-racist troll a public apology.

    Per Matt’s absurdist evasion @ 70, he’s not going to honor his offer, and his word is not worth the ether it’s written on. (In causal argument, the specific trumps the general.)

    Dragging forward fact chex from an earlier thread (excerpt of rejoinder to Mr. X, who advances the partially-plausible claim that his Irish, Italian and Jewish forbearers were equally violent in their day):

    … more than 100 years ago urban blacks were out-murdering each other vis a vis their white counterparts by significant margins, and these margins (a rough order of magnitude over the past century) have persisted or increased even as their comparative socio-economic disadvantage decreased. (cf Short, Poverty, Ethnicity and Violent Crime, 1997, pp. 8-9)

    This is a longstanding puzzle to criminologists. (If you like, you can confine your study to black criminologist, starting with W.E.B. Du Bois in the late 19th century.)

    The apparently-racist troll commands the high ground, factually. The argument, properly, is over their implications.

  28. Original Monique, I don’t think that’s the “real” Big Sven. His name is always a link to his blog, I think.

    It drives me crazy when commenters hijack other people’s names.

    I’m not going to use my name here because, having said that, I’m sure the Aryan Nations people would hijack it just to piss me off.

  31. it is funny how stating facts can make you a racist yet ignoring facts makes you enlightened to some people.

  32. Wow, it’s funny how some people are so insecure about the shit they post that they have to post the same thing to different threads.

  33. wow it’s funny how people who have been proven to be reality-denying naive tards just keep on coming back for more

  34. Come on matt, what happened to all your snappy naive reality-denying comebacks? I want to destroy you with facts some more. Don’t give up yet! This is too much fun!

  35. I’m LOLing myself because I was giving you shit and you didn’t catch on.

    Of course all that is true, dufus. I knew that from the beginning. Problem is, you’re implying that it means blacks are all bad people and inferior, and you don’t even have the balls to say it, even in an anonymous forum which lets you use a million different sockpuppet handles.

    I win, because I have balls, a sense of humor, and the honor to apologize as promised even though I was setting you up. You lose, because you ARE racist (again, not for your facts) and a coward (for your ever-shifting handle and for only hinting at your racist conclusions).

    You can keep coming back for more, but I no longer have any reason to do so.

  36. You were not setting me up you stupid revisionist.

    Stop trying to revise history after you have been proven to be wrong.

    You are just trying to cover up the fact that you were proven wrong. LAME

  37. Matt @ 77, your excretion @ 63 is not a proper apology.

    Presented in passive voice, in conditional, ambiguous language (“proffered as promised”), prefaced with a denial of the stated preconditions, and larded with gratuitious insults … your conduct reflects badly on your side of the preceding dialog.

    You make the troll look good.

  38. Ron, you don’t understand what I’m up to. I wasn’t playing by either the rules of normal dialogue (because this little turd isn’t interested) or by his rule either (because this little turd doesn’t deserve it).

    You, on the other hand, are playing by his rules by saying that this is somehow a “dialog”. The little turd, who constantly turns these threads this way, is not interested in discussion, so you’re falling for his game when you go along. I made him think I was playing his game too but I wasn’t. He fell for it and even revealed at 86 that his is, indeed, just one person (if not, where are the others? Why aren’t they jumping all over me?) That was my object all along.

    Pay attention to other threads where some serious discussion is going on and I’m participating. That’s Matt from Denver contributing. Here, it’s all fun and games.

  39. Racists are all small dicked doofuses who have failed at attaining middle-management jobs, and blame their failure on the black folks. Also, they love to wear ladies underwear.

    Female racists have problems with vaginal dryness and can’t keep a man.

  41. 86
    Matt, why are you so obsessed with showing it is one poster?
    It is not, and in 86 you did not show it was, and what difference does it make?
    It is not racist to note disparities in the rate of crime (or education level or out-of-wedlock birthrate or anything else)based on race.
    It is racist when PC Liberal media hacks try to hide that information when it is relevant.
    Withholding the race of a suspect at large is assinine and jeapordizes public safety and makes a mockery of police work.
    When slog pointedly does that some folks like to have fun with them.
    When the regulars predictably squeal ‘racism’ it only encourages to point out the facts of race and crime.
    Accusing people who are trying to have a fact based discussion of racism just because you disagree with them or find the facts they bring to the discussion inconvenient cheapens the term and makes it harder to deal with actual racism.

    Don’t do it.

  42. No, it’s racist to imply (as your buddy does) that all black people can be judged by this; that this proves that black people are violent and dangerous; and that there are no other mitigating factors. He’s having a “fact based discussion of racism”? Don’t make me laugh.

    Now, if he has other, more relevant points to make, then why can’t he just make them? Personally, I don’t care about the race of a perpetrator unless someone is at large and the police are looking for him; I agree that NOT stating race is dumb in that case. However, I also notice that most of these reports are short on eyewitness details; if the perp is black and that’s all they know, then it won’t help find him.

    Hey, if it’s more than one poster, then let them (and you) all select a single identity and stick with it. Obsessed? Hardly. Just letting him know that I see right through him.

  43. Matt, you are trolling here, and you are giving your antagonist the perfect set-ups for his arguments.

    BTW, unlike you, I DO care about the race of the perpetrators even when they’re not at large with police looking for them. I care 24 hours a day, because I have family, friends, family of friends and friends of family who have made, are making, or will make the difficult passage through this dangerous age, who are susceptible to its dangers, or who have already fallen irremediably prey to them.

    If you have auxilliary hypotheses to account for the differences, the burden is on you to introduce and defend them. All the usual circumstantial yada and all the demonstrable disparities in the justice system explain only a fraction of the disparity. BTW, I have followed your act in other threads, and you ain’t shit.

  44. Aww, Ron, now you’re going to make me cry. I know you’ve been around for a while but can’t think of anything particularly insightful you’ve written either. I guess we’re even on that count.

    Let me clue you in, Ron – you don’t deal with trolls by introducing “auxilliary hypotheses” or otherwise giving them any credit for trying to steer the conversation. But if you believe it’s so, then why don’t YOU do that?

  45. What if the troll is actually some kind of weird, subversive anti-racist who is trying to prod yall into coming up with better responses than insults?

  46. @ 95, what if Jesus came back in a purple Cadillac and rid the world of STD’s, global warming, and bad breath? That’s about as likely as your supposition.

Comments are closed.