A Recent Study Shows That More Guns Lead to More Violent Crime

A recent statistical analysis of 33 U.S. states might be a game-changer for the argument that more guns on the street would help reduce violent crime.

The report will likely come into play as the Supreme Court gets ready to hear arguments in a case lobbying for the constitutional right for Americans to carry guns outside the home.

The debate over whether more guns leads to more or less crime harkens back to the 1998 book More Guns, Less Crime, by John Lott Jr. of the Crime Prevention Research Center. Since its publication, 11 states have loosened their right-to-carry laws, and more than 30 states allow the open carrying of a gun with no permit necessary.

In those same states, violent crime increased 13%-15% in the decade after right-to-carry laws were adopted.

Which is one why, argues the study’s lead author John Donohue, adopting them could be a “dangerous mistake to make.”

View this post on Instagram

“It just another day.. and I stand behind you in line at the store with a smile on my face…and a gun in my purse and you are none the wiser. You have no clue that I carry because I have my gun concealed, yet you are safer for having me next to you. I will not shoot you. My gun won't pull it's own trigger. It is securely holstered. It can't just go off by itself. However, rest assured that if a lunatic walks into the store and pulls out a rifle and starts shooting innocent people, I will draw my pistol and protect myself and my family.. and because your next to me, I will protect you and your family. I may freeze up, I may piss my pants, I will be terrified just as you. I may even get shot before I can pull the trigger…but, I won't die helpless on the floor begging for my life or my families life without trying to protect us. I won't be that victim. I REFUSE to be that victim. No one will take my life or those around me without me fighting back. As for you, I don't ask you to carry a gun. If you are not comfortable, then please don't. There are some people that feel guns kill people.. I’m here to tell you people kill people. I choose to not be a HELPLESS victim. This world is ugly and there is evil in the world and if evil has a gun, I want one too… because that’s MY RIGHT and I pray that day NEVER HAPPENS but if that day did, you’ll be blessed to have me by you.” #concealedcarry #glock43 #myright #secondamendmentrights #gunsafe #concealcarry #countrygirl #SelfDefense #RefuseToBeAVictim #Glock #9mm #KeepCalmAndCarry #defendthesecond #2A #AllGunLawsAreInfringements #righttocarry #ihavetherighttoprotectmyself #DontBeAStatistic #Southcarolina #ThisIsMySafety

A post shared by Alexis Summer (@alexis.summer) on

“The important takeaway is that more guns seem to lead to more crime. So it is probably wise to think in terms of appropriate controls and it would be very unwise to push the 2nd amendment too far.”

The team behind the study looked at violent crime rates in all states, controlling for policing, incarceration rates, poverty, and other demographic issues to estimate the impact of the right-to-carry laws on the books.

3.1 million people were victims of violent crimes in 2017, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, and jailing everyone responsible would double the prison population in most states.

Donahue says that even he and his team were surprised at what the data presented.

View this post on Instagram

"I stand behind you in line at the store with a smile on my face…and a gun under my shirt and you are none the wiser, yet you are safer for having me next to you. I won't shoot you. My gun won't pull it's own trigger. It is securely holstered with the trigger covered. It can't just go off. However, rest assured that if a lunatic walks into the grocery store and pulls out a rifle, I will draw my pistol and protect myself and my family and therefore protect you and your family. I may freeze up. I may piss my pants. I may get shot before I can pull the trigger…but, I won't die in a helpless blubbering heap on the floor begging for my life or my child's life. I won't be that victim. I choose not to be. As for you, I don't ask you to carry a gun. If you are not comfortable, then please don't. But I would like to keep my right to choose to not be a helpless victim. There is evil in the world and if evil has a gun, I want one too…” -unknown . . #SelfDefense #RefuseToBeAVictim #Glock #GlockPerfection #glock43x #9mm #therearemanylikeitbutthisoneismine #KeepCalmAndCarry #defendthesecond #edccarry #2A #AllGunLawsAreInfringements #righttocarry #ihavetherighttoprotectmyself #DontBeAStatistic #ConcealedCarry #Texas #ThisIsMySafety

A post shared by Tiffany Brafford (@tiffanybraffordgodwin) on

“It was really only after we had 13 more years of data and 11 additional adoptions of RTC laws that a clear picture emerged that RTC laws increase violent crime.”

And not by a little – by a lot.

In 23 of the 31 states with right-to-carry laws, violent crime increased by as much as 24% (PA) in the last decade.

Incidents of gun violence related to road rage disputes, bar fights, police shootings of armed civilians, and everyday disagreements explain increases, as the study did not find a statistically significant change in rates of homicide or property crimes.

Other researchers, like Daniel Webster of the Center for Gun Policy and Research at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, told Buzzfeed News he’s thrilled to have more numbers.

“I have read the study and consider it to be the most rigorous of studies of right-to-carry laws to date. This is a very important piece of research.”

Mr. Lott – the author of the original pro-gun argument – is keen to dismiss the emerging numbers.

“Basically, poor areas are more likely to be affected by violent crime, so lowering barriers to permits has a bigger effect in states that do so.”

The insinuation (without evidence) is that the study didn’t take such things into account. He also complained that other studies that support his own findings have “gotten no news coverage.”

Criminologist Philip Cook from Duke University, though, argues that new studies often trump old research and topple old data. That’s just how science often works.

“The scientific process does not always get the answer right the first time, but if it’s working well, then important findings are reviewed and tested and the truth becomes clearer.”

The new study, which encompasses 33 states and an extra decade of data, should be the beacon going forward – unless another study as rigorous effectively challenges it sometime in the future.

Until then, these numbers should give everyone – including the Supreme Court – something to think about.

The post A Recent Study Shows That More Guns Lead to More Violent Crime appeared first on UberFacts.

A New Study Shows Police Violence Is a Leading Cause of Death for Young Black Men

It’s become clear that young black men have different experiences with – and more reasons to fear – interactions with police.

At least, that’s how it seems.

But now, a scientific study is backing up that idea with proof.

According to new research, black men between the ages of 20 and 29 experience the highest mortality rate, with use-of-force by police being the 6th leading cause of death (after accidents, suicide, other homicides, heart disease, and cancer).

Study author Frank Edwards, of the School of Criminal Justice at Rutgers University-Newark, issued a statement about their findings.

“We haven’t really known for sure how often these killings have been happening because the data hasn’t been good enough. But if we are going to try and change police practices that aren’t working, we need to track this information better.”

Lest you think those numbers aren’t striking, they mean that 1 in every 1,000 black men will be killed by police – a 2.5x higher rate than for white men.

They join American Indians and Alaskan Natives in being “significantly more likely” to be killed by police. Even black women are 1.4x more likely than white women to be killed by police.

The data comes from Fatal Encounters, a journalist-led effort to document police-related deaths, which otherwise are lumped in with other crime statistics.

“We find that African American men and women, American Indian/Alaskan Native men and women, and Latino men face higher lifetime risk of being killed by police than do their white peers.”

Even though the data includes so-called “justified” killings, the results are nonetheless compelling. Race and police brutality continue to stand in the national spotlight, largely due to the fact that even though black people make up a mere 13% of the population, they encompass 34% of the prison population and 25% of people killed by on-duty police – making them closer to 3x more likely to die that way than their white peers.

While these results can be partially explained by the fact that younger people are more likely to engage in risky behavior, the study authors point out that police in the U.S. kill more people overall than forces in other industrialized democracies, particularly when it comes to people of color.

Hopefully studies like these, combined with thoughtful policies and departments intent on improving relations between officers and those they serve, will help steer America in the right direction.

The post A New Study Shows Police Violence Is a Leading Cause of Death for Young Black Men appeared first on UberFacts.

These Photos Show How Polluted America Was Before the EPA Cleaned It up

It’s difficult to imagine that there was a time when the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) didn’t exist in the United States, but it actually wasn’t until 1970 that President Richard Nixon signed the order to create the agency.

From 1971 until 1977, the EPA hired freelance photographers to document just how bad the environmental problem was in the U.S. at the time.

These old photographs show just how polluted America’s air and waterways were before the EPA stepped in and cleaned them up. You can view more from the series here on Flickr.

1. “The Atlas Chemical Company Belches Smoke across Pasture Land in Foreground”

Photo Credit: US National Archives

2. “Smog Hangs Over Louisville And Ohio River, September 1972”

Photo Credit: US National Archives

3. “Burning Barge On The Ohio River”

Photo Credit: US National Archives

4. “Detroit Lake the Dam”

Photo Credit: US National Archives

5. “Paddlewheel Steamboats Seen From Banks Of Ohio River”

Photo Credit: US National Archives

6. “Litter Left In The Ohio River”

Photo Credit: US National Archives

7. “Broken Glass From “No-Deposit, Non-Returnable” Bottles Along the Washington Shore of the Columbia River in a Public Picnic Area”

Photo Credit: US National Archives

8. “The Job Of Clearing Drift From The Potomac And Anacostia Rivers Is Done By The Army Corps Of Engineers”

Photo Credit: US National Archives

9. “Warning of Polluted Water at Staten Island Beach Verrazano-Narrows Bridge in Background”

Photo Credit: US National Archives

10. “Abandoned Car in Jamaica Bay”

Photo Credit: US National Archives

11. “Sand Covers Abandoned Car on Beach at Breezy Point South of Jamaica Bay”

Photo Credit: US National Archives

12. “Outflow Pipe 6 of the Oxford Paper Company Will at Rumford on the Androscoggin River”

Photo Credit: US National Archives

13. “Mary Workman Holds A Jar of Undrinkable Water That Comes from Her Well, and Has Filed A Damage Suit Against the Hanna Coal Company”

Photo Credit: US National Archives

14. “International Paper Company Mill at Jay on the Androscoggin River”

Photo Credit: US National Archives

15. “Cleaning Up the Roadside in Onset”

Photo Credit: US National Archives

Powerful photos, that’s for sure.

The post These Photos Show How Polluted America Was Before the EPA Cleaned It up appeared first on UberFacts.

A Horrible Fart Forces Kenyan Regional Assembly to Pause Their Debate

Everyone passes gas sometimes, but not everyone’s farts are smelly enough to disrupt the political process.

A member of a Kenyan regional assembly emitted a fart that was so foul, the entire assembly had to disperse in the middle of a debate, BBC reports. The Homa Bay county assembly had just returned from a lunch break to debate market stalls when they were interrupted by the sudden stench. Several men began to argue over who had dealt it (obviously).

“Honorable Speaker, one of us has polluted the air and I know who it is,” Julius Gaya reportedly told the assembly.

He went on to directly accuse a fellow member, who denied having done the deed, saying: “I am not the one. I cannot do such a thing in front of my colleagues.”

Speaker Edwin Kakach then paused the debate and told members to step outside and take a break from the smell in the chamber. Edwin also asked officials to bring in air fresheners “to make it pleasant.”

“Get whatever flavor you will find in any office, whether it’s vanilla or strawberry. We cannot continue sitting in an environment that smells bad,” Edwin said.

Fortunately, that didn’t prove to be necessary. After a 10 minute break, members returned to the room to find that the smell had subsided before any air fresheners were found. The heated debate on market stalls continued.

Guess we’ll never know who dealt it for sure.

The post A Horrible Fart Forces Kenyan Regional Assembly to Pause Their Debate appeared first on UberFacts.

Meet the Woman Who Finally Wore Pants onto the Senate Floor – It Wasn’t Until 1993

With pantsuits all the rage among high-profile female representatives these days, it never occurred to me to wonder about a time when they were all but forbidden on the Senate floor.

Which is silly, maybe, given that there were few public places prior to the 1970s where you would catch a woman wearing pants, but still – this is the 90s, we’re talking about. Bill Clinton was president.

But still women followed the unwritten “no pants allowed” rule.

That is, until one woman – the first African-American woman to serve as a U.S. Senator – went in for her first day of work.

Carol Moseley-Braun, the Democratic Senator from Illinois, hadn’t thought twice about donning one of her many pantsuits (her “nice outfit) and heading to the Capitol. When she arrived, however, “the gasps were audible” and she was left wondering what faux pas she’d committed on her very first day.

Image Credit: Wikipedia

It was her pants.

Since the beginning of the legislative branch, members have dressed in a dignified manner befitting the office, though no official dress code was written. And when women began to seek and win political office in 1912, they followed suit (heh), typically choosing dark colors and conservative cuts to eschew unwanted attention. The trend continued into the 40s, as more and more women joined the ranks of representatives. Reps. Mary Norton and Frances Bolton would even patrol female fashion choices on the floor.

Image Credit: Wikipedia

In the 1970s, slacks and pantsuits became acceptable office and formalwear attire, and were also allowed at federal agencies around the same time (except at the FBI, where J. Edgar Hoover reigned).

In 1972, Pat Nixon became the first sitting first lady to be photographed wearing trousers, and Rep. Charlotte T. Reid became the first woman to wear a “black wool, bell-bottomed pantsuit” in “the annals of the U.S. Congress.” One male colleague even told her he “was told there was a lady here in trousers, so I had to come over and see for myself.”

Pat Nixon
Image Credit: Wikipedia

The Senate, however, was much slower to embrace the trend of letting women wear whatever the hell made them the most comfortable.

It is perhaps not surprising, knowing what we know about the Senate, that even in the 1980s women were warned to dress appropriately before showing up for work – not just Senators, but temps, secretaries, or anyone else who might find themselves in the chamber.

“We’ve heard from women staff that in the 1980s, if they came in to work – if they were called in on an emergency basis – they needed to keep a dress to put on quickly or they had to borrow one if they had to appear on the Senate floor,” says historian Richard A Baker.

Though, again, it was not an official or written rule, the Senate employed “doorkeepers” that decided who did and did not look appropriate to appear. They were part security guard, part “protocol monitor,” and still today they make sure that everyone who enters is supposed to be there and is dressed appropriately.

A 1972 request for a written dress code, so that women weren’t thrown off by a different door monitor on any given day, was ignored.

By 1993, things were shifting. For the first, time, more than two women were serving Senate terms at the same time (there were 4). One of them was Moseley-Braun, who was simply unaware of the unwritten rule.

“It was one of those unwritten rules that they don’t tell you about unless you’re part of the circle. And nobody was talking to me about these things, so I had no clue.”

She might not have meant to start a revolution, but when staffers started to thank her for taking up the fight to wear pants on the floors, Moseley realized she had done just that.

“What happened next was that other people started wearing pants. All the women staffers went to their bosses and said, ‘If this senator can wear pants, then why I can’t I’ And so it was the pantsuit revolution.”

For what it’s worth, Senator Barbara Mikulski had also made up her mind to fight the outdated norm that same session, on a day when a bad snowstorm was forecast.

“It was a snowy day,” she told Vice. “I found out more bad weather was coming. I just really wanted to be comfortable. I’m most comfortable wearing slacks.”

Aware of the tradition she would be flipping the bird, Mikulski went to Robert Byrd, president pro tempore of the Senate, and told him she would be wearing pants. After checking the official rules to make sure that pants on women weren’t explicitly outlawed, Byrd gave her the nod.

“He didn’t say yes,” Mikulski recalls, “but he gave a nod.”

Soon after, the Senate sergeant at arms, Martha Pope (the first ever woman to hold the job) amended the written policy manual from “women are required to wear business attire, i.e. dress, skirt and blouse, or business suit” to read “women are required to wear business attire, i.e. dress, skirt/blouse, business suit, coordinated pantsuit (slacks and matching blazer; no stirrup pants).”

Image Credit: Wikipedia

Gotta love the 90s for that last tidbit.

Though recent events suggest that there are plenty in Washington who would love to turn back the clock on many things – including the role of women in politics – pants, pantsuits, and powerful women aren’t going anywhere.

The post Meet the Woman Who Finally Wore Pants onto the Senate Floor – It Wasn’t Until 1993 appeared first on UberFacts.

You Might Not Know These 10 Things About the British Royal Family

Even if you’re one of those people who is really into (meaning obsessed) with the British royal family, I bet there’s still a lot you don’t know about them.

Cause they are some quirky folks, let me tell you.

Let’s look at 10 facts about these royals.

1. That’s odd

View this post on Instagram

Wishing all our Canadian followers a very happy Canada Day #CanadaDay As Queen of Canada, Her Majesty has a deeply held affection for and loyalty to a country that she first toured as Princess Elizabeth in 1951 and to which she has returned over twenty times since. Members of the Royal Family also represent Her Majesty The Queen when they visit Canada. Swipe to see photographs of The Royal Family in Canada. The Queen is a constitutional monarch, acting entirely on the advice of Canadian Government ministers. Her Majesty is represented in Canada on a day-to-day basis by a Governor General at the federal level and by a Lieutenant Governor in each of the ten provinces, and is fully briefed by means of regular communications from her ministers, and has face-to-face audiences with them where possible.

A post shared by The Royal Family (@theroyalfamily) on

Queen Elizabeth II travels with her own supply of blood. I guess that makes sense and might be common among leaders around the world, but still…kind of strange.

2. The secret documentary

The royal family filmed a documentary that aired once in 1969 and never aired again. The reason? Queen Elizabeth thought that showing how the royals lived their everyday lives could be potentially dangerous.

3. Entourage

View this post on Instagram

Today is #ArmedForcesDay! As Sovereign, The Queen is Head of the Armed Forces and maintains a close relationship with serving members and veterans of the Armed Forces, both in the United Kingdom @BritishArmy @RoyalNavy @royalairforceuk and in the Commonwealth. In 1945 The Queen (then Princess Elizabeth) joined the Auxiliary Territorial Service (ATS), learning to drive and maintain vehicles, becoming the first female member of the Royal Family to join the Armed Services as a full-time active member #ArmedForcesDay Over the years The Queen, as Commander-in-chief, has met many servicemen and women of all ranks, and their families, both at home and overseas. In 2009 HM spoke about how "deeply thankful" she, and the entire nation, are for those who serve in the Armed Forces. #ArmedForces #SaluteOurForces

A post shared by The Royal Family (@theroyalfamily) on

The Queen travels with her doctor and 34 other people, including her hairdresser, secretary, press officers, and bodyguards.

4. Not ever gonna happen

This is a weird one. When the Queen gets off of an airplane, you’ll never see her skirt fly up because all of her skirts are weighted. Smart, very smart.

5. BYOB

View this post on Instagram

Today, The Duke of Rothesay (as The Prince of Wales is known when is Scotland) was in Caithness. He toured @wolfburn_whisky, the most northerly whisky distillery on the Scottish mainland, originally opened in 1821. Master distiller Iain Kerr, who has over 20 years’ experience, explained to HRH how the craftsmen at the distillery use traditional methods to produce fine spirit. His Royal Highness also opened Scotland’s largest wind farm – Beatrice Offshore Windfarm, whee he met staff and local residents at the Operations and Maintenance Base. The wind farm’s 84 turbines will generate enough energy to power 450,000 homes and is Scotland’s single largest source of renewable energy.

A post shared by The Royal Family (@theroyalfamily) on

On their trips abroad, Prince Charles and Camilla have a bodyguard carry a bag of their favorite drinks. Gin and tonic for Charles and red wine for Camilla.

6. Fill ’em up

Harry and William love American fast food. Once when they were young boys, their mother Princess Diana asked the family chef to cancel lunch because the boys wanted to eat McDonald’s.

7. Two birthday parties

The Queen’s birthday is actually celebrated twice. The sovereign’s birthday has been celebrated on the second Saturday of June for over 260 years in an official ceremony. But the Queen’s actual birthday is April 21, so that’s double the fun.

8. No seafood

When the royal family travels, they are not allowed to eat seafood because the chances of someone getting sick from shellfish are high.

9. That’s bright

View this post on Instagram

Today The Queen visited Cambridge on a day of engagements including to visit The National Institute of Agricultural Botany, The Royal Papworth Hospital and Queens’ College, Cambridge. #RoyalVisitCambridge In the morning The Queen helped The NIAB to celebrate its 100th anniversary. NIAB is one of Britain’s oldest, and fastest growing, crop science research centres. Her Majesty learned about the work The NIAB does, saw visitor books which had been signed by King George V and Queen Mary, and The Duke of Cambridge. In the afternoon, Her Majesty visited The Royal Papworth Hospital where she was joined by The Duchess of Gloucester, who is Patron of the hospital. Her Majesty met transplant patients, consultants and visited the new hospital which has been built and will include 300 new beds for patients. At Queens’ College Cambridge The Queen met staff and graduates, as Patroness of the college.

A post shared by The Royal Family (@theroyalfamily) on

The Queen wears bright colors so people can spot her from far away in crowds.

10. Breaking protocol

Kate Middleton broke the royal protocol in Germany when she hugged children while visiting a charity. There is usually a handshake only rule.

The post You Might Not Know These 10 Things About the British Royal Family appeared first on UberFacts.

The “Hundred Flowers Campaign” of…

The “Hundred Flowers Campaign” of 1956 China, allowed and encouraged people to speak freely and openly express their opinions about the communist regime. After a year, the campaign was withdrawn the Chinese government imprisoned those who spoke critically about them.

Classical Illustrations Depict What Can Only Be Described as Japanese Fart Battles

If you’ve ever needed proof that potty humor in general has been around for years– fart humor in particular – these images depicting epic flatulence battles should do the trick.

Image Credit: Waseda University

There’s a centuries-old scroll called He-Gassen (“the fart war”) dating to Japan’s Edo Period (1603-1868) that depicts men, rear ends bared, spraying powerful gusts of gas toward each other – gas that can break boards and cross wide battlefields to win the day.

Image Credit: Waseda University

Image Credit: Waseda University

Though the depictions aren’t entirely unique – Arabian Nights features a story titled “The Historic Fart” and Apocolocyntosis, a satire possibly written by Seneca, references a “shart” (“When he had made a great noise with that end of him which talked easiest, he cried out, ‘Oh dear, oh dear! I think I have made a mess of myself.’”)

And bathroom humor has a long history in European political dissent – this is a woodcut from 1545 entitled “Kissing the Pope’s Feet”:

Image Credit: Public Domain

But back to Japan…

Image Credit: Waseda University

Image Credit: Waseda University

In the Japanese art, Westerners in particular were apt to be blown away by the strength and prowess of the Japanese wind, so the scroll pictured also counts (crudely) as a political cartoon.

Image Credit: Waseda University

Image Credit: Waseda University

The creators of South Park have nothing on whoever created it, for sure.

If you want more (and of course you do), you can check out the full collection here.

The post Classical Illustrations Depict What Can Only Be Described as Japanese Fart Battles appeared first on UberFacts.

American and Mexican Children Play Together on Seesaws Built into the Border Wall

Here’s a feel-good story.

Despite all the current examples of tragedy, hateful rhetoric, and divisiveness in the news, the images of children simply playing together at the US-Mexico border can make us all pause and reflect on what it means to be human.

There’s no doubt that the situation along the US-Mexico border is complicated and has been for many, many years. But two university professors decided to change the tone from “it’s scary and complicated’ to “maybe this can be a little whimsical” by installing seesaws that straddle the border so kids on opposite sides of the fence can play with each other.

How do you like that for breaking down barriers?

The folks behind the project are Ronald Rael, a professor of architecture at the UC Berkeley, and Virginia San Fratello, an associate professor of design at San Jose State University.

View this post on Instagram

One of the most incredible experiences of my and @vasfsf’s career bringing to life the conceptual drawings of the Teetertotter Wall from 2009 in an event filled with joy, excitement, and togetherness at the borderwall. The wall became a literal fulcrum for U.S. – Mexico relations and children and adults were connected in meaningful ways on both sides with the recognition that the actions that take place on one side have a direct consequence on the other side. Amazing thanks to everyone who made this event possible like Omar Rios @colectivo.chopeke for collaborating with us, the guys at Taller Herrería in #CiudadJuarez for their fine craftsmanship, @anateresafernandez for encouragement and support, and everyone who showed up on both sides including the beautiful families from Colonia Anapra, and @kerrydoyle2010, @kateggreen , @ersela_kripa , @stphn_mllr , @wakawaffles, @chris_inabox and many others (you know who you are). #raelsanfratello #borderwallasarchitecture #teetertotterwall #seesaw #subibaja

A post shared by Ronald Rael (@rrael) on

The seesaws were installed at the border in Sunland Park, New Mexico, not far from the very busy border of El Paso, Texas, and Ciudad Juarez, Mexico.

Photo Credit: Instagram,rrael

Photo Credit: Instagram,rrael

Rael and San Fratello actually came up with the idea for a “Teetertotter Wall” back in 2009. In his Instagram post, Rael said, “The wall became a literal fulcrum for U.S.-Mexico relations and children and adults were connected in meaningful ways on both sides with the recognition that the actions that take place on one side have a direct consequence on the other side.”

Photo Credit: Instagram,rrael

Rael added that the seesaw project “is incredibly important at a time when relationships between people on both sides are being severed by the wall and the politics of the wall.”

Kids simply having fun knows no boundaries, no borders, no walls, and no fences.

The post American and Mexican Children Play Together on Seesaws Built into the Border Wall appeared first on UberFacts.

Desperate-Sounding Officials Are Using Pizza to Help People Understand Russian Election Interference

Let’s be honest: hearing a story (or, in this case, daily stories) about how Russia used bots and trolls and other vague, internet tactics in order to influence an American presidential election can be kind of hard to wrap one’s mind around.

I mean, this isn’t Cold War tactics like nuclear weapons that we can hide from under our school desks to (pretend we can) survive. Without a concrete thing to point to, officials have found it difficult to really present how big of a deal – and how much of a threat – these actions have been and continue to be to our democracy.

In a last-ditch seeming attempt to meet the masses where they live, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency is relying on pizza to get the message apart.

Because if Americans live anywhere, it’s in a pizza parlor.

The agency created an infographic that they shared in a July 25 tweet that puts the Russian interference in the 2016 election in terms of an ongoing, widespread, and passionate disagreement about whether or not pineapple belongs on pizza.

In a nutshell, we’re to imagine that, instead of using clever tactics to pit Americans against each other when it comes to issues of race, religion, sexual orientation, etc., a foreign power wants to encourage a battle to the death over pineapple.

Image Credit: DHS.gov

“To date, we have no evidence of Russia (or any nation) actively carrying out information operations against pizza toppings. This infographic is an ILLUSTRATION of how information operations have been carried out in the past to exploit divisions in the United States.”

The illustration takes people on a fairly thrilling ride examining how foreign powers like Russia can turn ordinary people against their friends, family, and neighbors.

“Foreign influencers are constantly on the lookout for opportunities to inflame hot button issues in the United States. They don’t do this to win arguments; they want to see us divided.”

Some examples of how they use social media to push further division are given as “Being anti-pineapple is un-American! Millennials are ruining pizza! Keep your pineapple off my pizza! What’s wrong with plain old cheese?”

Basically, the lesson is that you should consume all of your media – especially online media – with a hefty dose of skepticism, and if someone is intent on stirring the pot, make sure to ask yourself what’s in it for them.

Oh, and as for pineapple on pizza? To each her own.

The post Desperate-Sounding Officials Are Using Pizza to Help People Understand Russian Election Interference appeared first on UberFacts.