Do you think this news article is bias toward a political party?

Rex W. Huppke and the Chicago Tribune published an article on June 23, 2016 titled.  ‘Facts suggest a whiter shade of profiling.’ The article states that “Of the 81 mass shootings that have occurred since 1982,  47 were committed by white men.”  “That’s not opinion, It’s fact.” Said the writer.

He goes on to state, “with the exception of 9/11 attacks, a murderous event on a scale yet to be replicated – Muslim people are not the main culprits.”

In My Opinion

If the writer’s point is to compare a non-Muslim ‘white shade’ of profiling to Muslim profiling, why not start with 9/11 instead of going back to 1982.  Or was the article to purposely skew the statistics to the so called “facts” that should have been reported as percentages in relation to ‘skin shades?’

For example, what percentage results from the number of incidents to the population being considered by a skin shade? If Muslims only consist of one percent of the American population, the number of incidents should be compared as a percentage instead of  incidences.

Also, is it reasonable for a prudent person with common sense to be suspicious or wary of the appearance of a person? Whether it be skin shade, garb, or speaking in a non-understandable language, and sadly even a religion,  if only one percent of their population has a high percentage of mass murder incidents in the USA? More so, especially when our military is engaged in a war in their parental homeland countries. Sad but true reality of life.

King Solomon

A prudent person foresees danger and takes precautions. The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences. (Proverb 22:3)

 A good reputation is better than precious perfume; (Ecclesiastes 7:1a) 

Chicago Tribune

The purpose of a news source and their journalistic responsibility and duty to their readers and our nation, is to present news in a fair and objective professional manner. 

 Regards and goodwill blogging.