US breaks record for most mass shootings in single year after weekend murders
US breaks record for most mass shootings in single year after weekend murders
Whose record did we break? Our own?
Exactly. Congrats!
We're number 1!!! Eat it, Canada!
It's like the other countries aren't even trying.
Obviously
I know Our Town is creepy place, but it does not have any shooting.
Shooters? Not in Our Town!
...honestly, I'd rather get shot
Some, such as the Gun Violence Archive, include events in which multiple people are shot regardless of number of deaths, and so report much higher figures.
This carries a fun implication: let’s deflate the number of mass shooting by only including the deaths and not how many people are actually shot (and perhaps saved by emergency room personnel).
It also ignores any lingering effects the survivors might suffer, whether physically or mentally. Just because you're alive doesn't mean you are whole.
Or economically, given the absurd costs of medical attention in the USA.
Mass shooting, not mass killing. I'd even want to know about instances of multiple, unrelated targets. If we get a string of shooters with terrible aim and nobody is actually hurt I don't consider that an improvement of our epidemic.
That last part is important, because our emergency responders have gotten very good at saving lives (sadly, they've had to). People will point to deaths as the only relevant stat--and it's amazing that isn't enough for some people--but it's a huge burden and cost for healthcare.
I can already hear the wing conspiracy theories about how liberal doctors are letting mass shooting victims die in order to bolster the numbers.
Kind of like the conspiracies they’d throw around about the numbers of cases and deaths related to Covid.
Words have meanings and require definition.
Gun Violence Archive has about the most liberal definition, Mother Jones about the most conservative. (I can't believe I used Mother Jones and conservative in the same sentence.)
Fact is, when we hear "mass shooting", we're thinking of the Mother Jones definition.
"If I just focus on rhetoric, all the rampant gun violence goes away! I mean, no, there is no gun violence. Regardless, everything is fine, you just have to pretend. Guns have nothing to do with gun violence, also war is peace, and I am sane in the head. I'm sure people will buy this if I just repeat it a lot."
YEAH!
WE DID IT AMERICA!
U.S.A! U.S.A.! U.S.A!
All these senseless murders every fucking year, and not one of them directed at the republicans that have ruined everything.
It's conservatives doing the shootings. Why does it seem that 95% of all mass shooters have a white supremacist manifesto?
Because white supremacists' arguments are easily dismantled to their core components of idiocy, racism and ignorance. They can't convince anyone who isn't a moron racist and they believe that those who don't think like they do are trying to replace them so they resort to mass murder. Because they are racist morons.
Media bias.
Seriously, when talking about this people use different definitions of "mass shooting" depending on what fits their agenda.
If we're talking about the "nutter shoots up a public place" type shootings, then those caused about 1400 deaths between the middle of 1964 and the middle of 2021 based on numbers posted by WaPo.
If you define it as "any shooting with more than three dead" then the numbers go way up but a huge chunk of that is gang violence and family annihilators (people who murder-suicide their family). These are different kinds of problems that need to be treated differently. And neither of those is going to respond much to gun control laws.
Hey it happened once. He couldn't shoot for shit, but someone tried...
This feels fucked up to write, but incels shooting women/children/non-whites is probably better than having lefties/righties shooting each other. That's how you actually get a civil war.
Remember back in July 2022, when there was a mass shooting in Denmark and some Americans would say "see it happens even in a gun regulated country"?
There hasn't been one since...
If you make the same search for America, letter B is probably on purge page 3
purge 3
Quite the Freudian slip
I live in a country where it is almost impossible to get gun. But there were some shootings even in schools. And every sane person agrees that neither any changes in laws will do anything nor all those bogus turnstiles, fences and locking fire exits. This circus of prison mentally harms children even more, fences don't let students escape in case of shooting and locking fire exits... Dear Princess Celestia, we didn't learn anything.
unless you are male between age 18 and 27. In this case good uncle Voencom will give you AK even if you don't want it.
It's weird how the BuT OtHeR CoUnTrIeS HaVe iT tOo argument is so rapidly debunked even without showing how 'both sides' it is.
theres like 5 million Danes. their per capita count is still higher.
Have you done the maths, or are you guessing? For the rate to be equal, there must have been 220 mass shooting in the US since 1994, wich is the earliest mass shootings on this list.
(332 mil / 6mil) X 4 mass shootings registered since 1994
Notice it is SINCE 1994. I believe there are double this EVERY year in the US. The actual comparison is 15000 (mass) shootings Vs 220 (adjusted to reflect the population) making it 70! Times higher in the US, after accounting for the population differences
So you are not correct when you say it is higher in Denmark.
Also note that this is a comparison for mass shootings. Gun violence in general is even more extreme
This is a VERY rough comparison simply to prove you wrong, but there is a good article about this, comparing Denmark and the US here
Denmark's rate is 1.08. This is actually quite high by European standards, but to claim it's higher than the US is a joke.
Math is hard 😔...
I don't disagree that gun violence is a huge problem in the US, and we can all agree that we need to have serious discussion about realistic solutions.
But there are SO many more people in the US than in Denmark. It's not even close. It has roughly the population as Colarado for the entire country.
That's not to say there aren't many, many more mass shooting instances in Colarado (I'm using the term mass shooting to mean a person shooting strangers on purpose in a planned attack in a place unlikely to have armed victims like a school, movie theater or gay night club) than Denmark, so I feel it's a bit disingenuous to compare the whole US to Denmark.
Denmark also has a lot less poverty and better access to healthcare and mental health services as compared to the US.
So I know it feels good to try and make your point this way, but it's not really the same at all. There's more to this than guns and "Americans dumb".
It's easier to veiw these gun statistics less by a side by side comparison of total population and more by gun related deaths per every 10, 000 people. That allows an adjustment for population.
The US in 2023 had 10.89 gun deaths per every 10k people. Denmark had 1.08 per 10k. So roughly Denmark would have had to have roughly 10x the number of gun deaths to draw parallel with the US.
This metric does cover all homicides and suicides. For a better picture homicides only made up 7% of all gun related fatalities in Denmark in the US 43% of gun deaths were homicides. One interesting difference is that Denmark accidental gun deaths is a much bigger slice of their piechart than the US.
Strong social welfare programs and measures to check extreme wealth aggregation are also things the US would have money to manage. Technically speaking the ratio of Government wealth per adult in the US is greater than Denmark's meaning Denmark is doing more with less.
Also poverty crime is still pretty high in Denmark. The social safety net means you don't starve so much and have a place to come home to but it's a very lean existance. A lot of people there are barely making ends meet. Technically speaking the poverty rates between the two countries are actually very comparable.
Ok, but controlling for population doesn't actually make it better for you guys. You're still far and away the number one in number of mass shootings. By orders of magnitude.
Note that there is a really bad outdated study that puts US in the number 11 (and it's not relevant, because it's really outdated by now. I suspect that because of these frequent record breaks, it would look bad even with the fuckery), because they did a lot statistical fuckery to make it so. It's too long of an explanation to write out what they did.
However, you can just use the average for number of mass shootings per year/month/week and you propel to the top like a rocket.
So, yes it's more than just "Americans dumb", but everything points to the fact that US is rotten to the core, and lack of gun control is definitely part of the problem. Poverty, inequality, police violence, lack of social programs (because fuck commies, fam) and so forth... But while it's not unique to US, it's definitely typical US problem.
Nah, y'all dumb.
Ok let's compare the entirety of Europe to the US (Europe has about 750 000 000 inhabitants, so double the US)
Amount of school shootings happened in the US last year: 52
Amount of school shooting happened in Europe: 31 since the year 1900
I mean it's still an entire country. The comparisons are the same for Australia and England as well. Sure they have violence. It's mitigating the tools to create violence. They have the easiest access in a country that breeds toxicity. Take some of those things away and maybe keeping the guns as they are a worthy discussion. But because they aren't, it's the most common sense way to handle the problem.
And we'll do nothing about it as always. On to the next year. America, you're a real winner.
[I]n Dallas a 21-year-old with a previous aggravated assault charge shot five people in a house, including a toddler.
If that toddler was armed it wouldn't have happened
Sadly I would put more faith into a good guy toddler with a gun than the police from Uvalde.
Honestly, I have a whole lot of issues with how the data is presented and categorize with mass shootings all around.
Now pretty much however you look at the data, we have a major problem and probably multiple different but related major problems with gun violence in America that we are handling poorly and pretty much nowhere else in the world is experiencing the kinds of problems we have. So don't get me wrong, I don't mean to minimize the importance of any of the categories of gun violence, I just want more clear statistics on what actually is happening so I don't have to go sorting through a thousand different news articles, Wikipedia pages, press releases, etc. to get a full and clear picture of what's actually happening.
Personally, I'd like to see specific stats on
The "classic" mass shooting, someone walks into a place like a school, mall, outdoor public area, concert venue, etc. and attempts to kill as many people as possible more-or-less indiscriminately.
I'd also like to see stats on planned/attempted mass shootings that get stopped before they properly get off the ground, whether police actually manage to act on a tip about a suspicious person, the shooter is unsuccessful and either doesn't manage to shoot anyone or only shoots one person before being stopped which may keep it from being counted as a mass shooting
There's also more target situations, domestics where someone shoots multiple family members, or situations like a gang-related drive-by, where the victims are chosen because of a specific relationship to the shooter.
There's definitely some grey areas in-between, for example someone shooting up their own school, church, or workplace, because they would have some relationship or affiliation with the victims, but it's somewhat more indiscriminate and they might behave more like the first category than second, or situations in which bystanders get shot, or where the shooter's specific goal is one or several specific people but they are ok with other collateral damage, maybe they intend to kill their boss but end up shooting 7 other coworkers as well that get in their way, they didn't set out to kill those other employees, if they happened to not be there or didn't interfere that would have been fine by them, but they were also willing to do it if it came to that.
I'd also like to see the stats for total shots fired, how much ammo they were carrying, percent of ammo used, how many wounded, how many killed, how many times each victim was shot, types of firearms used, how those firearms were obtained, length of the incident, police response times, previous criminal/psych histories, etc.
Similarly stats on school shootings could use a bit more granularity, a columbine or sandy hook type situation is very different from a situation where a kid brings a gun to school to shoot a specific student or staff member, or from a situation where a shooting happens on school property even if it's well outside of school hours and no students or faculty are present, etc. but often these sorts of situations will get lumped together into one school shooting category.
And that's probably just scraping the tip of the iceberg. I could keep going with a whole lot of categories and stats I'd like to see but this comment is already getting too long.
And honestly it's wild to me that some government agency or at least some non-profit or even a dedicated random person doesn't seem to have really put together any decent spreadsheet with these incidents categorized and all of the stats. I'm almost certain it probably exists somewhere as the pet project of some CDC employee or something who's unable to release it due to regulations, bureaucracy, political bullshittery, etc.
Yeah they define mass shootings as 4(?) Or more deaths. Injuries doesn't count.
I dunno what kind of math games theyre playing with this “mass killing” definition lately but Ive seen it twice now. America is near or over 2 “mass shootings” a day and has been for a while. This “mass killing” metric seems to be an obvious attempt to hide the level of gun violence in the united states. Here is a good source I frequent to get a better idea of whats happening day to day.
The article explicitly addresses that, and even links to the same website:
Different groups count mass shootings and killings in different ways. Some, such as the Gun Violence Archive, include events in which multiple people are shot regardless of number of deaths, and so report much higher figures. Its tally for the year is 630 mass shootings.
Interesting. I'm not American, but somehow I expected bigger numbers in Montana and Wyoming.
You'd need a scoped rifle and some amount of skill to pull off a mass shooting in Montana
I think the distinction is right in the wording, you can be shot and not killed. In your Wikipedia link they define a mass shooting as incidents where 2 out of 7 of their sources define it as a mass shooting, but 3 of those outlets don't require killing to happen at all.
On top of that, in recent memory even the Vermont shooting where 3 Palestinian-Americans were shot it wouldn't be called a mass shooting by that wiki link because they survived (albeit with severe problems) and it was one person short of the threshold.
That being said, the choice of specifying "killing" is sort of weird for outlets to make. If you shoot someone, your intent or expectation is usually for them to die.
I dunno what kind of math games theyre playing with this “mass killing” definition lately
If they didn't broaden the definition they wouldn't be able to include knife attacks in their article.
They aren't attempting to hide the level of Gun Violence, they're trying to get clicks by re-spinning the data.
Here is a good source I frequent to get a better idea of whats happening day to day.
GVA is decent but a lot of people don't look past the number totals to try and understand the problem(s). The majority of the incidents recorded there look a lot like this one.
The salient details are depressingly familiar
You can just walk down the list of incidents and pick them out over and over and over.
https://abc30.com/central-fresno-deadly-shooting-two-men-killed-apartment-party/14141254/
https://www.cbsnews.com/colorado/news/4-shot-house-party-over-100-minors-suspect-arrested-aurora/
congrats?
Most mass shootings in a single year so far.
World: But it's already December!
America: hold my beer
... so far.
"No way to prevent this"
"Says only country where this happens" :(
Those fools! If only we had 1.3 guns per person to defend ourselves!
If only this was a purely sarcastic sentiment and not unironically spouted by libertarian gun nuts.
No, no, they've got a point: if every citizen has enough guns to be entirely covered in them, the bullets won't be able to get through!
I'm excited for people to come into this thread and insist on a definition of assault rifle.
Or mass shooting
It's not a mass shooting unless it happens in Massachusetts, otherwise it's just sparkling shooting
USA! USA! USA! NUMBER 1 BAYBAY! (Shotgun blasts)
Isn't this old news already? Wasn't there already another mass shooting at UNLV that barely makes the news because this happens like three times a month?
What a world.
Pro Life! Fuck yea!
I'm sure someone has done the math on it, how many of these mass shootings were right wingers? How many were not right wing trans people?
Try the Southern Poverty Law Center
U S A! NUMBER ONE!
Can you just pay teachers fucking living wage?
No. We can arm them with AR15s though
Funny, but horribly impractical.
If every classroom has an AR-15 secured behind a desk, then every school can outfit a gang. Remember that the gun violence in countries without so many available guns is coincidentally a lot lower.
And teachers aren't paid enough as it is. They're not gonna take a life for the pittance they're getting.
How about you pay those teachers in AR15s then?
It's mixing mass shooting with mass killing.
The first number deals with people shot, and the second counts incidents where four or more people died from their injuries. I believe the second number isn't just gun violence - so stabbings or vehicular homicide are counted - but I'm not sure because the number of mass attacks are far lower when the victim can avoid injury by moving only three feet to one side.
The number of mass shootings, where 4+ people were injured by guns but less than 4 were killed, has been as many as 9 in one day.
I think the number of strictly school shootings is more than 38 this year. Like, a Columbine somewhere, every pay-cheque.
Look at all the good all those good guys with guns are doing. /s
Given the opportunity to outlaw "assault weapons" or eliminate hate, fear and greed, which do you think would reduce deaths the most? Saying this because Amish communities are generally armed to the teeth without any shootings.
I would guess countries/societies with a (much) smaller wealth gap and more homogenous culture/values have less mass shootings. Perhaps in these societies there is less isolation between people, for better and worse?
Ah yes, the Amish. Famously violent, and always running around with their AR-15s, high capacity magazines, just to really show off how modest, simple and peaceful their lives are.
The Amish are a non-violent cult. They have a lot of good values but they also have many toxic traditions. The difference is that they control people through psychological methods rather than with force.
They may be a non-violent group, but that doesn't excuse their behavior or mean that they are a model that all gun owners should strive for. Disgruntled members are more likely to abruptly leave altogether and carry lifelong trauma.
Amish = Cult
Isolation from mainstream society.
Strict rules and regulations controlling all aspects of everyday life.
Limited access to education
Unwavering devotion.
Shunning and excommunication practices.
Patriarchal leadership guided by god instead of charismatic leader
Amish communities deal with those things in a different horrible way. Like excommunicating people who know nothing outside of the community.
Outlaw assault weapons. That's the easy one.
This is as stupid as sad.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Two attacks on Sunday occurring within a couple of hours of each other in Texas and Washington state were the year’s 37th and 38th mass shootings.
Authorities believe a murder-suicide was responsible for the death of five family members in Vancouver, a suburb of Portland, Oregon, just across the border in Washington, while in Dallas a 21-year-old with a previous aggravated assault charge shot five people in a house, including a toddler.
Another attack occurred on Sunday in New York City, when a 38-year-old man stabbed four of his relatives – including two children – as well as another woman and two police officers before they shot him.
Some, such as the Gun Violence Archive, include events in which multiple people are shot regardless of number of deaths, and so report much higher figures.
The Fourth of July long weekend was overshadowed by 16 shootings in which 15 people were killed and nearly 100 injured.
But the deadliest attack of 2023 happened in Lewiston, Maine, on 25 October when an army reservist murdered 18 people in a bowling alley and a bar.
The original article contains 380 words, the summary contains 182 words. Saved 52%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
There it is again, that funny feeling.
Wait. you guys only lost 200 people in mass shootings? There's four hundred million of you. no wonder no one cares. News makes it sound like you lose 50,000 that way.
Yeah, they are. Turn off the news and go for a walk.
No, we lose 50,000 people per year in normal shootings. Quite a few of those are suicides though, so no one cares.
We very much should
Total homicides usually clocks in around 26k or so. About half with firearms. About 10% with specifically rifles.
Of that ~26k, about 200 this year have been from shootings in which more than 3 people were killed. To get the number that high you aren't just counting "nutter with a manifesto shoots up a public place"-style shootings (there were 1400 or so total killed in those between the mid 60s and 2021, according to WaPo - they stopped that count at the point and since started a new project with a more broad measure of what counts), you're mostly counting gang violence and family annihilators (think person kills own spouse and kids, then themself).
We focus on nutters shooting up public places and want to primarily ban rifles, because the people calling for it pay attention to a few incidents that get lots of media attention and then see statistics measuring something different and connect the two as is intended.
Big whoop! As an american it doesn't affect me because I've a gun for self defense.
A gun is not a guarantee of safety against other people with guns, otherwise war would be pretty anticlimactic.
You should also invest in getting some t-shirts made that say "GOOD GUY" in big letters, that way the police know you're a good guy with a gun and don't kill you like they did to the last guy who stopped a mass shooter.
I thought you'd recommend AR15s against other people with guns.
Why do you need a gun, when you can just murder people with words?
Gun takes less effort and I'm lazy.
If you need a gun to feel safe in your own country, you live in a shithole.
Yet every other person in this world want to live in the " shithole". I was in Australia recently and noticed so many Australian want to become American. They put in some real effort.
