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.
It also encourages confusion that each mass shooting is someone trying to kill as many people as possible in a public place, when that overwhelmingly isn't actually true.
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.
"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."
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
No, there's nothing more to this than guns and Americans dumb. You have to remember, we have functioning education in most other places in the world, so the kind of imbecile propaganda you all fall victim to has no effect on us, you only come across as a moron trying to regurgitate it.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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.
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.