Go dig up population-adjusted rates of mass shootings perpetrated by non-organized crime then. You can't just pick a country and find one or even a few examples of shootings and then say "Done! America doesn't have a problem. Other countries have shootings too!"ITT: We're talking about mass-murder violence perpetrated by members of organized crime. That is not uniquely American. Heck, it sounds like they're related to Mexican drug cartels...but yeah. "'Murica," you say...
(Red Squirrel and others)
sounds like it was a hit from the cartel on a family who was trying to get their piece of the pie.
Go dig up population-adjusted rates of mass shootings perpetrated by non-organized crime then. You can't just pick a country and find one or even a few examples of shootings and then say "Done! America doesn't have a problem. Other countries have shootings too!"
Mass shootings.Unfortunately, practically all such stats include suicides. Void.
but arent you glad your shot missed that guy? Imagine where you would be with that death on you.
Mass shootings.
Rates of mass shootings.what about them? they happen in the states, they happen in other countries that have strict gun laws to out right bans and registration on even air rifles. criminals will have their weapons of choice no matter what.
Stop making this an issue with a tool and work to figure out how to understand and fix the root cause of the violent nature of people. With actual facts, long term/wide studies, and logic instead of fear mongering, panic, and "oh the humanity, won't you please think of the children" cries of bullshit.
Rates of mass shootings.
Still very low including terrorist attacks.
Edit: not trying to say nothing needs to be done, but tools aren't the real issue.
For those who are saying don't blame the tool, what is your take on alcohol? Would people just-as-often get high on other legal things more and accidentally kill people in the same manners? Prohibition didn't work because of selfishness and greed.
Yeah it's pretty small, only 331 cases of mass shootings for the year of 2015 in the USA.
https://massshootingtracker.org/data/2016where are you stats? this is a number that sounds familiar and from what i remember, was proven wrong. many school shootings included in the stats that get thrown around were shown to either be after hours by criminals cutting through a elementry/middle,highschool grounds trying to flee or simply happen on university campus grounds not even related to a "mass shootings". meaning, the person didn't go there to shoot a bunch of people, there was a crime committed shot(s) were fired, and one or two people killed. as well as how many of those shootings are gang violence related? these are things that shouldn't be included in those stats.
All of that said, it's still a low number given the population and number of guns in the states. no matter what you try, you will not stop this by blaming a tool. I don't live my life in fear of mass shootings. i'm more likely to be killed by a car when i'm out walking. or a heart attack due to my crappy eating habits.
Yeah it's pretty small, only 331 cases of mass shootings for the year of 2015 in the USA.
So far we've got 88 mass shootings for 2016.
So which one do you choose, the one that only counts the number of people who die (ex. 15 shot, none die, therefore nope, no mass shooting here), or the one that counts the number of people shot (ex. 15 shot, none die, still a mass shooting).simply in response to your 331 figure. the biggest problem is people/groups aren't working off of a standard definition of mass shootings.
https://newrepublic.com/article/123027/heres-why-no-one-can-agree-number-mass-shootings
http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb...ootings-and-claims-355-so-far-year-its-really
http://reason.com/blog/2015/12/03/choose-your-own-mass-shooting-statistics
https://massshootingtracker.org/data/2016
Every single one is backed up by individual reports from the news. Look at their definition of a mass shooting and compare it to the FBI definition of a mass shooting that "official sources" use. Decide for yourself which one makes more sense.
Look at other countries like Australia. Look up the rates of mass shootings after the Port Arthur Massacre. Look up the prices of guns on the black market in Australia. Look up how criminals have to share guns and ammunition to cut down on costs.
So which one do you choose, the one that only counts the number of people who die (ex. 15 shot, none die, therefore nope, no mass shooting here), or the one that counts the number of people shot (ex. 15 shot, none die, still a mass shooting).
It's a problem, but a really stupid one. The answer is obvious. The official definition of a mass shooting as used by the FBI is completely retarded.
You're gonna wanna do more research and analysis, especially about the current state of places like Australia. And talk to more people from other countries. And if possible live in more places. I've been globetrotting for seven years now. Raised in Ohio. Being in the shoes of someone from another country looking into America from the outside opens your eyes to just how unbalanced and ridiculous America is.and that's what i thought. see my post above. you responded before i was able to post.
as was stated in my links, those "reports" are only reports and not police records. meaning, anyone calling in a noise or a reporter jumping the gun and reporting something that isn't actually happening gets counted. i think we all know how well modern media is quick to run with a story without many details these days.
for looking at Australia, why? last i looked, after they gun confiscation, violent crime went up. criminals sharing guns? that's not new, they've done that before. And as i under stand it from the last murder trial i sat as a juror, it doesn't have anything to do with cost. It was about having someone hold and monitor a stash and lending out guns when wanted/need. helping in keeping the same weapon from being used by the same person to brake up trends/patterns that might help catch the criminal. Sure, it may have a side effect on cost, but that's not how it was explained to us.
You disagree that firing five+ shots and hitting five+ people in a store robbery isn't a mass shooting? Look at their definition again. They say nothing about just firing shots in the air.i disagree. firing a shot in a mall while trying to rob a store shouldn't be counted as a mass shooting. either one i pick is a more realistic number than the one posted by the crowd funded tracker you are getting your number from. even the mother jones study/group doesn't agree with that groups number and they, if i'm remembering correctly, used to be the go to source for those numbers. but the media has found a source with a much higher number, so they run with that.
sounds like it was a hit from the cartel on a family who was trying to get their piece of the pie.
Man, serious hostile takeover...
But then, aren't you counting cases where some 16 year old shit heads drive around with a bb gun and shoot pellets at people?So which one do you choose, the one that only counts the number of people who die (ex. 15 shot, none die, therefore nope, no mass shooting here), or the one that counts the number of people shot (ex. 15 shot, none die, still a mass shooting).
It's a problem, but a really stupid one. The answer is obvious. The official definition of a mass shooting as used by the FBI is completely retarded.
Go look in the list and tell me if the numbers of these kinds of cases are statistically relevant.But then, aren't you counting cases where some 16 year old shit heads drive around with a bb gun and shoot pellets at people?