You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
-33 points

The worst is the Gun Violence Archive and their “mass shooting index” which gets quoted uncritically in the media, so you get headlines like:

https://abcnews.go.com/US/mass-shootings-days-2023-database-shows/story?id=96609874

"There have been more mass shootings than days in 2023, database shows

The United States has experienced 627 mass shootings so far this year."

The problem is they define “mass shooting” differently from how the public sees a mass shooting.

Their definition is a shooting event where 4 or more people are injured or killed.

So were there 627 events similar to the UNLV situation where a nut with a gun shows up in a public place and starts shooting indescriminately?

No.

Most of the shootings listed on the Gun Violence Archive are situations where there was a party, alcohol or drugs were involved, two parties got into an argument, the argument turned into a fight, and people got shot. That’s not how most people define a “mass shooting”.

I’d argue for a mass shooting definition of “person(s) arrive at a public location with the sole intention of shooting as many people as possible.”

That would rule out the bar fight incidents, or robberies gone bad, or people who go nuts and kill their family in their own house. We should distinguish between psychotic episodes that put the public at risk, vs. normal crime, vs. domestic vioence that does not involve the general public.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

So your objection is that they call a mass shooting a mass shooting? What magic number would you like them to use?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-21 points

No, my objection is they call normal shootings mass shootings with the agenda of making and keeping people scared.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

“Normal shootings”

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

So you’ll only care about children dying in school when the numbers go up even higher than they already are?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

You don’t think the nra telling people to be scared and that they need a gun to feel safe is more of the issue?

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

That’s not how most people define a “mass shooting”.

That’s is I and many others define it…

permalink
report
parent
reply
-16 points

If you want to scare people, sure, you can define it that way.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

No. It just takes some basic intelligence to figure out that mass shootings are shootings of multiple people. Sorry that concept is hard for you to understand.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Sad to see this so heavily down voted. A ton of emotional reasoning from people in this thread rather than by logic.

A gang shooting, police shooting, robbery, self defense etc are not mass shootings. Period. Its dishonesty to include those statistics.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Or even simple bar fights. How long have we been having bar fights in this country? If you include those then this is absolutely nothing new.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

There’s an issue with Familicides as well. Those are often in private, but can wipe a household out. Ease of access is what is being discussed largely, as well as the general terrorism of a ‘public space’ mass shooting.

permalink
report
parent
reply

World News

!world@lemmy.world

Create post

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

  • Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:

    • Post news articles only
    • Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
    • Title must match the article headline
    • Not United States Internal News
    • Recent (Past 30 Days)
    • Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
  • Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think “Is this fair use?”, it probably isn’t. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.

  • Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.

  • Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.

  • Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19

  • Rule 5: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

  • Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.

  • Rule 7: We didn’t USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you’re posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Community stats

  • 11K

    Monthly active users

  • 17K

    Posts

  • 284K

    Comments