747

TheGuardian.com

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Fondots@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

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.

this post was submitted on 05 Dec 2023
747 points (96.5% liked)

politics

19135 readers
977 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. 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.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

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.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS