The US is NOT the worst country for mass shootings

[Zan15]

Did we end up coming to a consensus that this was Fake News?

Nope he is just ignoring people refuting his cherry picked data report by basically saying "nanny nanny noo noo"

Unless you can refute my facts with counter facts, I'm not going to accept that they are wrong. I showed my math. Now if you want to refute my math, you need to show yours.

When 11 people are shot = Mass shooting = Fact

Your Facts do not include when 11 people are shot so it does not count all Mass Shootings = Fact.

Thus i refute your facts as being non facts.

There, i posted simple math. Consider yourself refuted.

[Deleted]

Holy shit this thread is all kinds of bad. A dumpster fire from the get-go.

[Belize]

Facts are facts, regardless of the motives of who says them. Can you refute the figures presented? If you can't, then you don't really have an argument.

Facts don't care about your feelings.

Facts: 100% of mass school shootings on Valentine's day 2018 were committed by a Trump supporter.

How's that for facts.

[Stop Pretending]

ROFL

Yeah, you can't buy deer meat anywhere in the US, that I have ever seen. I'm sure someone is, somewhere, but I have never seen it.

Most hunters are begging you take some of theirs, because it ain't real great, and no family could eat 2 or 3 deer a year. "Try my deer jerky, it's great." How come all jerky isn't deer, if it's so great?

- - - Updated - - -



Thank you for that detailed, and insightful breakdown of the data. With your contribution, I think many of us will have to alter our future arguments.

Except you can buy dear meat. What the fuck are you on about? I get dear sausage logs all the time. Garlic and Jalapeno.

[Vankrys]

What AIDS epidemic? The one where we were told everyone was at risk, despite that not at all being true, and that is now obvious to all?

[Kaeth]

Unless you can refute my facts with counter facts, I'm not going to accept that they are wrong. I showed my math. Now if you want to refute my math, you need to show yours.

Not sure if this has already been brought up, but this thread has gotten really long, so I apologize if I'm repeating someone else's post.

The average population of the United States from 2009 to 2015 was about 314 million. If, as the Fraud Promotion Research Center indicates, the U.S. suffered 0.089 mass shooting deaths per million people over that period, that would equal 28 people.

I'm not sure from the diagram if the death toll is supposed to be 28 people each year or over the entire seven-year span.

So far in 2018, 34 mass shootings have been reported. In 2014 and 2015, 271 and 333 mass shootings were reported, respectively.

That looks like a hell of a lot higher body count than 0.089 per million.

Lol the only way you can actually make this headline correct is by making it per 1mill people.

Nah, it'd still be ridiculously wrong.

[Dacu]

Not sure if this has already been brought up, but this thread has gotten really long, so I apologize if I'm repeating someone else's post.

The average population of the United States from 2009 to 2015 was about 314 million. If, as the Fraud Promotion Research Center indicates, the U.S. suffered 0.089 mass shooting deaths per million people over that period, that would equal 28 people.

I'm not sure from the diagram if the death toll is supposed to be 28 people each year or over the entire seven-year span.

So far in 2018, 34 mass shootings have been reported. In 2014 and 2015, 271 and 333 mass shootings were reported, respectively.

That looks like a hell of a lot higher body count than 0.089 per million.


Nah, it'd still be ridiculously wrong.

He doesn't care about your perfectly sound logic.

[Belize]

Except you can buy dear meat. What the fuck are you on about? I get dear sausage logs all the time. Garlic and Jalapeno.

I think TJ hasn't ever left his hometown of Bumfuck.

You can buy deer meat literally all over the south. Texas has some if the best deer sausages.

[Deleted]

It's the same with the tinfoil dudes - some "insider" tells them what they want to hear and it becomes a fact for them. Impossible to discuss or overrule.

Some random gun PR guy gives his Gun-Fans what they want with random bad unscientific data and bam we have this thread. And it stays open for whatever reason.

[Allybeboba]

Quoted just for mods to see. Shut this thread down.

Won’t happen.

Peace

- - - Updated - - -

I think TJ hasn't ever left his hometown of Bumfuck.

You can buy deer meat literally all over the south. Texas has some if the best deer sausages.

I am not big on venison. However, I do like jalapeño venison links.

Peace

[Belize]

Won’t happen.

Peace

- - - Updated - - -



I am not big on venison. However, I do like jalapeño venison links.

Peace

You raise a good point.

Maybe he doesn't know venison and deer are essentially the same thing.

[Donald Hellscream]

Regardless public mass shootings happens far more frequently in America, it just doesn't seem *that* bad because of the total population, where as a mass shooting in a country like Norway that only has a population of about 5 million looks worse on the statistics.

Had you taken statistics from 2012 till now Norway would be way lower because there hasn't been a mass shooting since the one commited by Breivik.

[Sunseeker]

Per-capita measurements are fairly useless.

We have a problem. Other countries don't have this problem. We have loose gun laws. They don't. Hmmmmm.....

[Volardelis]

Facts are facts, regardless of the motives of who says them. Can you refute the figures presented? If you can't, then you don't really have an argument.

Facts don't care about your feelings.

These "Facts" come from a website that has been proven to be false on multiple occasions and you still consider their fake news as facts?

[Not A Cat]

Norway had one incident in that time and made changes so it wouldn't happen again.

Meanwhile Florida politicians are literally saying, "We aren't going to do anything about this huge problem, bye"

We have ignored the gun issue for way too long, we've gone through all of the excuses now we actually need to change something.

[Brubear]

Ok, fair enough. Just present the correct facts, and we can discuss them. I'll stand by while you do that.

Dude, it's a lie by omission and you know it. It's a very common logical fallacy which is intentionally done in order to make the facts support a claim when they don't. As someone else pointed out (and you dismissed), the person you cited in your OP is misrepresenting the facts by limiting the data (there's a reason why they not only chose a narrow time frame but also changed the definition).

You want facts? Here you go.

https://www.pri.org/stories/2017-11-...-one-statistic

the study in question https://search.proquest.com/openview...olar&cbl=45619

(NOTE: It's an actual study and not a think-tank article)

The text of the PRI article discussing the stud (because, like most academic research papers, it's behind a paywall).

Every time there's a mass shooting in the US, the same question comes up. Does the availability of guns lead to such tragedies?

Adam Lankford, a criminology professor at the University of Alabama, saw an opportunity to use data to provide an unambiguous answer. His paper, "Public Mass Shooters and Firearms: A Cross-National Study of 171 Countries," has been widely quoted as proof of a link between the frequency of mass shootings and handgun ownership.

The US leads in both categories.

Lankford dipped into databases and news articles that spanned from 1966 through 2012. Significantly, 1966 was the year Charles Whitman climbed the clock tower at the University of Texas in Austin and shot at people below for the next 96 minutes. The attack by the "Texas Tower Sniper" marked the beginning of an era of mass shootings.

In order to make apples-to-apples comparisons between countries, Lankford came up with criteria that narrowly define a mass shooter.

"These were individuals who attacked, in public, using firearms, killing not only someone they had a grudge against, but also random strangers or bystanders," he says. "And I was looking specifically at individuals who killed four or more victims, as kind of a baseline threshold."

He looked at school shootings, workplace shootings, theater shootings, church shootings, mosque shootings and the like. To qualify, killings couldn't be acts of organized terrorism or genocide.

"Violence committed in Rwanda or in Bosnia by a group of people with firearms who are exterminating the population, that kind of thing wouldn't count," he says.

He concluded that, yes, the United States has the most mass shootings, overall and per capita.

"We had 31 percent of these offenders, despite the fact that we only have about 5 percent of the world's population. So, we have well more than our share. And of course, that's very concerning for a variety of reasons."

Lankford says comparing the US with other large countries shows how serious America's gun problem is: "China and India would be two clear examples, and yet they don't have anywhere near the public mass shooter problem that we do."

Once he had determined the number of mass shootings that took place in different countries over the 46-year period, Lankford looked at different variables to see if countries with a high frequency of mass shootings shared any other patterns.

"This is not a matter of opinion; this is a matter of applying statistical models to data from all these 171 countries."

Lankford compared countries' homicide rates, their gross domestic product, their level of urbanization, the balance of men and women in their population and the frequency of suicide in each country.

Nations with lots of mass shooters did not seem to have much in common until Lankford factored in the availability of guns.

"The difference between us and other countries, that explains why we have more of these attackers, was the firearm ownership rate. In other words: firearms per capita. We have almost double the firearm ownership rate of any other country."

Lankford says he expected the US to come out on top, but another finding did surprise him.

"I was a little surprised that it wasn't attributable to other things, like homicide rate or suicide rate. So, if you look at this on an individual level, these people are committing acts of homicide and they're often committing acts of murder-suicide and they're using firearms. But if you look cross-nationally, there are a lot of countries with more homicides and suicides than we have. And yet, they don't have this problem. It really was the firearms, and I was surprised at the strength of that statistical association."

He says his research underscored the influence of America's embrace of gun ownership.

"You could certainly make the argument, I think a lot of people would, that American gun culture is to some degree holding us back from real reform when it comes to guns. Purely in terms of numbers, we have more than 200 million more guns than the next highest country, which is India. And India has a much greater population than ours, so purely in terms of the number of guns, which is really the product of American gun culture, really, there's no comparison between us and anywhere else."

Lankford notes that other countries, by limiting gun ownership, show a lower incidence of mass shootings. And in at least one case, a country has begun to reduce mass shootings by decreasing the number of guns owned by the public.

"Australia is one example — they had a horrible mass shooting there a number of years ago and they did enact better gun control," he observes. "They engaged in a gun buyback program that reduced the number of firearms in their country by 20 percent and they have seen major dividends in terms of fewer mass shootings in that country."

Notice how he didn't limit his classification of a mass shooting only one where someone dies, like the one you cited, because, as someone else pointed out, that greatly reduces the numbers for the US. A mass shooting by its very nature doesn't have to result in deaths, so restricting it to ones where it does is clearly an attempt to obscure the actual facts and statistics of mass shootings.

The author you presented was lying by omission, you know it because someone pointed it out to you and you hand-waived it away (direct quote of you "Yes, the table uses different data than some other tables. How does that make the underlying facts untrue though? If one car ad lists HP and the other lists BHP, that doesn't mean one side is lying.") How does it make the underlying facts untrue? Because the underlying facts of the article you posted were altered in such a way that would support their premise by strictly narrowing the criteria of what qualifies as a mass shooting, there by allowing them to base their article on a false premise and then present it as "fact". They're not using the actual facts, just a cherry-picked sampling of the facts because, if they used the entire data set of the facts, their premise would be shown to be false.

[stomination]

are you being fucking serious your comparing literal acts of terror performed by foreign nationals and right wing extremist's (likely driven by the revenge loop) with you're preventable school shooting's................

I wouldn't be so fucking angry at this if it wasn't mostly America's fucking fault we have the terror issue. if you wouldn't keep forcing failed regime changes on the middle east and funding the fuckers we might not have to be nerves around every guy with a beard the hires a van.

our seriously lumping your stupidity in with the Paris attacks, terrorist attacks and civil wars ?

hurp durp America doesn't have a problem because more people died from guns in the Ukraine and that's in Europe !!!! dribble dribble....

Actually i would blame the people who drew the lines after ww2.

[DrMcNinja]

Hey my country is on that list and I recall one instance of mass shooting... which was in 2011. Six people died. The only public mass shooting I recall in my entire 25 years of living in this country.

And you want to convince me we're only two ranks below the US? What does the OP want to do with this data? Justify that the US doesn't need more strict gun regulations?

[DrMcNinja]

So are people blind to biased sources and faulty research or do they knowingly try and find things to fit their narrative?


Hell look at Crimes Resource homepage, and it's one giant site dedicated to feeling good about right wing politics.

- - - Updated - - -



It's because they used "per million people", to screw with the data. It's screams of horrible ways of running scientific statistical data, but then again scientific statistical data wouldn't fit the OP narrative.

I know, I'm just being cynical here.

[Brubear]

I just fundamentally do not understand why you give terrorism a pass. ALL mass killings are bad, regardless if there is a spaghetti monster or not.

I fail to see how anyone who wants to separate out terrorism, is doing anything but hand waving away mass murder.

Because mass shootings are different from terrorist attacks because the entire motivation behind the perpetrator is vastly different, which means that you can't really address one the same way you'd address the other?

If you're trying to stop pollution, you aren't going to address a large company dumping a bunch of waste the same way you would a city whose population tends to litter. Their actions might have the same end result, but since their motivation and means of doing so are so vastly different you can't compare them as being the same situation.

Mass shootings and terrorism are the same way. If someone wants to kill a bunch of people because they're angry/sad/depressed, then you're far more likely to find success talking them down then you are if they're doing it because their religious figurehead told them to do it.

Crimes are classified by intent. That's why manslaughter is different from murder, and even murder has different classifications. Because the intent behind it is different, which means it is addressed differently.