Interesting read on where the US actually rates with respect to mass shootings

He wants you to show where the conclusions of the study are wrong, and he’s going to keep insisting that you do so.

Found the study. Glancing through the first page, I see that the authors are including war zones.

Yes, surely the mass shooting rates in the United States are lower than in war zones.

Absolutely rich.

What? You mean it’s disingenuous to include “mass shootings” in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen, etc.?

1 Like

Personally, I don’t care where the United States ranks for mass shootings in the world. There are more important questions to ask about mass shootings in the United States than, “Wait, wait, but how do we compare with Yemen?”

It’s just another example of asking the wrong question and arriving at a dishonest answer in order to make a subset of our population feel good. Do you think that they’re going to analyze a study that tells them something that makes their toes squiggle?

I am just shocked at the North Mariana Islands… Number 4 on the list… 4 victims out of a population of about 55K resulting in 4.000 victims per population of 100K… What could have happened to move the North Mariana Islands to number 4 on the list…

This is Lankfords study but you only get the abstract…

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/07418825.2013.806675#.VN0xc_nF9yV

And NY Times article that talked a great deal about Lankfords study

Thanks! Appreciate it.

I think the question is arr those areas stats including actual military shootings…or citizen on citizen shootings? That makes a difference.

Would you count mass shootings in war zones? Just curious on your take.

I always had issue with Lankfords findings. They just didn’t seem to track.

I would not…if they were a direct result of military action. But you know as well as I do that military isn’t always the cause.

Would you count acts of terror carried out by one group against another?

Of course, that’s where it gets tricky, and I don’t have a blanket answer. We call some groups terrorists, despite an ongoing, military-style conflict with another group. In one case, we say, “Oh, they’re terrorists,” and count it as a mass shooting. In another case, we might say, “Well, this group is composed of military combatants,” and we don’t.

I don’t know the answer, but I can easily see how data can be fudged in one way or another based upon the classification being used.

What do you think?

74 % of all statistics are made up by the person writing about them.

hahahahahahaha You basically said what I said in 8.5% of the words. Nice job.

1 Like

Lotts’s data has details to answer your questions… Here is the first three entries in his data…

Yes yes no in order.

I look at these Terrorism accounts two ways. One way is a definite militaristic component. The other way…i look at it in much the same way as street gang violence. No different than in Chicago or LA. The former I would not include…the latter I would.

You can have more fun and download his excel file with all his data…

https://crimeresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/World-Mass-Shootings-Cases.xlsx

I recommend the first tab, Foreign Cases_1448, try sorting by number killed, largest to smallest, and then look at the Summary column… The top row after this data ordering…

Would you classify this as a mass shooting?

No to the unita incident. Rebels and government forces…more militaristic than criminal.

Directed at me?

:rofl:

You do love your cherry picked garbage sources.