Friday, February 22, 2013

USAT | Less than 1% of gun-related homicides since 2006 were mass shootings, new study finds

USA Today's analysis challenges the public perception that mass killings are a growing problem, adding to the current debate over gun control efforts in Congress after the December school shootings in Newtown, Conn.

The paper found 934 deaths in 146 incidents that matched the FBI's definition of a mass shooting, where four or more people were killed. A majority of the victims knew their killers, the paper said today.

Still, it's easy to see why the public thinks mass shootings occur on a larger scale than actual reports show. "Although they account for just a minuscule share of all homicides," the paper says, "mass killings occur about once every two weeks."

USAT relied on FBI records plus news accounts since 2006. The paper did not explain why it chose that time period, however.

43 comments:

  1. The public has a distorted view of reality on this and many, many other topics because, by and large, coverage by the lamestream media is biased, reactive, reductive, unoriginal, uninformed, and just dead wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I don't agree that there's a public perception that that mass killings dominate gun deaths. Also, the story doesn't say there is such a perception, does it?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I've substituted "a growing problem" for my original text. And, no, the story doesn't say that; I do.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Finally a national media source actually publishes
    facts about gun violence.
    More of this should be reported and maybe more gun haters would realize that we don't need more gun controls laws. We just need to enforce the laws that already exist.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Except then your group claims the criminals don't obey the laws. So just enforcing the existing laws isn't a solution in itself.

      Try to develop something other than your talking points. When you simply regurgitate propaganda, it shows only that you have no argument.

      Delete
  5. If newspapers/media really wanted to be seen as unbiased they would also publish the many times a gun has stopped, or even avoided violence.

    A gun is just a tool. It depends on the way it's used.
    An inanimate object cannot be good or bad.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. USAT relied on FBI crime statistics. To the best of my knowledge, the agency doesn't collect the data you describe.

      Also, if inanimate objects cannot be bad, why are heroin and cocaine, just to name two, illegal?

      Delete
    2. Because mentally challenged drug users can't control themselves.
      Just as mentally or criminally ill people use guns to kill because they can't control themselves. Guns should be impossible to acquire by criminals and mentally ill.
      That doesn't mean we punish law abiding citizens. That is taking away the liberty's of the masses of good people in order to punish the crazies.

      Delete
    3. Narcotics are not "bad" per se. Narcotics misuse is bad and, therefore, illegal.

      Delete
    4. Mr. Jim...they weren't always illegal. The American drug cartells are your answer. 2pm is also right. People are bad...things are not. A straw can be lethal if one knows how to use it. Should they be outlawed?

      Delete
  6. So what should we conclude from this? We still have 10,000 gun homicides every year, so it doesn't minimize the need for broad background checks and restrictions on possession for those with a history of domestic violence and gun crimes, not just felonies. Certainly no harm in limiting high-capacity magazines either.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Why does anyone need a weapon that can fire more than a handfull (4-5) of bullets? If you don't hit a deer with the first shot or two you should stay home. Even shotguns have limitations as to what they are allowed hold so why not other weapons?

    Sure, we should enforce the laws we have but we also need to review those laws as well since they have shifted over the years.

    ReplyDelete
  8. @ 11:38AM: Why does anyone need a weapon that can fire more than a handfull (4-5) of bullets?

    Because of the Zombie Apocalypse, Jesus man, have you not seen The Walking Dead?? I know I'll be ready!

    ReplyDelete
  9. “Why does anyone need a weapon that can fire more than a handfull (4-5) of bullets?”

    Well 11:38 AM, why stop there…

    Why does anyone need a 24 oz drink? Let’s cap it to 16 oz nationwide like Bloomberg did in NYC.

    Why is Dairy Queen, Cheese Cake Factory et al allowed to sell such high calorie deserts? Let’s send the food police in to fix it.

    Why do people need cars that seat five when most people travel alone, let alone in large SUV’s? Let’s implement progressive taxes on vehicles based on seats, horsepower, mpg’s, usage and weight.

    Why do we still allow the sale of cigarettes given their risks? Surely govt can give up those taxes for the better good right?

    Why do we still allow newspapers, magazines and other periodicals produced on paper with what the internet offers today? Isn’t it time we got serious about saving trees too.

    The list is no doubt endless as to what govt “could do” and the larger question is should it?

    And, that answer is NO as the evidence is clear that the more govt decides and does for us, the less responsibility people take for themselves and their own acts; blaming violence on guns, instead of the people who commit those acts is yet another enabling excuse.


    BTW, 3D printers are becoming increasingly more affordable, making it easier for people to make whatever the hell the want like extended clips and even plastic guns. Then what?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Guns are for people who live in constant fear, fear of government, fear of their neighbors, fear of minorities, fear of natural disasters, fear of the dark, you name it. For them, there is no such thing as enough because the fear is so great it requires a great response. Guns are their therapy. Most of us can't relate to that irrational fear because we are able to rationalize these thoughts and put them into perspective. Hence, the arguments will never be resolved.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have a gun and, because of that, I'm not afraid of a damn thing.

      Delete
    2. Here's another silly stereotype...

      Blacks are people who are lazy, stupid, shiftless, violent and hate Whitey. For them, there can be no evolution for them because they're so deficient in nature. Being poor and stupid are their therapy. Most non-Blacks can't relate this because we're so much smarter in thought and can put them into perspective. Hence, the arguments will never be resolved.

      Delete
    3. Jim does 3:17 actually advance this discussion?

      Delete
    4. Yes, 3:17 advances the discussion by shining a powerful light on the abject ignorance and offensiveness of the original post at 1:27.

      Delete
    5. 12:33 lives in constant fear and is portrayed perfectly in the original post.

      What was that noise, 12:33? Better get out your weapons and go check it out.

      Delete
    6. It's fair to say that people who take responsibility for their own safety are the opposite of fearful.

      Also fair to say that 1:27 PM and 1:27 AM don't actually even know anybody like that.

      Delete
    7. Wrong, 10:24. I did know someone like that. Every time he heard or saw an animal in the yard, out came the weapon. Most of the time this happened at night, when he had no chance of seeing what he was pursuing, and just the act of opening the door was enough to scare it off.

      Wait -- I think I heard a noise. Better come over with your weapons, 10:24. The neighbor's dog is barking.

      Delete
  11. In other USA Today poll Obama's favorability rating at 51 percent. Republicans in Congress only 28 percent.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for proving yet again media’s bias and that numbers don’t lie, just those who use them.

      Where’s Congressional Democrats’ rating? Do you think comparing an individual rating with that of a group is a fair, apple’s to apples comparison? (hint: it’s not). Do you think Obama’s rating would slide if media did a better job exposing his failings, like going AWOL for at least seven hours soon after he was informed about Benghazi’s attack, him creating the Sequester only to deny he didn’t*, etc?

      Frankly, your post only further embarrasses this profession, one that has yet to realize its ability to control the agenda and message is fast ending because, exacerbatted by acts like yours.

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/bob-woodward-obamas-sequester-deal-changer/2013/02/22/c0b65b5e-7ce1-11e2-9a75-dab0201670da_print.html

      Delete
    2. People with a similar view as yours were saying much the same before the election yet it proved not to come to fruition. Other polls show Obama has the upper hand on who people blame for the Sequestration cuts. Bias Media has got little to do with it. While the media pretends to be bias they still secretly lean to the Right as the Righrt has spun it so that if you don't agree with them you are a lefty liberal commie.

      Delete
  12. Joe Biden said to buy a shotgun, so I bought 5 shotguns due to the advice of our crazy VP.

    Also, if you're a woman and are being raped, don't use a gun. Defecate or urinate to scare away the rapist. That's the latest libtard thought on guns.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    2. Thank you Jim

      Delete
    3. If Sheriff Joe was a Republican there’d be stories all over this nation about his sexist remarks pertaining to women and guns. Instead, it’s mostly crickets which is typical for most things this truth bender says, comments that make Quayle look like a Rhodes Scholar and president of Mensa.

      Delete
  13. The anti gun people just don't get it. The right to bear arms is to protect us from freedom stealing people, regardless of who they are.

    Of course they were hoping I think, that US citizens would actually care about losing freedoms and defend the Constitution.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Like the other poster said, pure paranoia. It's tough to get through to irrational people.

      Delete
    2. There's nobody more irrational than gun control hysteria.

      Delete
    3. Hysteria is a person?

      Delete
  14. A little colony across the ocean had a pretty good thing going until they realized they didn't have any input in the laws that were being applied to them, they weren't being represented by their government. Kind of like a couple others you've heard of - Syria, Egypt, Libya.

    The Second Amendment was expressly to keep government in check. And if you don't think that could still require an armed response - or the threat of a response - in 'this day and age', feel free to ask the Arab Springers to lay down their weapons and sing Kumbya until their governments give in.

    If we protect the First Amendment rights of the worst Larry Flynt has to offer so as to not endanger our industry with encroaching limits, we should encourage the protection of the Second Amendment as the ultimate backstop.

    ReplyDelete
  15. The gun debate has people grabbing the constitution and statistics to make their point on either side of the issue.
    Both miss the mark by a country mile.
    No matter what legislation comes from this, it will stop anyone from getting a firearm and committing a felony with it.
    Why is that, you may ask.
    It is simple math. There is almost 1 firearm per living person living here in the US, and unlike fresh produce they will not expire in the near future. Anyone can get hold of a firearm without a background check or any questions asked, if they really wanted to.
    The current debate is emotional on both sides, and there isn't a real solution to this issue. Unless we can invent a time machine and go back 200 years, and prohibit any firearm not designed for hunting.

    ReplyDelete
  16. This was an extremely poorly written story which tries to make the point Jim surmised, but failed to do so. With three reporters on the byline, it looks like this was written by committee, and, unfortunately, edited poorly.

    Another USA today expose that's exposed for flimsy concept, execution and above all, lack of editing.

    If Callaway can't take charge of anything beyond news alerts and the trivial, USA Today is in serious trouble.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I get so tired of people saying comparing the 2nd amendment to hunting. It has NOTHING to do with hunting. Gun control proponents should look to history and all of the dictatorships that killed their own people. They were able to do so because their populace was disarmed. People in the U.S. think, "that could never happen here. That's impossible." It's not impossible, it's simply improbable, and it's because we have an armed population. If you believe in banning guns, fine, do it by passing an amendment instead of bypassing the constitution. Far too often we've seen too many of our freedoms eroded by intolerant bullies who want to push their beliefs on the rest of the country because they think they know what is best. Before long, nothing will be allowed except for the officially sanctioned view of the "enlightened" ones. Places like North Korea live like that, but we never should.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The intolerant bullies are on your side of the fence, 2:54. Address that problem, and let us know how you are doing. Until then, you have nothing to offer on this issue, other than the same, tired talking points.

      Delete
  18. None of the laws proposed now by either state or federal politicians , if enacted , would have prevented Adam Lanza from killing all those people .

    Like every other solution to a problem ,
    this too will make no sense .We are being governed by feelings and media sound bites .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unless you have " armed with guns "
      guards in every school , which scares to death the anti gun folks .

      Delete
    2. 5:40, that "solution" is outright nuttiness. Also, your side is the one frightened of everything -- the government, neighbors, yourselves. This has been pointed out already.

      By the way, I think a car just backfired in your neighborhood. Better go return fire.

      Delete
  19. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. That seems pretty clear to me. The founding fathers knew what they were doing when they added this to the Bill of Rights. Except today, the cultural left thinks they know best. But of course they do know what is right for the rest of us because they are just that smart and pompous enough to believe they are. Just look at Obamacare. Guns aren't the problem. The people should have access to the same arms as the military and law enforcement. If the government wants to withhold certain arms from the populace, it should also be withheld from the government and law enforcement. The government should be afraid of its people, not the other way around and right now too many people are afraid of the government what with domestic drones, National Defense Authorization Act signed by our beloved president allowing for indefinite detention of US citizens, Homeland Security adding 21.6 million rounds of ammo to the 1.6 BILLION rounds it already has obtained over the past 10 months, tracking of virtually all electronic communications, continued general loss of privacy. The neutering of the national media. Add to this the fears of future censorship of the internet, possible economic collapse generated by irresponsible and unsustainable printing of money, national debt and never ending wars. Foreign countries looking to drop the dollar as the world's reserve currency.The general pall of the economy. Inflation. The continued too high unemployment levels. The shit may hit the fan one day (and we hope not) and the only citizens who will fill empowered are the ones who are armed with something beyond a BB gun. Especially for those of you living in a major city. It will not be pretty. Take a look at Afghanistan or North Korea, etc. Who's empowered there? Not the general law abiding citizen. Just sayin'

    ReplyDelete
  20. Safewow.com is committed to offer cheap World of Warcraft Gold, WOW CD Key, WOW Power Leveling service for all realms to the needs of wow players who want to maximize their gaming experience.


    tags:world of warcraft gold , cheap world of warcraft gold ,buy world of warcraft gold

    ReplyDelete

Jim says: "Proceed with caution; this is a free-for-all comment zone. I try to correct or clarify incorrect information. But I can't catch everything. Please keep your posts focused on Gannett and media-related subjects. Note that I occasionally review comments in advance, to reject inappropriate ones. And I ignore hostile posters, and recommend you do, too."

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.