Why America Is Prone to Mass Shootings

[OldLady]

A strange paradox is emerging in America: Overall violent-crime rates are down, but active shooter events — in which a person is trying to kill multiple people in a populated area — appear to be on the rise, according to Federal Bureau of Investigation statistics.

Meanwhile, a just-released study finds that although the United States has just about 5 percent of the world's population, the country has 31 percent of the world's mass shooters. The reasons for these numbers are complex, researchers say, but the data suggest that the availability of guns, and perhaps the American obsession with fame, may be to blame.


The United States has more private gun ownership and more desire for fame than any other country in the world, said Adam Lankford, a criminal justice professor at the University of Alabama and author of the new research, presented Sunday (Aug. 23) at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association. [5 Milestones in Gun Control History]

Why America Is Prone to Mass Shootings

We have far, far, far, far, far, far fewer "mass shootings" than in countries with a "progressive" government and unarmed citizens; it's not even close!

Have you got some actual facts and statistics to back that up, Frank?

A strange paradox is emerging in America: Overall violent-crime rates are down, but active shooter events — in which a person is trying to kill multiple people in a populated area — appear to be on the rise, according to Federal Bureau of Investigation statistics.

Meanwhile, a just-released study finds that although the United States has just about 5 percent of the world's population, the country has 31 percent of the world's mass shooters. The reasons for these numbers are complex, researchers say, but the data suggest that the availability of guns, and perhaps the American obsession with fame, may be to blame.


The United States has more private gun ownership and more desire for fame than any other country in the world, said Adam Lankford, a criminal justice professor at the University of Alabama and author of the new research, presented Sunday (Aug. 23) at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association. [5 Milestones in Gun Control History]

Why America Is Prone to Mass Shootings

Once God was taken out of public education and right vs wrong, is now 50 shades of grey, no wonder there is a lot of mass shootings...Liberals, slap yourselves on the back for making the sanctity of life, no longer cherished.....

Keep God out of public education. I noticed something with the church shooting people, its like they are in a cult like atmosphere, I would be darn mad and I would never say things like
"Our church family is in heaven now"
"She is in the arms of Jesus"

BS. I'd be class action suing the Air Force for their negligence. Not normal for them to be such pacifist at this time. Its like they drink water with downers in them.

They're also saying that they all plan on buying a gun and carrying it at all times. Don't worry; they're mad as hell.

So we are going to have religious zealots with guns. Great.

I'd be wanting to shoot someone/thing with an uzi, too, if I were them. It's sad, though.

 

[OldLady]

same link'

• MORE

Credit: STILLFX/Shutterstock
A strange paradox is emerging in America: Overall violent-crime rates are down, but active shooter events — in which a person is trying to kill multiple people in a populated area — appear to be on the rise, according to Federal Bureau of Investigation statistics.

Meanwhile, a just-released study finds that although the United States has just about 5 percent of the world's population, the country has 31 percent of the world's mass shooters. The reasons for these numbers are complex, researchers say, but the data suggest that the availability of guns, and perhaps the American obsession with fame, may be to blame.


The United States has more private gun ownership and more desire for fame than any other country in the world, said Adam Lankford, a criminal justice professor at the University of Alabama and author of the new research, presented Sunday (Aug. 23) at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association. [5 Milestones in Gun Control History]









This ad will end in 1 seconds.


The possible association between mass shootings and a desire for fame is particularly eerie, given the nation's latest high-profile killing. Early this morning (Aug. 26), a former employee at a local news station in Virginia allegedly killed a reporter and a cameraman on-air, while filming the shooting with a GoPro camera. He later posted the film to social media. Because there were fewer than four victims, the event does not qualify as a mass shooting, according to most definitions. But the apparent desire to broadcast the crime places the killer in the same company as many notorious mass shooters of the past decade. [The History of Human Aggression]

"Especially some of the younger ones — they want attention," said Mary Muscari, a forensic nurse at Binghamton University in New York who has studied revenge-driven mass killers. "That's why you see them wanting to have a bigger head count, a bigger body count, to try to outdo the last one or to do something that is going to cause more of a rise."


A person claiming to be the alleged gunman in the Virginia attack sent a 23-page fax to ABC News after the shooting, claiming to be influenced by Seung-Hui Cho, the killer in the Virginia Tech shooting of 2007. "He got NEARLY double the amount that Eric Harris and Dylann [sic] Klebold [the Columbine shooters] got," the writer of the fax added, according to ABC News. The fax also claimed that the shooting was in response to the mass killing at a Charleston church in June.

The paradox of mass shootings

There are no official definitions of a mass shooting, and varying ways of tracking the data — by fatalities, by total victims — can make finding trends in this type of violence difficult. A person who arms himself with enough ammo to take out dozens but who only manages to kill one or two people would not be included in federal statistics that track crimes with four or more victims.

The term "mass shooting" also encompasses a range of crimes with a variety of motivations. A gang drive-by that kills multiple people would count, though the root cause is very different from the kind of rampage killings that occur regularly in schools, churches and theaters around the country.

The FBI attempted to narrow the definition in a 2014 report that focused on "active shooter" situations, defined as shootings in which an individual tried to kill people in a public place, and excluding gang- or drug-related violence. The agency found that 160 active-shooter incidents had occurred between 2000 and 2013, and that the number of events was rising. In the first seven years of the period, the average number of active-shooter incidents per year was 6.4. In the final seven years, the annual average rose to 16.4.

In these 160 shootings, 486 people were killed and 557 were wounded, not including the shooters.

The rise in active-shooter events bucks the general trend toward less violent crime in the United States: Overall violent crime dropped 14.5 percent between 2004 and 2013, according to the FBI.

This disconnect echoes what Lankford found in his latest research. Lankford analyzed mass-shooting events in which four or more people were killed in 171 countries, between 1966 and 2012. He found that the rate of mass shootings did not correlate with the overall homicide rate.

"Being a dangerous country or a so-called peaceful country was not a predictor" of mass shootings, Lankford told Live Science.

The link to guns

What did predict the number of mass shootings, however, was the prevalence of firearm ownership, Lankford found. Countries with higher firearm ownership rates had more public mass shootings. [Private Gun Ownership in the US (Infographic)]

"That wasn't a shocking finding, but I guess what surprised me was it showed up no matter how many or what type of statistical tests I ran," Lankford said. "It was kind of unshakable."

The link between firearm ownership and mass shootings remained even when the United States was removed from the analysis, Lankford said. For example, Switzerland and Finland, two relatively low-crime countries with high rates of personal gun ownership, had more mass shootings than would otherwise be expected.

Studies within the United States have also found links between gun ownership and gun crime. Research published in July found that states with more gun-owning households had higher rates of firearm assault, robbery, homicide and overall homicide compared with states with fewer gun owners.

Lankford also found that mass shootings in the United States tended to take place at schools, businesses or workplaces, whereas international mass shootings were most common at military installations.

"Looking back, it maybe makes sense, because that's where people have the easiest access to firearms in other countries," he said.

Discussions of firearm access usually lead to arguments about gun-control laws. But there may be another way, said Michael Siegel, a physician at the Boston University School of Public Health who researches gun violence. Like smoking-related diseases, gun deaths are a public health problem, Siegel told Live Science. And like cigarettes, guns could be susceptible to the same sort of cultural change that has banished smokers to outdoor alcoves and sent smoking rates plummeting.

"There may be ways that we can actually intervene and try to change the gun culture itself," Siegel said.

Attitudes toward guns have already shifted, he said. There was a time when guns were thought of primarily as tools for hunting and recreation. Increasingly, however, the conversation has shifted to gun use for defense, to "stand your ground" laws and to the right to carry guns openly in public.

"That's a change in social norms that has occurred," Siegel said. Public health campaigns could seek to push back, encouraging people to think of guns as recreational, not as something meant to be used against one another, he said.

Thoughtful OP, bones. thanks

 

[Disir]

The article came out in 2015. Violent crime has increased since then and behind that are the policy changes that have rolled out nation wide.

When most people seek fame, they see themselves benefiting from it in glamorous ways. Lavish life styles. The shooters have nothing left to lose. They know there are options are suicide, suicide by cop or they will die in prison/death row.

Devin Kelley had mental health issues. He fractured his infant step-sons skull, threatened his superiors while in the military, escaped from a behavioral center, beat the living hell out of a dog. The fact that he is so easily frustrated indicates he may be low functioning.

This:But there may be another way, said Michael Siegel, a physician at the Boston University School of Public Health who researches gun violence. Like smoking-related diseases, gun deaths are a public health problem, Siegel told Live Science. And like cigarettes, guns could be susceptible to the same sort of cultural change that has banished smokers to outdoor alcoves and sent smoking rates plummeting.

is precious. Frankly, it's the elite squad that thinks if they spend a lot of money poo-pooing people that own guns and it will somehow alter the minds of the mentally ill then they have another thing coming. They don't want anyone to focus on that too much because the general public might want money directed towards mental health and Simon didn't say. Simon says the general public might attach a stigma to those suffering from a mental illness. Simon says miss the mark and nail gun owners

That's why we don't get shit done.

You are confusing "mental illness" with "violent." Violent is not a mental illness. The mentally ill are more likely to be a victim than a perpetrator of violence. There is no statistical tie between DIAGNOSED mental illness and mass shootings. Sure, when someone like the Vegas shooter or Sutherland shooter steps onto the stage, we say he's "nuts." You gotta be mentally ill to beat your baby, your dog, shoot up a crowd of concert goers--right? Wrong. You gotta be someone who chooses to use violence to react to frustration. I won't argue that trying to help people early on in their lives learn other ways to cope is a great idea. Of course it's a great idea. We could start by enforcing existing laws in ALL states that require people with certain mental health diagnoses be reported to the fed background check database. Over half of our states don't enforce it and those that do, do not always do it consistently.

No.
There are several types of mental illness where there is aggressive behavior.
For example, bipolar disorder. Not everyone with a bipolar diagnosis is going to commit violent acts. Some do. Not every schizophrenic is violent but some are. Schizoaffective Disorder is the same. If I remember correctly schizoaffective disorder is no longer being diagnosed. That said, McDermott, San Marco, Hawkins, Kazmierczak, Holmes, Dear, Loughner, Eliot Rodger, and the Virginia Tech shooter were all mentally ill. DIAGNOSED. Don't forget Maurice Clemmons. Aaron Alexis had not yet been diagnosed but I'm pretty sure that if someone would have payed attention when he said there were people sending him messages through the microwave then he might have got one.

None of the above indicates there is a misinterpretation of masculinity.

Two shooters not mentioned above were autistic. The point in mentioning them here is that after the report on Sandy Hook there was a backlash from parents of autistic children that saw an opportunity to discuss the violence that was occurring in their own homes and it was squashed by nitwits deeply afraid that the unwashed masses might believe all autistic people were mass shooters.

This is not the 1950s. These good folks are not locked in the basement or sent some place far away. We interact with these people all the time and sometimes we are related to them. There are friends and family members that are afraid and attempt to get help. It ain't either/or folks.

It is absolutely true that you don't have to be mentally ill to beat your baby or your dog. You don't have to be mentally ill to join a gang, kill your mother, commit armed robbery or shoot people at your former place of employment.