Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
15 confirmed dead so far in Oregon college shooting
Options
Comments
-
There needs to be a cultural shift with regards to attitudes towards violence and violent individuals in the States. Don't know how that's ever going to happen though since there seems to be so little effort being made to properly address it.
Fully agreed. But there's no chance of getting that done in the same election cycle. It's far easier to sign a law restricting firearms as that is in effect immediately and can be pointed to in a reelection campaign, even if it doesn't actually address the root problem.0 -
As usual, no debate from you.
Debate requires 2 people discussing you just peddle out the same old crap every few weeks. Guns are great. Guns keep muricans alive. Look at these random countries shootings, leave our guns alone. Whenever people do try to debate with you you say their data is wrong and your data is the only correct data. I dont think you actually know what a debate is.0 -
namloc1980 wrote: »If everyone was armed to the teeth this wouldn't have happened. Clearly more guns is the answer people.
Unlikely to have made matters much worse.0 -
Got any source for this? I can't find any definitions anywhere, all I found was the FBI definition of a mass murderer - which said four or more murdered. Nothing on mass shooters, though it would follow logically that shooting four or more people would quality.Can you not understand that there is a big difference between gang-related violence, domestic violence, drug-related violence and "mass shooting". By the definitions provided by the FBI a mass shooting is one where three or more people are killed.
Who ever said that? You are beginning to get more and more disingenuous.If you want to claim that a brawl at a wedding where four people are shot, but not seriously, is in any way the equivalent of Breivik's event, then I cannot take you seriously.
I never said that. I said that, PLUS FIFTY SEVEN OTHER INCIDENTS IN THE LAST SIX WEEKS ALONE, equalled the death toll made by Breivik, and only a few extra days again to equal the death toll
Yeah I did, and none of those links cite the numbers being displayed. Feel free to point out the specific one you are referring to.Scroll down and read the References section, it lists the OECD data used.
Except it absolutely does, because it means there is no way to validate them.It is archived data, the site is no longer being updated. That doesn't invalidate the data.
Others have covered this already.Switzerland restrict ammo, hence "restrictive".
[/quote]Again, no definition of mass shooting to be found. Would really appreciate an official link to that FBI definition again though, thanks.For a better analysis of the question of "Do mass shootings take place outside the US?" try this. You find it backs up my points.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jun/22/barack-obama/barack-obama-correct-mass-killings-dont-happen-oth/
Also from your link there though, just while we're at itThe White House argues that Obama's second sentence qualifies the first, and added that PunditFact rated Mostly True the claim that "Americans are 20 times as likely to die from gun violence as citizens of other civilized countries."0 -
irishmover wrote: »
http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/reports/mass-shooting
Fails the FBI definition of mass shooting, to draw the distinction and confusion of such counting blogs, the FBI and federal govt defines "active shooter" asThe agreed-upon definition of an active shooter by U.S. government agencies—including the White House, U.S. Department of Justice/FBI, U.S. Department of Education, and U.S. Department of Homeland Security/Federal Emergency Management Agency—is “an individual actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a confined and populated area.”
https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2014/september/fbi-releases-study-on-active-shooter-incidents/pdfs/a-study-of-active-shooter-incidents-in-the-u.s.-between-2000-and-2013
The count there is 160 over 13 years.
Please appreciate the difference in these FBI numbers compared to the numbers banded around by the blogs ticking up every time a bullet is fired. We are discussing mass/rampage killers, not drug deals gone south.0 -
Advertisement
-
Straw men and moving goalposts... your link there is related to murder rates. Of all causes. And using anything as a weapon.If that were the only country topping the US, then I'd accept that, however the fact is that there are others in that list. And as someone pointed out it doesn't include Russia, nor Estonia or Lithuania (which have has a higher homicide rate than the US)
http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Crime/Violent-crime/Murder-rate-per-million-people
Not really going to give any clear picture on mass shootings, now is it.0 -
Got any source for this? I can't find any definitions anywhere, all I found was the FBI definition of a mass murderer - which said four or more murdered.
According to the Washington Post the FBI definition is three or more killed.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/10/01/2015-274-days-294-mass-shootings-hundreds-dead/0 -
[Deleted User] wrote: »And Chicago has seen an insane amount of gun crime as well in the past 2 or 3 weekends, I believe.
When in the hell will America understand that their current gun laws are the problem?
It really isn't the gun laws. In states and cities with stricter gun control you still have guns. Chicago would be an example.
The problem is cultural, the love affair with the gun, the national obsession with power, from top to bottom, the examples the government -from DC to local enforcement -lead with as violence as a default solution.
The attention the media gives to lone wolf gunmen and the lone cowboy myth that seems to have taken hold of young men.0 -
Straw men and moving goalposts... your link there is related to murder rates. Of all causes. And using anything possible.
Not really going to give any clear picture on mass shootings, now is it.
FBI link above and fact checking article provided.
I only posted the murder rates for Russia, Estonia and Lithuania to show the level of violence, the mass killings data for those countries is unavailable but I'd say it is a safe bet to expect high numbers.0 -
http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/reports/mass-shooting
Fails the FBI definition of mass shooting, to draw the distinction and confusion of such counting blogs, the FBI and federal govt defines "active shooter" as
https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2014/september/fbi-releases-study-on-active-shooter-incidents/pdfs/a-study-of-active-shooter-incidents-in-the-u.s.-between-2000-and-2013
The count there is 160 over 13 years.
Please appreciate the difference in these FBI numbers compared to the numbers banded around by the blogs ticking up every time a bullet is fired. We are discussing mass/rampage killers, not drug deals gone south.
The FBI definition also doesn't account for the Lafayette theatre shooting. Along with many others which warrant to be considered. As per my washington post link.
Just because the FBI has a definition doesn't make it right. What motivations do you have to downgrade these numbers?0 -
Advertisement
-
The premise being bandied about seems to be that the US has a permissive gun culture and therefore has worse mass killings, however if you adjust for population size a very different picture emerges.
http://archive.is/f4gbv
Norway, Finland, Slovakia, Israel and Switzerland all have restrictive gun laws, yet the per capita death rate is higher than the US.
Obviously. They have much smaller populations so one incident will distort the picture if you go per capita.
At this stage denying the problem just looks like will full blindness.
In how many other countries do 1st graders have to do lockdown drills? Honestly, there is an illness in the culture.0 -
Billy86;
Re this post http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=97234651&postcount=215
Your blogs count the brawl at the wedding as 1 "mass shooting" incident, same as they would count the Norway incident as 1 "mass shooting".
It is pretty clear we are not comparing apples with apples by using those tracker blogs.
Make sense?
As to the OECD data, read the references it's very clear that OECD statistics were used.0 -
irishmover wrote: »According to the Washington Post the FBI definition is three or more killed.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/10/01/2015-274-days-294-mass-shootings-hundreds-dead/
Absolutely untrue. From the FBI report that WaPo linked to, 'mass shooting' is listed twice.
Once in a citation: 37 e.g.: U.S. Department of Defense, Internal Review of the Washington Navy Yard Shooting: A Report to the Secretary of Defense, 20 November 2013. U.S. Department of Defense, Secretary of Defense, Memorandum on Final Recommendations of the Ft. Hood Follow-on Review, 18 August 2010; TriData Division, System Planning Corporation, Mass Shootings at Virginia Tech Addendum to the Report of the Review Panel, November 2009; Los Angeles World Airports, Active Shooter Incident and Resulting Airport Disruption—A Review of Response Operations, 18 March 2014.
And once in the first page, specifically stating: This is not a study of mass killings or mass shootings
"Miss killing" is listed multiple times though, referring to 3+ people being killed.
See for yourself - https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2014/september/fbi-releases-study-on-active-shooter-incidents/pdfs/a-study-of-active-shooter-incidents-in-the-u.s.-between-2000-and-2013
There is a reason WaPo have not always got the best of reputations.0 -
No, because if a mass murder is the murdering of 4+ people then a mass shooting would be the shooting of 4+ people. So if 4 people are shot by someone, it would be a mass shooting. Just like if 4+ people were murdered by someone, it would be a mass murder.Billy86;
Re this post http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=97234651&postcount=215
Your blogs count the brawl at the wedding as 1 "mass shooting" incident, same as they would count the Norway incident as 1 "mass shooting".
It is pretty clear we are not comparing apples with apples by using those tracker blogs.
Make sense?
As to the OECD data, read the references it's very clear that OECD statistics were used.
An incident where 77 were killed would be worse than an incident where four were killed. But 20 incidents of 4 people being killed would mean 80 were killed, a higher number. It is very simple, really.
No OECD statistics were used, because there is no set definition of a mass shooting. You can look down through these and tell me which one would be giving the hard numbers of something that has no set definition:
REFERENCES
* see compendium
** ”OECD Statistics.” OECD Statistics. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, n.d. Web. 09 Jan. 2013. [Web Link]
*** Gun Law and Policy. University of Sydney, n.d. Web. 09 Jan. 2013. [Web Link]
**** “Police Officers.” Eurostat Data Explorer. Eurostat, n.d. Web. 09 Jan. 2013. [Web Link]
***** ”Psychiatrists.” Health at a Glance 2011: OECD Indicators. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, 2001. N. pag. Print. [No Web Link]
****** ”Safety.” OECD Better Life Index. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Jan. 2013. [Web Link]
******* ”Suicides.” Health at a Glance 2011: OECD Indicators. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, 2001. N. pag. Print. [No Web Link]
Answers on a postcard, thanks.0 -
Absolutely untrue. From the FBI report that WaPo linked to, 'mass shooting' is listed twice.
Once in a citation: 37 e.g.: U.S. Department of Defense, Internal Review of the Washington Navy Yard Shooting: A Report to the Secretary of Defense, 20 November 2013. U.S. Department of Defense, Secretary of Defense, Memorandum on Final Recommendations of the Ft. Hood Follow-on Review, 18 August 2010; TriData Division, System Planning Corporation, Mass Shootings at Virginia Tech Addendum to the Report of the Review Panel, November 2009; Los Angeles World Airports, Active Shooter Incident and Resulting Airport Disruption—A Review of Response Operations, 18 March 2014.
And once in the first page, specifically stating: This is not a study of mass killings or mass shootings
"Miss killing" is listed multiple times though, referring to 3+ people being killed.
See for yourself - https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2014/september/fbi-releases-study-on-active-shooter-incidents/pdfs/a-study-of-active-shooter-incidents-in-the-u.s.-between-2000-and-2013
There is a reason WaPo have not always got the best of reputations.In 64 incidents (40.0%), the crime would have fallen within the federal definition of
“mass killing”—defined as “three or more” killed—under the new federal statute.
I see what you're saying about mass shooting and mass killing. I am on your side here after all but is there any other definition from the FBI or a standard for mass shooting? No? So this is the one that must be used.0 -
irishmover wrote: »The FBI definition also doesn't account for the Lafayette theatre shooting. Along with many others which warrant to be considered. As per my washington post link.
The Lafayette theatre shooting meets the definition of an active shooter.Just because the FBI has a definition doesn't make it right. What motivations do you have to downgrade these numbers?
I'm trying to have a like with like discussion about rampage killings, the problem is that people have to conflate this with other gun violence, including wedding brawls. It doesn't really put a context on the question of is this a uniquely US problem as Obama asserted today. Some of the more memorable events outside the US include these:
2011 – Anders Behring Breivik killed 77 in Oslo, Norway, in twin attacks: a bombing in downtown Oslo and a shooting massacre at a youth camp outside the capital.
2009 – Farda Gadyrov, 29, killed 12 people at the Azerbaijan State Oil Academy in the capital, Baku, armed with an automatic pistol and clips, and then killed himself.
2008 – Matti Saari, 22, walks into a vocational college in Kauhajoki, Finland, and opens fire, killing 10 people and burning their bodies with firebombs before shooting himself fatally in the head.
2003 – Robert Steinhaeuser, 19, who had been expelled from school in Erfurt, Germany, kills 13 teachers, 2 former classmates and 1 policeman, before committing suicide.
Comparing these incidents as equal in the count to a US family fight where a drunk uncle pulls out his .22 really doesn't make a lot of sense.0 -
irishmover wrote: »I see what you're saying about mass shooting and mass killing. I am on your side here after all but is there any other definition from the FBI or a standard for mass shooting? No? So this is the one that must be used.
That is a definition of MASS KILLING, not MASS SHOOTING. Hence why you can't be done for murder if you shot someone in the arm and they lived, because nobody died.0 -
No, because if a mass murder is the murdering of 4+ people then a mass shooting would be the shooting of 4+ people. So if 4 people are shot by someone, it would be a mass shooting. Just like if 4+ people were murdered by someone, it would be a mass murder.
An incident where 77 were killed would be worse than an incident where four were killed. But 20 incidents of 4 people being killed would mean 80 were killed, a higher number. It is very simple, really.
No OECD statistics were used, because there is no set definition of a mass shooting. You can look down through these and tell me which one would be giving the hard numbers of something that has no set definition:
REFERENCES
* see compendium
** ”OECD Statistics.” OECD Statistics. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, n.d. Web. 09 Jan. 2013. [Web Link]
*** Gun Law and Policy. University of Sydney, n.d. Web. 09 Jan. 2013. [Web Link]
**** “Police Officers.” Eurostat Data Explorer. Eurostat, n.d. Web. 09 Jan. 2013. [Web Link]
***** ”Psychiatrists.” Health at a Glance 2011: OECD Indicators. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, 2001. N. pag. Print. [No Web Link]
****** ”Safety.” OECD Better Life Index. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Jan. 2013. [Web Link]
******* ”Suicides.” Health at a Glance 2011: OECD Indicators. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, 2001. N. pag. Print. [No Web Link]
Answers on a postcard, thanks.
The same argument applies to your tracking blog, if they do not use an agreed definition, then your massively bolded statistics you were throwing out earlier are pretty dubious by the same measure.
The expired web page is problematic, however looking at the first link (first column it appears that the data on US and international shootings was taken from the Harvard Injury Control Research Center, which I would assume to be an accurate and reliable source.
EDIT: Here's the compendium of incidents: https://web.archive.org/web/20130205023439/http://www.rampageshooting.com/compendium/
EDIT#2 Here's the definition used by rampageshooting.com - "The Rampage Shooting Index applies a more definitive set of five criteria to identify rampage shootings, namely: (1) a criminal event, (2) involving a lone perpetrator, (3) that begins and ends within a 24-hour period, (4) in which the perpetrator uses firearms, (5) and in which four or more people are killed or injured directly or indirectly from the attack. Additionally, we do not consider attacks at military installations, police stations or prisons – or attacks specifically targeting military or police personnel – to be rampage shootings, even if all other criteria are met. We also exclude assassination attempts against state officials."
https://web.archive.org/web/20130205075100/http://www.rampageshooting.com/faq/0 -
The Lafayette theatre shooting meets the definition of an active shooter.
Is it on the FBI list? Show me where. You should call the Washington Post, let them know they've got it horrilby wrong.I'm trying to have a like with like discussion about rampage killings, the problem is that people have to conflate this with other gun violence, including wedding brawls. It doesn't really put a context on the question of is this a uniquely US problem as Obama asserted today. Some of the more memorable events outside the US include these:
Nobody has to conflate it with anything. America is gun lobbied. There are a lot of people who want to downgrade the gun violence in America. As was said before some guy goes on a shooting rampage kills two and injures many doesn't get any attention because the FBI's requirements weren't met doesn't make it OK. None of those numbers are being conflated. You're picking and choosing how you like to make it sounds like America isn't such a bad place to live. If you were moving to the US, I'm sure like anyone you'd take into consideration criminal violence and gun activity as to where to move to right? Which graphs would you use? The FBI's one or the ones from the gunviolence.org or Washington post?Comparing these incidents as equal in the count to a US family fight where a drunk uncle pulls out his .22 really doesn't make a lot of sense.
Say that to all the families losing loved ones everyday.0 -
The same argument applies to your tracking blog, if they do not use an agreed definition, then your massively bolded statistics you were throwing out earlier are pretty dubious by the same measure.
The expired web page is problematic, however looking at the first link (first column it appears that the data on US and international shootings was taken from the Harvard Injury Control Research Center, which I would assume to be an accurate and reliable source.
It is made clear on the front of that website that since by FBI standards, mass killing = 4 or more killed by one person, then they will be using mass shooting = 4 or more shot by one person. I have yet to hear anyone come up with any suggestions that would be approaching as reliably close to FBI definitions. If anyone can come up with a better way to measure if they by all means, have at it! But you would need to explain why the FBI definition on mass kings is also flawed for it to hold weight.
I took a look through that Harvard source by the way and came up with nothing resembling the statistics show in your defunct source. Feel free to get back to me with the hard numbers on it, though. You did say the OECD numbers linked to on the bottom of that page after all, but even the Harvard ones might suffice.0 -
Advertisement
-
It is made clear on the front of that website that since by FBI standards, mass killing = 4 or more killed by one person, then they will be using mass shooting = 4 or more shot by one person. I have yet to hear anyone come up with any suggestions that would be approaching as reliably close to FBI definitions. If anyone can come up with a better way to measure if they by all means, have at it! But you would need to explain why the FBI definition on mass kings is also flawed for it to hold weight.
I took a look through that Harvard source by the way and came up with nothing resembling the statistics show in your defunct source. Feel free to get back to me with the hard numbers on it, though. You did say the OECD numbers linked to on the bottom of that page after all, but even the Harvard ones might suffice.
Edited above. see new links.0 -
irishmover wrote: »Is it on the FBI list? Show me where.
Which list now??? Link?
I'd use my head and realise that some places in America are far, far safer than say, Dublin. I barely lock my door living where I do in New Mexico, yet there are parts of downtown where it's a hellhole. A lot of that has more to do with drugs and poverty than guns.Nobody has to conflate it with anything. America is gun lobbied. There are a lot of people who want to downgrade the gun violence in America. As was said before some guy goes on a shooting rampage kills two and injures many doesn't get any attention because the FBI's requirements weren't met doesn't make it OK. None of those numbers are being conflated. You're picking and choosing how you like to make it sounds like America isn't such a bad place to live. If you were moving to the US, I'm sure like anyone you'd take into consideration criminal violence and gun activity as to where to move to right? Which graphs would you use? The FBI's one or the ones from the gunviolence.org or Washington post?Say that to all the families losing loved ones everyday.
Oh please, can we not get all "think of the children" about this, people die every day of sudden means in every country in the world.0 -
Just listening to Newstalk in the car. They were talking to the editor of a local paper in the town where this shooting happened. All standard stuff about close knit, long-established community, devastating effect on the people of the area, nobody knows as yet who the shooter was etc etc all delivered in measured tones.
Then the Newstalk guy asked him what he thought about Obama's comments yesterday when he said that this is a matter of routine in America and that it's not the only country in the world with people with mental difficulties but it is the only advanced country where this sort of thing happens every few months.
Well, talk about a change of tone. The editor became incandescent. The timing of his comments were inappropriate. The first priority must be the victims and their needs. Obama's politicising the issue and frankly he's an embarrassment. It's a cheap political stunt what he did. We don't need any more laws. You know it's already illegal to shoot several people in a university dead in America, right? Many people hope he doesn't come to visit. Etc Etc
So if this man's views are representative of people in Oregon it seems that the only appropriate response is more sympathy for the victims and whatever you do, even if you're the president, do not make any suggestions or proposals that might actually do something to lessen the chances of this happening again. (You can never guarantee against it happening) That's "politicising the issue".
OK.
"Ah ye poor feckers. Sure isn't it desperate altogether. But hey, what can you do?"0 -
Edited above. see new links.
Yeah, about that. From your link...
(1) a criminal event - as are essentially all shootings not done by law enforcement
(2) involving a lone perpetrator, - isn't that the same criteria used b my source?
(3) that begins and ends within a 24-hour period, - again, pretty sure that meets the same criteria of "without a cooling off period" specified by my source.
(4) in which the perpetrator uses firearms, - pretty self explanatory when discussing shooting incidents.
(5) and in which four or more people are killed or injured directly or indirectly from the attack. - that is EXACTLY what was specified by my source.
So yes, this story that you were balking at earlier would meet all of the criteria - http://www.fox5vegas.com/story/24738619/2-people-shot-at-wedding-reception .
Additionally, we do not consider attacks at military installations, police stations or prisons – or attacks specifically targeting military or police personnel – to be rampage shootings, even if all other criteria are met. We also exclude assassination attempts against state officials." - this part, I am unsure about, but even if it does contradict my source, it highly doubt it would account for more than a small handful of the 990+ mass shootings in the USA since JAuary 1st, 2013 - as per your own sources criteria.0 -
Which list now??? Link?
You said the theatre shooting on the FBI list. Where is it?I'd use my head and realise that some places in America are far, far safer than say, Dublin. I barely lock my door living where I do in New Mexico, yet there are parts of downtown where it's a hellhole. A lot of that has more to do with drugs and poverty than guns.
Use your head going to live in a country you really have no idea about?Oh please, can we not get all "think of the children" about this, people die every day of sudden means in every country in the world.
People do die everyday that much is obvious, but you're playing down these deaths in particular. They're not significant enough for you so everybody else shouldn't pay any attention to them, that's it really, as I said tell the families that their losses are not significant enough because they weren't murdered by Breivik.0 -
Yeah, about that. From your link...
(1) a criminal event - as are essentially all shootings not done by law enforcement
(2) involving a lone perpetrator, - isn't that the same criteria used b my source?
(3) that begins and ends within a 24-hour period, - again, pretty sure that meets the same criteria of "without a cooling off period" specified by my source.
(4) in which the perpetrator uses firearms, - pretty self explanatory when discussing shooting incidents.
(5) and in which four or more people are killed or injured directly or indirectly from the attack. - that is EXACTLY what was specified by my source.
So yes, this story that you were balking at earlier would meet all of the criteria - http://www.fox5vegas.com/story/24738619/2-people-shot-at-wedding-reception .
Additionally, we do not consider attacks at military installations, police stations or prisons – or attacks specifically targeting military or police personnel – to be rampage shootings, even if all other criteria are met. We also exclude assassination attempts against state officials." - this part, I am unsure about, but even if it does contradict my source, it highly doubt it would account for more than a small handful of the 990+ mass shootings in the USA since JAuary 1st, 2013 - as per your own sources criteria.
Look at the table again; the table ranks fatalities so no your wedding incident is not ranked.
https://web.archive.org/web/20130204001536/http://www.rampageshooting.com/
I'm not sure why the faq cites "and in which four or more people are killed or injured directly or indirectly from the attack" typo perhaps (?) but clearly the table ranks only fatalities.0 -
Because that is its criteria. So 3 injured and 1 dead will count as 1 fatality. Bit unfortunately your so race did not do enough thorough research hence the far lower US numbers, which can be found on my source.Look at the table again; the table ranks fatalities so no your wedding incident is not ranked.
https://web.archive.org/web/20130204001536/http://www.rampageshooting.com/
I'm not sure why the faq cites "and in which four or more people are killed or injured directly or indirectly from the attack" typo perhaps (?) but clearly the table ranks only fatalities.
Basically, you need to use better sources.0 -
irishmover wrote: »You said the theatre shooting on the FBI list. Where is it?
I said it meets the criteria of active shooter as federally defined by the FBI and other federal aggencies.Use your head going to live in a country you really have no idea about?
Eh? I've lived here for almost five years????People do die everyday that much is obvious, but you're playing down these deaths in particular. They're not significant enough for you so everybody else shouldn't pay any attention to them, that's it really, as I said tell the families that their losses are not significant enough because they weren't murdered by Breivik.
I'm playing down nothing, but the US seems to take the brunt of the hysterical criticism when in fact parts of the US are far safer than some parts of Europe. Yes, the US is violent, but violence rates are dropping. In fact I feel safer here than I ever did in Dublin.0 -
I don't think events like this are a concern for Americans (in the sense of changing anything to ensure the possibilities of further types of incidents are minimised). Its a case of "Isn't it awful" and on we go. I guess that is the choice they make.0
-
Advertisement
-
Because that is its criteria. So 3 injured and 1 dead will count as 1 fatality. Bit unfortunately your so race did not do enough thorough research hence the far lower US numbers, which can be found on my source.
Basically, you need to use better sources.
Feel free to update it then - off you go, clearly you should publish the updated table, but much of your source is 0 killed 4 injured etc which would not rank in that table so I don't expect much change.
You still haven't conceded that the massive population of the US skews absolute numbers when a per capita basis is a much more accurate representation of the scale of the problem.
The fact is the FBI have identified only 160 incidents as 'active shooter' incidents from 2000-2013, far cry from your 300+ this year.0
Advertisement