Mass shootings: We are 12th... Yeah?

[OnMyWayID 1,489]

Reading an article about there being more mass casualties in the EU last year than there has been in the US in the last ten years combined (I know right) anyway that's using the official FBI definition of a mass attack and a few news papers are now changing their definition based on a redit group that went back and analyzed the numbers and created a new definition that better suits the agenda..

But! Saw these interesting tables...

You go Russia!

[Expat1 971]

So much for the gun correlation. Only 12th? We can do WAY better than that

[TBoneTX 45,288]

Mass shootings... most of the deaths must be at Catholic services, it seems...

[ExPatty 502]

Take your stats and get out of here, we have some rhetoric we prefer instead!

[Ban Hammer 13,336]

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

Where's the link to this study?

[Dakine10 5,452]

Where's the link to this study?

Looks like the data leads to crimeresearch.org, John Lott's website.

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

Looks like the data leads to crimeresearch.org, John Lott's website.

Thanks. So this is website written by a gun advocate? That explains a lot...

[Dakine10 5,452]

Thanks. So this is website written by a gun advocate? That explains a lot...

Should at least be a disclaimer. He's been accused of fudging data more than once. So has everyone else though, I guess.

[Sousuke 1,214]

Should at least be a disclaimer. He's been accused of fudging data more than once. So has everyone else though, I guess.

I remember we all discussed a similar study late last year. It had the US higher at 7th but excluded Eastern Europe.

In that thread Norway was also number 1 I think. Basically the summary is that the US population size better absorbs mass shooting quantities than smaller European nations. I think Norway is at the top because of a single really terrible mass shooting, far deadlier than seen in the US.

Many of the other top nations are Eastern European where there is high levels of ethnic violence.

So is the data accurate? Well, Yes technically.

Is it truly apples to apples? Not quite. if you combined the EU nations and compared it to the US, I'm sure the US is slightly higher.

When US politicians say its a uniquely American issue is that accurate? No of course not, and thats how I view the data above.

[Dakine10 5,452]

I remember we all discussed a similar study late last year. It had the US higher at 7th but excluded Eastern Europe.

In that thread Norway was also number 1 I think. Basically the summary is that the US population size better absorbs mass shooting quantities than smaller European nations. I think Norway is at the top because of a single really terrible mass shooting, far deadlier than seen in the US.

Many of the other top nations are Eastern European where there is high levels of ethnic violence.

So is the data accurate? Well, Yes technically.

Is it truly apples to apples? Not quite. if you combined the EU nations and compared it to the US, I'm sure the US is slightly higher.

When US politicians say its a uniquely American issue is that accurate? No of course not, and thats how I view the data above.

Like most of these studies, the data is framed in a way that shows what the author want's to highlight. The 67 people killed in the single Norway shooting adjusted for Norway's small population gives you a chart that really exaggerates the real life risk. Is it reflective of the data for that small time period - sure. Is the risk of being the victim of a mass shooting incident really 15 times higher in Norway than the USA? Of course not.

What stands out to me is the US had 36 mass shootings during that time period. The next highest country had 3. I don't like that graph.

[OnMyWayID 1,489]

Like most of these studies, the data is framed in a way that shows what the author want's to highlight. The 67 people killed in the single Norway shooting adjusted for Norway's small population gives you a chart that really exaggerates the real life risk. Is it reflective of the data for that small time period - sure. Is the risk of being the victim of a mass shooting incident really 15 times higher in Norway than the USA? Of course not.

What stands out to me is the US had 36 mass shootings during that time period. The next highest country had 3. I don't like that graph.

I left out any commentary from the original article with only a line of my own about how others are going to redefine what a "mass shooting" is to make the data fit their agenda. All I posted was the tables - which are accurate. The numbers are derived using past definitions by the FBI of what constitutes a mass shooting. I like this better than the various sites and papers going through the data first and coming up with new definitions to fudge the numbers towards an agenda.

Edited March 9, 2016 by OnMyWayID