One law will actually stop 98.8% of mass shootings...why don't we pass it?

[2aguy]

This one law will stop almost all mass shootings......why won't we pass it?

Just One Gun Law Might Stop 98.8% Of Mass Shootings, So Why Do Democrats Oppose It?

f Democrats really want to stop the vast majority of mass killings, they can push for one simple law that would have the dual effects of restoring liberties nationwide, and destroying the common target of nearly every mass murder.

Yes, nearly 99% of all mass public murders over the last 66 years have the common denominator of occurring in so-called “gun free zones,” places where citizens have been prevented from being able to legally carry firearms for their own self-defense and the defense of others. Those evil souls who have decided that they must rage against innocent random human life nearly always pick densely populated spaces where they know citizens have been disarmed by ill-informed politicians.

They want time and space to kill.

Democrats have given them all the time and space they need for more than half a century. It isn’t working.

It’s time to get rid of these tragically misnamed “gun free zones” and give American citizens a fighting chance.

 

[Agit8r]

How were they able to determine whether or not the shootings took place in a "gun-free zone" or not?

Did they look up the state and local laws for each place individually for those shootings that occurred before 1990?

Where is the data set?

 

[TemplarKormac]

How were they able to determine whether or not the shootings took place in a "gun-free zone" or not?

Did they look up the state and local laws for each place individually for those shootings that occurred before 1990?

Where is the data set?

You could start by reading the links:

UPDATED: More misleading information from Bloomberg's Everytown for Gun Safety on guns: "Analysis of Recent Mass Shootings," Showing how mass public shootings keep occurring in gun-free zones - Crime Prevention Research Center

 

[Agit8r]

How were they able to determine whether or not the shootings took place in a "gun-free zone" or not?

Did they look up the state and local laws for each place individually for those shootings that occurred before 1990?

Where is the data set?

You could start by reading the links:

UPDATED: More misleading information from Bloomberg's Everytown for Gun Safety on guns: "Analysis of Recent Mass Shootings," Showing how mass public shootings keep occurring in gun-free zones - Crime Prevention Research Center

They did not list each individual shooting in that article, or the articles it linked to. The terms "gun-free" or "gun free" do not appear at all in the NYT article that it cites. They do not appear in the abstract of the other article either, are only passingly mentioned two times in the full version.

I'm sure that the amygdala thinker who wrote the article assumed broadly that all schools throughout all time have been "gun-free," which is plainly not the case. Even after the passage of the federal Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 there are exemptions in that law for law enforcement officers and others specially licensed to carry in those areas.

 

[miketx]

This is why I never post any data to back up my claim. All these shill bastards do then is just lie and smoke. Waste of time as they are a waste of skin.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

How were they able to determine whether or not the shootings took place in a "gun-free zone" or not?

Did they look up the state and local laws for each place individually for those shootings that occurred before 1990?

Where is the data set?

You could start by reading the links:

UPDATED: More misleading information from Bloomberg's Everytown for Gun Safety on guns: "Analysis of Recent Mass Shootings," Showing how mass public shootings keep occurring in gun-free zones - Crime Prevention Research Center

Well, according to that page, in order for it to be true we need to re-define what "mass shooting" means.

The OP seems to be talking only about random, public mass shootings that were unrelated to other crimes.

10 times as many people have died of gun accidents in the last 10 years than have in public, random mass shootings unrelated to other crimes.

 

[miketx]

 

[TemplarKormac]

10 times as many people have died of gun accidents in the last 10 years than have in public, random mass shootings unrelated to other crimes.

I fail to see how the former is related to the latter, in the context of "mass public shootings."

 

[theDoctorisIn]

10 times as many people have died of gun accidents in the last 10 years than have in public, random mass shootings unrelated to other crimes.

I fail to see how the former is related to the latter, in the context of "mass public shootings."

The point is that after you make up all these additional conditions to carve out only the "mass shootings" that fit your narrative, you're left with such a small number of incidents that they're statistically irrelevant.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Here's a more helpful analysis.

50 years of U.S. mass shootings: The victims, sites, killers and weapons

 

[airplanemechanic]

Are you freakin' telling me that people who want to kill others would rather go into a place where they know that nobody will shoot back?

I can't believe that shit.

 

[Picaro]

For clarity, the Peanut Gallery can find that 'mass shootings' are a category, defined as shootings where 4 or more people are wounded and/or killed, and can keep that in mind when the deflections and segues into other types of shootings trying to change the subject, as is already the case here in this thread, where the category is clearly in the thread title and the OP.

 

[miketx]

Here's a more helpful analysis.

50 years of U.S. mass shootings: The victims, sites, killers and weapons

More biased media bullshit.

 

[airplanemechanic]

OP? Any links?

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

10 times as many people have died of gun accidents in the last 10 years than have in public, random mass shootings unrelated to other crimes.

I fail to see how the former is related to the latter, in the context of "mass public shootings."

The point is that after you make up all these additional conditions to carve out only the "mass shootings" that fit your narrative, you're left with such a small number of incidents that they're statistically irrelevant.

If they are statistical irrelevant as you say why is the left calling for gun bans ?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

10 times as many people have died of gun accidents in the last 10 years than have in public, random mass shootings unrelated to other crimes.

I fail to see how the former is related to the latter, in the context of "mass public shootings."

The point is that after you make up all these additional conditions to carve out only the "mass shootings" that fit your narrative, you're left with such a small number of incidents that they're statistically irrelevant.

If they are statistical irrelevant as you say why is the left calling for gun bans ?

I don't know, ask them.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Mass shootings at gun shows and police stations seem to be exceptionally rare.

 

[2aguy]

For clarity, the Peanut Gallery can find that 'mass shootings' are a category, defined as shootings where 4 or more people are wounded and/or killed, and can keep that in mind when the deflections and segues into other types of shootings trying to change the subject, as is already the case here in this thread, where the category is clearly in the thread title and the OP.

Actually, obama had to change the number to classify mass shootings as mass shootings......he lowered it to 3 because they weren't getting enough mass shootings to scare the public with headlines for stories....the Mother Jones list of mass public shootings that I use did just this...they went back and added shootings after the number change....so I included the old number with the new number.....it didn't change that many shootings to the list....

 

[theDoctorisIn]

10 times as many people have died of gun accidents in the last 10 years than have in public, random mass shootings unrelated to other crimes.

I fail to see how the former is related to the latter, in the context of "mass public shootings."

The point is that after you make up all these additional conditions to carve out only the "mass shootings" that fit your narrative, you're left with such a small number of incidents that they're statistically irrelevant.

No....the FBI has a specific definition of mass public shootings....the anti-gunners make up their own in order to increase the numbers......

The FBI defines a "mass shooting" as a shooting with 4 or more victims.

In your OP, you've defined a "mass shooting" as a shooting with 4 or more victims, that takes place in public, is random, and involves no other criminal activity.

That's the only way that your "98.8%" claim works.

 

[2aguy]

For clarity, the Peanut Gallery can find that 'mass shootings' are a category, defined as shootings where 4 or more people are wounded and/or killed, and can keep that in mind when the deflections and segues into other types of shootings trying to change the subject, as is already the case here in this thread, where the category is clearly in the thread title and the OP.

here is the list from anti gun Mother Jones...


The list below comes from the old definition of 4 killed to make a shooting a mass shooting...if you now go to the link there are more than listed below...but that is because Mother Jones changed the list from the time I first posted it...and changed to obama's new standard of only 3 dead to make a mass shooting...

I have put obama's updated number in parenthesis..........

we will see....


US Mass Shootings, 1982-2015: Data From Mother Jones' Investigation

2016....3

2015....4 ( obama's new standard....7)

2014....2 (4)

2013....5

2012....7

2011....3

2010....1

2009....4

2008....3

2007....4

2006....3

2005...2

2004....1

2003...1

2002 not listed so more than likely 0

2001....1

2000....1

1999....5

1998...3

1997....2

1996....1

1995...1

1994...1

1993...4

1992...2

1991...3

1990...1

1989...2

1988....1

1987...1

1986...1

1985... not listed so probably 0

1984...2

1983...not listed so probably 0

1982...1