• farcaster@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      10 months ago

      Yeah, counting only fatal shootings as “mass shootings” is strange. A gunshot wound can easily be a life-altering injury, and this should be reflected in the statistics.

    • Boddhisatva@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Yeah, this is a horseshit article. They chose to define a mass shooting as an incident where 4 or more people are killed (excluding the shooter) rather than where 4 or more people are shot as they do in your gunviolencearchive.org link. Gunviolencearchive.org current;y has 25 incidents per page and is now onto page 26! It lists 631 mass shootings this year! This is day 338 of 2023 so that is 1.9 mass shootings per day! And it’s not even an exhaustive list. It doesn’t yet include, for example, the two mass killings listed in OP’s article.

      • DoomBot5@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        I think that’s the definition of a serial killer. They just chose to incorrectly adopt it for mass shooting.

  • xc2215x@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    10 months ago

    Not a shock knowing the shootings in USA. No politician wants to change these gun issues so this will continue.

    • cheesebag@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      10 months ago

      Excuse me, NO politician? Not Lucy McBath (D-Ga) who literally ran on gun control to flip her seat after her 17 yo son was shot to death by a white man over a noise complaint? Not “yes I will take your guns” Beto ORourke? Not literally-survived-being-shot -in-the-face Gabby Giffords?

      You completely undermine these anti-gun politicians & the work they do when you deny they even exist.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      Will, you see they need their guns and they can’t possibly have any coherent gun laws because of an old piece of paper written hundreds of years ago. It all makes perfect sense and isn’t in any way stupid at all.

      The law was made back when war was conducted by everyone standing in a field and shooting in the approximate direction of the opposing force, and eventually hitting someone. Just maybe the constitution is out of date now? Just a radical thought.

  • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Workd record holder for another year.

    Is there a record for how many consecutive years a country had held this record?

    • SapphironZA@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      If that were true, there would be no reason for Iran not to have nuclear weapons right.

      It’s people who kill after all. The weapons have nothing to do with it.

    • ByteWizard@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      10 months ago

      Freedom isn’t free. You want to live with your face under a boot that’s fine. You don’t get to choose for the rest of us.