• Pea666@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    100
    ·
    1 year ago

    Some, such as the Gun Violence Archive, include events in which multiple people are shot regardless of number of deaths, and so report much higher figures.

    This carries a fun implication: let’s deflate the number of mass shooting by only including the deaths and not how many people are actually shot (and perhaps saved by emergency room personnel).

    • Kalkaline @leminal.space
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      61
      ·
      1 year ago

      It also misses the damage done by witnessing that violence and being shot at and losing loved ones to gun violence.

    • Telorand@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      54
      ·
      1 year ago

      It also ignores any lingering effects the survivors might suffer, whether physically or mentally. Just because you’re alive doesn’t mean you are whole.

    • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      1 year ago

      It also encourages confusion that each mass shooting is someone trying to kill as many people as possible in a public place, when that overwhelmingly isn’t actually true.

      • PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        The new definition is mostly gang violence now, but that’s not what any of us think of when we see or hear “mass shooting”.

        • RGB3x3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s a dog whistle for justifying the gun violence as only being between black people and hispanics, as if that makes it okay.

          • PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I mean it seems like a change to inflate the numbers, but shifting it to minorities could prolly keep the right quiet.

    • BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      1 year ago

      Mass shooting, not mass killing. I’d even want to know about instances of multiple, unrelated targets. If we get a string of shooters with terrible aim and nobody is actually hurt I don’t consider that an improvement of our epidemic.

    • pizzaboi@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      1 year ago

      That last part is important, because our emergency responders have gotten very good at saving lives (sadly, they’ve had to). People will point to deaths as the only relevant stat–and it’s amazing that isn’t enough for some people–but it’s a huge burden and cost for healthcare.

    • Zink@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      I can already hear the wing conspiracy theories about how liberal doctors are letting mass shooting victims die in order to bolster the numbers.

      Kind of like the conspiracies they’d throw around about the numbers of cases and deaths related to Covid.

      • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        “If I just focus on rhetoric, all the rampant gun violence goes away! I mean, no, there is no gun violence. Regardless, everything is fine, you just have to pretend. Guns have nothing to do with gun violence, also war is peace, and I am sane in the head. I’m sure people will buy this if I just repeat it a lot.”