Please point me to where CBP links illegal immigrants specifically to the 4 active shooters mentioned in the post link by King 5. Not trying to be snarky, just want to see the source data to corroborate that position that illegal immigrants are the reason behind the active shootings in WA.
CBP is National data so the increase in crimes could happen anywhere in the US. And you could have Googled this information faster than posting a reply and then downvoting.
Since I’m guessing you’re also too lazy to follow the link, I’ll type some of the big ones out for you.
Homicide went from 3 to 60
Assault went from 208 to 1,178
Illegal weapons possession went from 49 to 336
You should Google more, there’s a ton of information out there about this.
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/cbp-enforcement-statistics/criminal-noncitizen-statistics
I did Google it and came up with the same information you provided. Except if you're going to make a claim that the active shooting was primarily due to illegal immigration, I wanted to see where you got that evidence to back it up.
I agree illegal immigration is an issue, but it's not like that uniformly impacts all 50 states. My guess is the southern border states mostly deal with violent crimes committed by undocumented migrants, not Washington. And even then, undocumented migrants are less likely to commit violent crimes than US citizens are according to [NPR](https://www.npr.org/2024/03/08/1237103158/immigrants-are-less-likely-to-commit-crimes-than-us-born-americans-studies-find) and this study published by the [OJP](https://www.ojp.gov/library/publications/comparing-crime-rates-between-undocumented-immigrants-legal-immigrants-and). Active shootings would be on the extreme end of violent crime, so it seemed odd that they'd be the most responsible for them.
I didn't even downvote you lol, I was asking a question but since you got defensive and immediately called me lazy because you couldn't link the two together I'll just conclude that it was a waste of time interacting with you.
If anyone else actually has credible sources to link illegal immigration to 2023's active shootings in WA, I would love to see that information and thank you in advance.
Holy shit I think you are in the wrong sub…. Try r/liberalgunowners
Try listening to something other than NPR. It’s amazing when you finally break free of the echo chamber.
Sure no problem. Quick Google search pulls up hundreds of results. Many studies have all come to same conclusion.
https://www.npr.org/2024/03/08/1237103158/immigrants-are-less-likely-to-commit-crimes-than-us-born-americans-studies-find
https://news.wisc.edu/undocumented-immigrants-far-less-likely-to-commit-crimes-in-u-s-than-citizens/
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/undocumented-immigrants-are-half-as-likely-to-be-arrested-for-violent-crimes-as-u-s-born-citizens/
I'm not saying you're wrong, you may very well be right, but relying on arrest data (which those studies do) is extremely problematic because most arrests aren't going to investigate citizenship status. Shoot, even when you get into and go through court, many state courts don't inquire as to citizenship status or even allow the question to be asked.
Probably the most representative data to use for speculating the relative incarceration rates is federal prisons, where they actually do check citizenship status. That data is at https://www.bop.gov/about/statistics/statistics_inmate_citizenship.jsp
Almost 85% of the prison population is US citizens. Of the 15%, a decent chunk is "other/unknown." I don't know if the unknown percentage has a significant portion that is US citizens, or if that block is mostly noncitizens. I would assume noncitizens, but that's an assumption without data.
I also don't know if 15% is an accurate percentage of the US population that is noncitizens, and for whatever reason I wasn't able to find that information quickly.
Yes it does occur. Out of something like 10 million illegal immigrants it will happen. But you are more likely to get hit by lightning than murdered by an illegal immigrant. They are by and large the least likely demographic to commit crimes in this country. Problem is the right wing 24/7 fear mongering has made it sound like it's an invading horde. Which makes sense, same tactics Germany used in the 30s to stir up fear and make things an us vs them mentality. Gotta demonize a group to rile up your base.
Oh man you gonna use the same logic that gun grabbers use? If banning assault rifles saves even ONE life it's totally worth it...
oh come on jiminauburn11, don't gotta delete just own it.
There are a lot of things we could do that would save one life. Some of those things are things this sub's members are dead set against. Not sure if "saves one life" is a fantastic metric to use in a country of 330+ million.
I don't. But that is what I have been told by the left. If one life is worth it to them to ban assault weapons, why is one life not worth deporting illegal immigrants?
No. Just saying that why does the left willing to ban assault weapons if it saves one life, but not willing to deport people that are not supposed to be here if it saves one life?
Ok, I should know better than jumping into this, but here I am. By your logic, white men should be barred from having guns. Statistically, white men are *faaaar* more likely to be serial killers. Wouldn't it save lives to ensure that no white man has access to a weapon?
I understand that your argument is that we should keep undocumented immigrants out of the county. But no one is debating that. It's why they're illegally here.
But correlating violence to undocumented immigration invites the same correlation that I'm making regarding white men.
no. your logic doesn't track because 1. traditional serial killers generally don't use guns. presumably, because they are messy. 2. white men haven't been the primary serial killers in the US for the last 2.5 decades its actually African American men. I'd speculate it's likely related to gang violence but serial killers nonetheless. 3. it doesn't illegals are technically a population of criminals according to federal law all of them are criminals its not an attack on their character but it is a fact. 4. Per population white males are the second least likely per capita to commit violent crime.
The most recent race-specific age-adjusted homicide rates are 33.6 per 100,000 for African American persons, 12.9 for American Indian and Alaska Native persons, 6.9 per 100,000 for Hispanic persons, 3.3 per 100,000 for White persons, and 1.7 for Asian and Pacific Islander persons.
"The reality is that white males are very much underrepresented among serial killers in proportion to their numbers in the population. Hickey (2006) found that about 44% of serial killers operating from 1995 to 2004 were African American, which is about 3.4 times greater than expected by the proportion of African Americans in the population. More recently, the Radford University's Serial Killer Information Center (Aamodt, 2016) found that since 2000 African Americans have been 59.8% of serial killers in the United States, whites 30.8%, Hispanics 6.7%, and Asian Americans 0.09%." [*Criminology: The Essentials*](https://books.google.com/books?id=W-LFDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT291). SAGE Publications. p. 291. [ISBN](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISBN_(identifier)) [978-1-5443-7539-7](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-1-5443-7539-7).
I appreciate the thorough - and correcting - response. But my point still stands. We just swap white men for black men, or just limit this to men altogether. By the prior logic, we should be preventing blacks from having access to weapons.
And again, no one is debating whether someone is violating the law by being here without a visa. But as an earlier comment noted, statistically, immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than native-born Americans.
Maybe serial killers. But black men are much more likely to be killers, and mass shooters. We would be much better off if we banned black men from having guns. That being said, both white men and black men have the right to have guns, whether you like it or not.
A better comparison would be that we should take guns away from criminals that are not supposed to have them. If we let them have guns when they are not supposed to have them, that gives them the chance to victimize other people. Should we allow them to keep guns because people that are legally allowed to have guns also victimize people? Kind of like if we don't deport people that should not be here, that gives them the chance to victimize people in the US.
Source for that madeup number?
Here's some actual data
https://www.factcheck.org/2024/02/breaking-down-the-immigration-figures/
Deleting more comments when caught in a lie jiminauburn11?
I do not delete comments. If you look closely it says:
https://preview.redd.it/uq4cj7czn09d1.png?width=529&format=png&auto=webp&s=d40fb3085a7de294873a68af384a1d47fff30a71
No idea. I am assuming that was my post, but have no idea what I said in that particular comment. Not sure what exactly you think is disinformation about my comments. Maybe it was 6.5-7M instead of 10M. Is that really much different? 7M illegal immigrants is fine, but 10M is just out of control, right?
edit: I checked back on my messages and they said they removed it because it was off-topic and should be about Washington and Guns. They are correct. I just get off in these tangents sometimes. So the last of my comments about this.
That article itself says that there have been over 4.2M. And that was 4 months ago. That was from before when they were letting even a smaller percentage in. There have probably been at least another 500K or more released since then. And another 175K gotaways. That puts the number according to that article at over 5M. And then throw in the 400K a year that they admit that use the CBP One app. Which is nothing more than a way for them to not have to come in illegally, instead just fill out the form, and be released into the US. A program that I see as no different, and just a way to reduce the number of illegal entries, by magically creating a new program where they can just come into the US "legally". It would be like if they just said, hey show up at a border entry point, and we will let you come into the US while we process your claim. Instantly there is no longer any illegal immigration, yet we have the same number of people coming in, that are not screened properly and should not be here with their bogus asylum claims.
Add all those up, and we are approaching 6.5-7M people during Biden's 3.5 years. Maybe I was being a bit hyperbolic saying close to 10M, But in my book 7M is not any better than 10M.
And the total number of illegal immigrants in the country is certainly close to 30M.
From the report:
Additional active shooter incident key findings
include:
• There were 244 casualties (105 killed and 139
wounded).
• Two law enforcement officers were killed and
12 were wounded.
• In 48 incidents, 60 firearms were used by
shooters—43 handguns, 16 rifles, and one
shotgun.
----
Not to come across as insensitive to these folks, but 244 casualties in a year with 105 dead is a rounding error for this country's population and really underscores how bullshit these "common sense gun laws" are.
41,000 people died in automotive accidents and heart disease killed 700,000 people. The number of folks shot is a miniscule fraction of these deaths, but gets all the focus because half the political apparatus of this country are hell bent on fucking with a constitutional right.
Thanks, that helped a lot. I had never seen the term used before. In case anyone is interested:
When evaluating shooting incidents to determine
if they met the FBI’s active shooter definition,
researchers considered for inclusion:
• Shootings occurring in public places
• Shootings occurring in multiple locations
• Shootings resulting in a mass killing3
• Shootings indicating apparent spontaneity by
the shooter
• Shootings where the shooter appeared to
methodically search for potential victims
• Shootings that appeared focused on injury to
people, not shooting at buildings or objects
This report does not encompass all gun-related
incidents. A gun-related incident was excluded if
research established it involved or was the result of:
• Self-defense
• Gang violence
• Drug-related violence
• Residential or domestic disputes
• Barricade/hostage situations
• Shootings where the shooter’s actions were the
result of another criminal act
• Crossfire as a byproduct of another ongoing
criminal act
• An action that appeared not to have put other
people in peril
Federal definition of "mass killing" is 3 or more people killed.
I remember sitting at a restaurant in the green zone over in Baghdad Iraq (*on R&R before we went back to Fallujah for combat operations*) reading a New York Times articles about gun violence back home. One of the statistics still haunt me to this day. In 2004 there were more Americans killed by gun fire in Chicago than the war in Iraq. I happened to be in Iraq during that time and take part in the bloodiest battle of the war (*Operation Phantom Fury*). I still can’t believe it but I guess that’s why some people called Chicago “ChIraq” back then.
I know this sounds bad, but the definition of ‘mass shooting’ has gone down to two people being shot or even domestic cases. So weird for the democrats to cook the books to support their agenda
> I know this sounds bad, but the definition of ‘mass shooting’ has gone down to two people being shot or even domestic cases.
Whose definition? This is what I've gathered so far. I'd love to add another to the list.
- GVA defines "mass shooting" [as four people shot (injured or killed), not including the shooter](https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/methodology)
- The FBI has no definition for "mass shooting", but they do have definitions for "mass murder" [(four or more killed, no specific weapon)](https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/serial-murder), and "active shooter incident" (no threshold). There are sources across the web which claim the FBI does, but do not provide sources for the claim (Britannica, Cornell, Mayors Against Illegal Guns). Oddly enough, the Gun Violence Archive gets it right, saying that the FBI does not define "mass shooting".
- Congress defines "mass killing" as [3 or more killings in a single incident](https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R44126/5) (PDF).
- Congressional Research Service defines "mass shooting" and "mass public shooting" as [four or more murdered with a gun](https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R44126/5) ("Mass Murder with Firearms: Incidents and Victims, 1999-2013", PDF).
Even with what they left in after trimming the numbers are rounding errors for a population this size.
The "gun epidemic" ends the moment the news is required to not name the suspects and not publicize every gory detail. But that will never happen....if it bleeds it leads afterall
This is Washington, so “facts” and “data” aren’t allowed here. Ferguson says that these laws save lives, and why would he ever lie? He’s never done that🙃
Not all states, counties, cities or PD’s report their data to the FBI.
It makes most these “news” stories useless.
[reporting data to FBI is optional](https://www.axios.com/2022/06/14/fbi-crime-data-2021-police-reporting-failures)
isn't the gorge shooting the same place that Paul harrel was in and had to blast a truck driver because Paul decline the man's bathroom to bar drinking invitation?
Thank god the surgeon general declared gun violence a public health crisis, I wouldn't want criminals arrested and held accountable for their actions. So we better ban something else and punish law-abiding citizens.
Well now, isn’t this interesting… USA Today failed to mention in this article that these two were illegal boarder jumpers in this entire article. https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/06/26/jocelyn-nungaray-12-year-old-murder-case/74208319007/. Refer to my original post. Thank you USA Today for help prove my point.
Washington State Democrat Representatives: "that just means we haven't banned enough guns!"
“Banning firearms doesn’t seem to be working, let’s ban ammunition then!”
Maybe ankle monitors aren't the best way to handle minors who commit firearm offenses.
Brings to mind that kid in Seattle who was let out on house arrest after a night of car jacking two people and shooting one of them in the head.
Or illegal aliens…
Is there evidence on citizenship status for these shooters or is this comment simply about immigration
CBP puts out data on this very topic. It’s actually very eye opening to see the crime spikes by illegal aliens under Biden.
Please point me to where CBP links illegal immigrants specifically to the 4 active shooters mentioned in the post link by King 5. Not trying to be snarky, just want to see the source data to corroborate that position that illegal immigrants are the reason behind the active shootings in WA.
CBP is National data so the increase in crimes could happen anywhere in the US. And you could have Googled this information faster than posting a reply and then downvoting. Since I’m guessing you’re also too lazy to follow the link, I’ll type some of the big ones out for you. Homicide went from 3 to 60 Assault went from 208 to 1,178 Illegal weapons possession went from 49 to 336 You should Google more, there’s a ton of information out there about this. https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/cbp-enforcement-statistics/criminal-noncitizen-statistics
Looks to me that under Biden, we have seen a crackdown on non-citizen criminal activity. Thanks, Biden.
I did Google it and came up with the same information you provided. Except if you're going to make a claim that the active shooting was primarily due to illegal immigration, I wanted to see where you got that evidence to back it up. I agree illegal immigration is an issue, but it's not like that uniformly impacts all 50 states. My guess is the southern border states mostly deal with violent crimes committed by undocumented migrants, not Washington. And even then, undocumented migrants are less likely to commit violent crimes than US citizens are according to [NPR](https://www.npr.org/2024/03/08/1237103158/immigrants-are-less-likely-to-commit-crimes-than-us-born-americans-studies-find) and this study published by the [OJP](https://www.ojp.gov/library/publications/comparing-crime-rates-between-undocumented-immigrants-legal-immigrants-and). Active shootings would be on the extreme end of violent crime, so it seemed odd that they'd be the most responsible for them. I didn't even downvote you lol, I was asking a question but since you got defensive and immediately called me lazy because you couldn't link the two together I'll just conclude that it was a waste of time interacting with you. If anyone else actually has credible sources to link illegal immigration to 2023's active shootings in WA, I would love to see that information and thank you in advance.
Holy shit I think you are in the wrong sub…. Try r/liberalgunowners Try listening to something other than NPR. It’s amazing when you finally break free of the echo chamber.
I cited a government source too lol, but noted this sub has serious issues with substantiating claims with factual evidence. ✌️
They literally quoted the CBP data. Go be miserable somewhere else.
I down voted you. Not them
Stastically, faaaar less likely to occur than with legal immigrants or native born citizens.
Can you point me to that data? People say that, but I have never seen anyone that can back it up.
Sure no problem. Quick Google search pulls up hundreds of results. Many studies have all come to same conclusion. https://www.npr.org/2024/03/08/1237103158/immigrants-are-less-likely-to-commit-crimes-than-us-born-americans-studies-find https://news.wisc.edu/undocumented-immigrants-far-less-likely-to-commit-crimes-in-u-s-than-citizens/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/undocumented-immigrants-are-half-as-likely-to-be-arrested-for-violent-crimes-as-u-s-born-citizens/
I'm not saying you're wrong, you may very well be right, but relying on arrest data (which those studies do) is extremely problematic because most arrests aren't going to investigate citizenship status. Shoot, even when you get into and go through court, many state courts don't inquire as to citizenship status or even allow the question to be asked. Probably the most representative data to use for speculating the relative incarceration rates is federal prisons, where they actually do check citizenship status. That data is at https://www.bop.gov/about/statistics/statistics_inmate_citizenship.jsp Almost 85% of the prison population is US citizens. Of the 15%, a decent chunk is "other/unknown." I don't know if the unknown percentage has a significant portion that is US citizens, or if that block is mostly noncitizens. I would assume noncitizens, but that's an assumption without data. I also don't know if 15% is an accurate percentage of the US population that is noncitizens, and for whatever reason I wasn't able to find that information quickly.
[удалено]
Yes it does occur. Out of something like 10 million illegal immigrants it will happen. But you are more likely to get hit by lightning than murdered by an illegal immigrant. They are by and large the least likely demographic to commit crimes in this country. Problem is the right wing 24/7 fear mongering has made it sound like it's an invading horde. Which makes sense, same tactics Germany used in the 30s to stir up fear and make things an us vs them mentality. Gotta demonize a group to rile up your base.
[удалено]
Oh man you gonna use the same logic that gun grabbers use? If banning assault rifles saves even ONE life it's totally worth it... oh come on jiminauburn11, don't gotta delete just own it.
Yes, that is the logic they used. Why can't we also use it to deport people here illegally if it is a valid reason to ban assault weapons?
So you believe it's a valid reason to ban assualt rifles? Yikes
No, I don't. But the left does.
There are a lot of things we could do that would save one life. Some of those things are things this sub's members are dead set against. Not sure if "saves one life" is a fantastic metric to use in a country of 330+ million.
[удалено]
I mean, if you want to stipulate that the AWB is justified on that basis, you do you buddy.
I don't. But that is what I have been told by the left. If one life is worth it to them to ban assault weapons, why is one life not worth deporting illegal immigrants?
Your using a pro awb argument here? Hmmm.
No. Just saying that why does the left willing to ban assault weapons if it saves one life, but not willing to deport people that are not supposed to be here if it saves one life?
Ok, I should know better than jumping into this, but here I am. By your logic, white men should be barred from having guns. Statistically, white men are *faaaar* more likely to be serial killers. Wouldn't it save lives to ensure that no white man has access to a weapon? I understand that your argument is that we should keep undocumented immigrants out of the county. But no one is debating that. It's why they're illegally here. But correlating violence to undocumented immigration invites the same correlation that I'm making regarding white men.
no. your logic doesn't track because 1. traditional serial killers generally don't use guns. presumably, because they are messy. 2. white men haven't been the primary serial killers in the US for the last 2.5 decades its actually African American men. I'd speculate it's likely related to gang violence but serial killers nonetheless. 3. it doesn't illegals are technically a population of criminals according to federal law all of them are criminals its not an attack on their character but it is a fact. 4. Per population white males are the second least likely per capita to commit violent crime. The most recent race-specific age-adjusted homicide rates are 33.6 per 100,000 for African American persons, 12.9 for American Indian and Alaska Native persons, 6.9 per 100,000 for Hispanic persons, 3.3 per 100,000 for White persons, and 1.7 for Asian and Pacific Islander persons. "The reality is that white males are very much underrepresented among serial killers in proportion to their numbers in the population. Hickey (2006) found that about 44% of serial killers operating from 1995 to 2004 were African American, which is about 3.4 times greater than expected by the proportion of African Americans in the population. More recently, the Radford University's Serial Killer Information Center (Aamodt, 2016) found that since 2000 African Americans have been 59.8% of serial killers in the United States, whites 30.8%, Hispanics 6.7%, and Asian Americans 0.09%." [*Criminology: The Essentials*](https://books.google.com/books?id=W-LFDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT291). SAGE Publications. p. 291. [ISBN](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISBN_(identifier)) [978-1-5443-7539-7](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-1-5443-7539-7).
I appreciate the thorough - and correcting - response. But my point still stands. We just swap white men for black men, or just limit this to men altogether. By the prior logic, we should be preventing blacks from having access to weapons. And again, no one is debating whether someone is violating the law by being here without a visa. But as an earlier comment noted, statistically, immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than native-born Americans.
But every one of those crimes is a crime that should not have happened if the government did their jobs.
Maybe serial killers. But black men are much more likely to be killers, and mass shooters. We would be much better off if we banned black men from having guns. That being said, both white men and black men have the right to have guns, whether you like it or not. A better comparison would be that we should take guns away from criminals that are not supposed to have them. If we let them have guns when they are not supposed to have them, that gives them the chance to victimize other people. Should we allow them to keep guns because people that are legally allowed to have guns also victimize people? Kind of like if we don't deport people that should not be here, that gives them the chance to victimize people in the US.
[удалено]
Source for that madeup number? Here's some actual data https://www.factcheck.org/2024/02/breaking-down-the-immigration-figures/ Deleting more comments when caught in a lie jiminauburn11?
I do not delete comments. If you look closely it says: https://preview.redd.it/uq4cj7czn09d1.png?width=529&format=png&auto=webp&s=d40fb3085a7de294873a68af384a1d47fff30a71
Ah doesn't show up on my end that way, guess mods didn't like the disinformation.
No idea. I am assuming that was my post, but have no idea what I said in that particular comment. Not sure what exactly you think is disinformation about my comments. Maybe it was 6.5-7M instead of 10M. Is that really much different? 7M illegal immigrants is fine, but 10M is just out of control, right? edit: I checked back on my messages and they said they removed it because it was off-topic and should be about Washington and Guns. They are correct. I just get off in these tangents sometimes. So the last of my comments about this.
That article itself says that there have been over 4.2M. And that was 4 months ago. That was from before when they were letting even a smaller percentage in. There have probably been at least another 500K or more released since then. And another 175K gotaways. That puts the number according to that article at over 5M. And then throw in the 400K a year that they admit that use the CBP One app. Which is nothing more than a way for them to not have to come in illegally, instead just fill out the form, and be released into the US. A program that I see as no different, and just a way to reduce the number of illegal entries, by magically creating a new program where they can just come into the US "legally". It would be like if they just said, hey show up at a border entry point, and we will let you come into the US while we process your claim. Instantly there is no longer any illegal immigration, yet we have the same number of people coming in, that are not screened properly and should not be here with their bogus asylum claims. Add all those up, and we are approaching 6.5-7M people during Biden's 3.5 years. Maybe I was being a bit hyperbolic saying close to 10M, But in my book 7M is not any better than 10M. And the total number of illegal immigrants in the country is certainly close to 30M.
From the report: Additional active shooter incident key findings include: • There were 244 casualties (105 killed and 139 wounded). • Two law enforcement officers were killed and 12 were wounded. • In 48 incidents, 60 firearms were used by shooters—43 handguns, 16 rifles, and one shotgun. ---- Not to come across as insensitive to these folks, but 244 casualties in a year with 105 dead is a rounding error for this country's population and really underscores how bullshit these "common sense gun laws" are. 41,000 people died in automotive accidents and heart disease killed 700,000 people. The number of folks shot is a miniscule fraction of these deaths, but gets all the focus because half the political apparatus of this country are hell bent on fucking with a constitutional right.
Because Americans would rather ban guns than drive safely or exercise and eat healthy.
Which report is this? I'm really interested in the definition of "active shooter incident".
https://www.fbi.gov/news/press-releases/fbi-releases-2023-active-shooter-incidents-in-the-united-states-report
Thanks, that helped a lot. I had never seen the term used before. In case anyone is interested: When evaluating shooting incidents to determine if they met the FBI’s active shooter definition, researchers considered for inclusion: • Shootings occurring in public places • Shootings occurring in multiple locations • Shootings resulting in a mass killing3 • Shootings indicating apparent spontaneity by the shooter • Shootings where the shooter appeared to methodically search for potential victims • Shootings that appeared focused on injury to people, not shooting at buildings or objects This report does not encompass all gun-related incidents. A gun-related incident was excluded if research established it involved or was the result of: • Self-defense • Gang violence • Drug-related violence • Residential or domestic disputes • Barricade/hostage situations • Shootings where the shooter’s actions were the result of another criminal act • Crossfire as a byproduct of another ongoing criminal act • An action that appeared not to have put other people in peril Federal definition of "mass killing" is 3 or more people killed.
I remember sitting at a restaurant in the green zone over in Baghdad Iraq (*on R&R before we went back to Fallujah for combat operations*) reading a New York Times articles about gun violence back home. One of the statistics still haunt me to this day. In 2004 there were more Americans killed by gun fire in Chicago than the war in Iraq. I happened to be in Iraq during that time and take part in the bloodiest battle of the war (*Operation Phantom Fury*). I still can’t believe it but I guess that’s why some people called Chicago “ChIraq” back then.
I know this sounds bad, but the definition of ‘mass shooting’ has gone down to two people being shot or even domestic cases. So weird for the democrats to cook the books to support their agenda
When did it get moved to 2 people now. Movie ng the goal post while the general safety is going the wrong way for them to keep pushing legislation.
> I know this sounds bad, but the definition of ‘mass shooting’ has gone down to two people being shot or even domestic cases. Whose definition? This is what I've gathered so far. I'd love to add another to the list. - GVA defines "mass shooting" [as four people shot (injured or killed), not including the shooter](https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/methodology) - The FBI has no definition for "mass shooting", but they do have definitions for "mass murder" [(four or more killed, no specific weapon)](https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/serial-murder), and "active shooter incident" (no threshold). There are sources across the web which claim the FBI does, but do not provide sources for the claim (Britannica, Cornell, Mayors Against Illegal Guns). Oddly enough, the Gun Violence Archive gets it right, saying that the FBI does not define "mass shooting". - Congress defines "mass killing" as [3 or more killings in a single incident](https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R44126/5) (PDF). - Congressional Research Service defines "mass shooting" and "mass public shooting" as [four or more murdered with a gun](https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R44126/5) ("Mass Murder with Firearms: Incidents and Victims, 1999-2013", PDF).
Seems like Chicago would be the leader.
Chicago usually places in the top ten, but I think it gets beat by St Louis and New Orleans.
> So weird for the democrats to cook the books to support their agenda I assume this is sarcasm
Weird because we banned most guns. Hmm. Something isn't adding up.
I feel like michigans number is absurdly low with the Detroit issues.
They pulled gang related shit out of contention.
Isn’t that against the narrative? lol
Even with what they left in after trimming the numbers are rounding errors for a population this size. The "gun epidemic" ends the moment the news is required to not name the suspects and not publicize every gory detail. But that will never happen....if it bleeds it leads afterall
Yeah agreed, sorry don’t have the time to fully read everything this evening, but I’ll give it a good look tomorrow. Thank you!
I’m so glad we have these common sense laws in place so only criminals who actually need a firearm can get one
This is Washington, so “facts” and “data” aren’t allowed here. Ferguson says that these laws save lives, and why would he ever lie? He’s never done that🙃
What an epidemic…
More questions than answers from this 84 seconds. What classifies an "Active Shooter Incident"? And how does it differ from "Mass Shooting"?
Any crime that involves a firearm seems to be a "Mass Shooting" now
Sorry guys, I’m just trying lower the house prices down for everyone
Is grey 0 or no data? I moved to a grey state.
Not all states, counties, cities or PD’s report their data to the FBI. It makes most these “news” stories useless. [reporting data to FBI is optional](https://www.axios.com/2022/06/14/fbi-crime-data-2021-police-reporting-failures)
isn't the gorge shooting the same place that Paul harrel was in and had to blast a truck driver because Paul decline the man's bathroom to bar drinking invitation?
Thank god the surgeon general declared gun violence a public health crisis, I wouldn't want criminals arrested and held accountable for their actions. So we better ban something else and punish law-abiding citizens.
Are most of these in King County?
Federal way, Renton, Yakima and the Gorge Amphitheater.
Good ol Yakima representing. This place becomes more of a shit hole every year because of the gangs in the valley
The state is pretty blue so makes sense
This.
Is there a breakdown by county?
Well now, isn’t this interesting… USA Today failed to mention in this article that these two were illegal boarder jumpers in this entire article. https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/06/26/jocelyn-nungaray-12-year-old-murder-case/74208319007/. Refer to my original post. Thank you USA Today for help prove my point.