It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Increase in Mass Shooting Events in the United States

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 08:24 AM
a reply to: Subrosabelow

Big Pharma and pushing heavy drugs to the masses who are increasingly dealing with psych issues.

That's worth another study of it's own. Which is the bigger threat? Those addicted to opioids or the mentally disturbed who refuse to take their medication?

posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 08:26 AM
a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

Pretty small sample sizes to try to get a statistically significant trend from. Going from 6 to twelve is doubling but 12 is a small number so a few incidents cause it to vary greatly.

Here is a question though, why have the gun grabbers convinced you that the number of what they call mass shootings matters?
Mass shooting is a made up and arbitrary term, different gun grabbers define it differently in order to cook up whatever statistics they want.

So why do you care more about the number of incidents than the number of people killed?

If we look at that then we see more people were killed in a single year of public mass shootings in France than in 8 years in America.

Seems to me we could save more lives trying to combat almost any other form of unnatural death, we could save a lot more lives by combating deaths from alcohol withdrawal, if we could reduce that 50% it would be much better than stopping mass shootings completely.

Or we could reduce or eliminate "mass shootings" by simply redefining the term.

posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 09:12 AM
a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

Just an out of the box sort of opinion to throw into the mix here:

People are holding in a lot more rage theses days (and it doesn't help when media- both mainstream and social- keep everyone's emotions riled up for advertising revenue). Used to you could scream out and raise Cain about your feelings of dissatisfaction, now you take medications and shove those feelings down as deep as possible for fear of social shaming or even criminal charges for "hate speech". You can only bury your feelings for so long before they come erupting out in extremely unhealthy ways.

posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 09:23 AM

"Increase in Mass Shooting Events in the United States"

"Increase in intelligence operations in the United States" Fixed it.

posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 09:34 AM
Probably subcategories within mass shootings would be helpful?
I imagine the gun violence in the inner cities is probably more related to crime, drugs, and gangs... although it has peaks and valleys, and maybe the availability of deadlier weapons have increased the number of casualties, it's been around as long as I can remember. And, considering the gangs in chicago used to go around shooting each others places up with machine guns... not really sure it's worse now than it was then.

Then there is the going postal unhappy employee. Less common than the first group I mentioned,.
In both of these groups, I think they know who their targets are, and have a personal beef with an identifiable group of people.
Has there been an increase in either of these two groups?

Another group I would be inclined to label more like a terroristic attack. And I do think that these are increasing. Unlike the drug dealer who feels one or more of his pushers has ripped him off and just wants revenge against them and a few innocent bystanders happen to get caught up in the mix, or the unhappy employer who wants to hurt the boss and coworkers he feels are the reason for his sudden unemployment.. the terroristic attacker feels that hes been wronged by a govt policy, a belief system that is contrary to his. His preferred target isnt as easily identifiable, he is after certain type of person. Or, he might be just wanting to cause terror and has no particular target in mind.. his goal, if he has one is to either protect himself from a perceived threat, win a percieved war, or coerce the society into accepting his way of thinking..
And ya. This group would need to be broken down more to understand each. But, the thing consistantly among them is they dont seem to care much about who they kill..
Their have no idea who they are killing.

posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 09:42 AM

originally posted by: carsforkids
a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

August 1, 1966. A rare and shocking event at that time, one I was too young to have remembered.

Yeah I disagree with lumping Texas 66 in with the mass shootings that
started in the 90's. The Bell tower I would call an isolated incident.
Perpetrated by a man who clearly couldn't help himself do to large
tumor on his brain. I remember how all the vicious things people
normally say about mass murdering shooters suddenly ended.
Only after it was revealed the guy was driven out of his mind
by a disease. Everyone found out it wasn't his fault and moved

Well, a mass shooting is a mass shooting regardless of what caused it to happen. But the information you presented is interesting, a brain tumor caused that shooter to go nuts. That seems like a factor that wouldn't be covered by normal procedures like an autopsy when the shooter is taken out by law enforcement.

In all honesty, I merely used that incident as a starting point for my study as it was within my lifetime and is a often considered one of the first cases of such. I then moved a head to the 1990s because I was familiar with those cases. After all, I am looking at this from my own perspective from events I've become aware of in my life time.

What you pointed out does seem to support the idea of mental disease as a causal factor, be it a tumor or what have you. Thanks for that information, I find it very relevant.

posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 09:53 AM

originally posted by: GeauxHomeYoureDrunk
a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

Just an out of the box sort of opinion to throw into the mix here:

People are holding in a lot more rage theses days (and it doesn't help when media- both mainstream and social- keep everyone's emotions riled up for advertising revenue). Used to you could scream out and raise Cain about your feelings of dissatisfaction, now you take medications and shove those feelings down as deep as possible for fear of social shaming or even criminal charges for "hate speech". You can only bury your feelings for so long before they come erupting out in extremely unhealthy ways.

Those are some good points about a general change in social values and how this could cause some people to snap. Even though each case is unique, it seems obvious that most of these shooters have a huge emotional investment in their choice to go on a mass shooting spree.
edit on 1-9-2019 by MichiganSwampBuck because: Typo

posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 09:59 AM
Until we learn how to raise children without the help of a chemical lobotomy this will continue.

My 7 year old nephew was addicted to Zoloft until I found him a hemp oil for his OCD. Now he's a happy stable teenager who doesn't take any pharmaceuticals.
edit on 1-9-2019 by JAY1980 because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 10:03 AM
At this point I will present some of the potential motives that are being given consideration by current studies.

Mass shootings can be motivated by religious ideology, political ideologies (i.e. neo-Nazism, terrorism), misogyny,[47] mental illness,[48][49] and extensive bullying,[50] among other reasons.[42] Forensic psychologist Stephen Ross cites extreme anger and the notion of working for a cause—rather than mental illness—as primary explanations

In a 2019 op-ed for the Los Angeles Times, [61]Jillian Peterson and James Densley of The Violence Project think tank presented a new, hopeful, framework to understand mass shootings. Based on a study funded by the National Institute of Justice, Peterson and Densley found mass shooters had four things in common: (1) early childhood trauma and exposure to violence at a young age; (2) an identifiable grievance or crisis point; (3) validation for their belief system, have studied past shootings to find inspiration; and (4) the means to carry out an attack.

In considering the frequency of mass shootings in the United States, criminologist Peter Squires says that the individualistic culture in the United States puts the country at greater risk for mass shootings than other countries, noting that “many other countries where gun ownership is high, such as Norway, Finland, Switzerland and Israel . . . tend to have more tight-knit societies where a strong social bond supports people through crises, and mass killings are fewer.”

Mass shooting

posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 10:04 AM
Mass shootings are statistically rare but incessant media coverage and hysteria makes them seem more common than they are in reality. As others have mentioned, the media and groups with agendas love to play around with the numbers. If you have 10 shootings and it doubles to 20... the headlines will read 100% increase in mass shootings!

However, the reality is that both 10 and 20 are such small numbers in a population of 300 million that you can't draw any kind of conclusion from the sample.

The other issue is the data is being manipulated for agendas. We really need to categorize mass shootings appropriately.

Disgruntled Employee
I recall hearing people "going postal" all the time in the 80s. The term came from the number of disgruntled postal workers who appeared to flip out of shoot up their work place.

Domestic Issues
Quite a few cases of domestic issues that turn into mass shootings

Gang / Thug Shootings
It is quite common to have three and four deaths in a gang shooting. I suspect this is bulk of the "mass shooting" data being touted. However, these are not the same thing as a random mass shooting and shouldn't be categorized as such.

True Nutjob
These are the shootings everyone fears the most. Some random guy with no connection at all to any of the victims just decides to shoot as many people as possible. DC Sniper. Vegas. Sandy Hook. These shootings are extremely rare but they garner the most media coverage.

I think any increases being seen are a result of continuous hysterical media coverage. Basically a bunch of copy cat killers. In addition, I do think there is a connection to the over medication of people which has most certainly increased over the past 30 years.

The conspiracy theorist in me also doesn't dismiss the false flags meant to manipulate society. Not saying there are "crisis actors" but I would not put it past government to secretly encourage these types of shootings to push through gun control. Making MK ULTRA type agents snap or trigger.

posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 10:12 AM
a reply to: dawnstar and Edumakated

There are categories of types of mass shooting events and these definitely effect the statistical analysis of the subject. It also effects what type of mass shootings that are reported in the main stream news media outlets. This is why I chose the most basic and accepted definition of what a mass shooting is to do this study.
edit on 1-9-2019 by MichiganSwampBuck because: For Clarity

posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 10:58 AM

originally posted by: Iscool
I'm curious how many of the killers identified as or were identified as Democrat/liberal types...


posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 11:38 AM
a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

It also effects just about every aspect of any discussion on the mass shootings and how to address it.

posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 11:43 AM
a reply to: LordAhriman

Personally I didn't feel that post deserved a response, but since you gave an answer to that one, could you provide a link and/or a quote for that number?

We might as well get that one out of the way before the subject gets derailed, "nip it in the bud" so to speak.

The information you provide is important and I thank you for your input.

posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 11:48 AM

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

It also effects just about every aspect of any discussion on the mass shootings and how to address it.

I agree that how a mass shooting is defined will effect the statistical data and how it is discussed in huge ways.

Perhaps we could come up with a more useful definition of our own? My definition was incredibly basic and what seems to be the most accepted one at the moment. My use of it was merely to help me understand if what I have been thinking pans out or not.

posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 03:00 PM
a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck
Less than 200 a year die in the US from mass shootings. Heck, its usually under 150 and typically under 100.
If there is a perception of an increase, I would say the MSM and their masters in the DNC deep state are responsible for their continued racist rhetoric, threatening racist calls of violence against those who disagree with them, and their seditious behaviors and attempts to overthrow the government of the United States of America.

To be honest, the levels of violence lately are directly contributed to the racist rhetoric from those who represent the Democrat political party.

posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 03:38 PM
it hasn't increased, the news media is just less restricted and isn't bound by rules that force balanced reporting, plus the media didn't have social media to influence behavior with in the past, it's just easier to push agendas, especially when people more inclined to liberal views are more likely to become members of the media or involved in tech, the liberals just have more power to manipulate information in the modern age.

posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 07:57 PM

Sorry but, no amount of mass shootings will ever convince me to give up our 2nd Amendment. Guns are NOT the root of the problem and no law or volume of laws will stop it. Congress fails to understand for past 30 years that criminals and crazed psychopaths on SSRI meds do NOT obey the laws. Population increase, social inequality and big Pharma.

Many of these shootings are too convenient to be coincidental. Too many similarities. A hidden dark sick agenda.

The so-called increase in mass shootings/gun violence is deceiving when folks are just reading msm headlines.
The manner the media reacts to every shooting is the equivalent of broadcasting every automobile fatality by demanding that all safe drivers give up their cars.

Countries with guns are bound to have tragedies, but countries without them are bound to have genocide.

History has shown us this repeatedly.

posted on Sep, 1 2019 @ 09:03 PM
a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

" to have observed an exponential increase in the frequency of mass shooting events with increasing casualties."

In your Observations , have you Ever looked into the Possible Causes of such Mass Shootings ? In How Many of those Instances have the Perpetrators been Under the Influence of Psychiatric Medications ? You would be Surprised at the Statistics , and Mad too .

posted on Sep, 3 2019 @ 11:25 AM
Why So Many Violent Crimes Now? Awake!—2003

Why Do They Do It?

There is no one factor that explains all the varied acts of senseless violence.
Some claim that violence is inherent in people. Others argue that senseless crimes cannot be explained as an unavoidable part of human nature.​—See the box “Doomed to Violence?”

Many experts believe that there are a host of factors and circumstances that are catalysts inclining people to commit irrational, violent acts. ... Let us look at several possibilities that experts have mentioned.

Breakdown of Family Life


Hate Groups and Cults


The Mass Media and Violence




Easy Access to Destructive Weapons


People’s Inability to Cope



Some argue that the propensity for violence or killing has always been inborn in humans. Supporters of evolution maintain that we come from wild animals and have simply inherited their violent characteristics. Such theories would leave us doomed to an endless cycle of violence from which there is no hope of escape.

However, there is much evidence to the contrary. The theories mentioned above do not explain why in different cultures there are wide variations in frequency and types of violence. They do not indicate why in some cultures responding with violence seems to be the norm, whereas other societies report very little violence, with murder almost nil. Psychoanalyst Erich Fromm exposed cracks in the theory that we inherit aggression from primates by pointing out that although some of them are violent as a result of physical needs or for self-protection, humans are the only ones who have been known to kill for the sheer thrill of killing.

In their book The Will to Kill​—Making Sense of Senseless Murder, Professors James Alan Fox and Jack Levin state: “Some individuals are more prone to violence than others, yet free will still exists. The will to kill, though governed by numerous internal and external forces, still includes choice and human decision making, and thus accountability and culpability.”

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2   >>

log in