Mass shootings since 1/1/2009

[chipbennett]

Trio accused in random killings of 3 people in Lehigh Valley due in court | lehighvalleylive.com
So this guy was first just a murderer when he killed his cousin in May.

Then a serial spree killer when he killed 3 random people and shot up another in June in NJ.

Then a serial spree killer double bonus when he killed 3 people and shot at 2 others in July in PA.

Got it.

No. He is simply a serial killer.

 

[T.Lex]

But don't the 2 separate instances of killing 3 people and shooting at others count as sprees?

 

[chipbennett]

But don't the 2 separate instances of killing 3 people and shooting at others count as sprees?

Call it a "killing spree" if you want. But that is a term that has no resemblance to the term "spree killing" (or "spree shooting").

To wit, he killed 3 people in three distinct events, over a period of 21 hours, and over a distance of several miles (and shot a fourth, who survived):

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/10/n...h-killing-7-in-nearly-2-month-spree.html?_r=0

The most devastating chapter began around 2:30 a.m. on June 25, the authorities said, when residents of Elizabeth reported hearing gunfire and seeing a body lying at the intersection of New Point Road and Seventh Street, the authorities said. The police there found Dennis Vega, 28, who had been shot several times. He was later pronounced dead.


Nineteen hours later, around 9:50 p.m., witnesses called the police, again describing gunfire and a body in the middle of the street only six blocks away, the authorities said. Jamil Payne, 29, had been shot multiple times and killed.


Investigators were still inspecting that scene when, about an hour later, the police received reports of shots fired on Clark Place, less than a mile away. Kelvin Nelson, 32, was found dead at the scene from multiple gunshot wounds.


The succession of shootings accelerated. Ten minutes after the reports of Mr. Nelson’s killing came in, about two miles to the west, Richard Marte, 24, was found with several severe gunshot wounds but still alive. The authorities say he is expected to survive.

The later events, in July, happened more closely together, but still consisted of multiple events:

The authorities said that around 3 a.m. on Sunday in Easton, Mr. West shot and killed Kory Ketrow, 22. An hour later, the driver of a Honda, Francine E. Ramos, 32, was found dead with multiple gunshot wounds in Allentown, the Lehigh County district attorney’s office said. Trevor Davante Gray, 21, was also shot by Mr. West, the authorities said, and died as he was treated by paramedics.

If you want to argue that the second killing in July was a spree killing, you might be able to make that argument. Ramos and Gray were shot at the same location and at the same time. But to say that 7 murders over a seven-week period were a shooting spree, rather than a serial killing, simply because 2 of the 7 were shot at the same time? That's a stretch.

The FBI seems to agree with me (with the caveat that the line between "spree killer" and "serial killer" is not necessarily a completely bright one):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spree_killer

According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the general definition of spree killer is a person (or more than one person) who commits two or more murders without a cooling-off period; the lack of a cooling-off period marking the difference between a spree killer and a serial killer.

 

[LockStocksAndBarrel]

5 dead, 9 injured.

Mass public shooting in Saudi Arabia leaves five dead, 9 injured at a Shia meeting hall - Crime Prevention Research CenterCrime Prevention Research Center

 

[T.Lex]

@chipbennett
Well, I absolutely concede the guy is a serial killer.

I still think the first multiple-victim event would count as a spree shooting. There does not appear to be a shot clock for these kinds of things.

Any of these spree shootings that unfold over hours or in multiple locations could be parsed so thinly as to be separate "incidents." In Columbine, for instance, would each classroom be a different location? For that matter, the Chattanooga shootings were in 2 locations, separated by time and distance.

@LSAB
Wrong thread?

 

[chipbennett]

@chipbennett
Well, I absolutely concede the guy is a serial killer.

I still think the first multiple-victim event would count as a spree shooting. There does not appear to be a shot clock for these kinds of things.

Any of these spree shootings that unfold over hours or in multiple locations could be parsed so thinly as to be separate "incidents." In Columbine, for instance, would each classroom be a different location?

While the line isn't exactly "bright", I think that someone sincerely attempting to make such an assertion would be engaging in reductio ad absurdum.

For that matter, the Chattanooga shootings were in 2 locations, separated by time and distance.

I think the determination can be case-by-case. One person's "cooling down" period may not be another's.

I'd like to bring this back around to your OP, though: all these cases are "spree" killings or "serial" killings. They are not public, mass shootings in the context intended when a John Lott makes the claim about public, mass shootings taking place in gun-free zones.

 

[LockStocksAndBarrel]

I looked at the OP and didn't see where they had to be in the US...

 

[T.Lex]

I'd like to bring this back around to your OP, though: all these cases are "spree" killings or "serial" killings. They are not public, mass shootings in the context intended when a John Lott makes the claim about public, mass shootings taking place in gun-free zones.

Well, I am not John Lott. I never claimed to adopt his definition. In fact, I explicitly reject it as too narrow. (Might edit the OP to say that.)

In other news, I do not anticipate submitting this thread for peer review.

And yet, I do think "Mass Shootings" is open to a common sense definition, even if it departs from Lott's.

 

[chipbennett]

Well, I am not John Lott. I never claimed to adopt his definition. In fact, I explicitly reject it as too narrow. (Might edit the OP to say that.)

In other news, I do not anticipate submitting this thread for peer review.

And yet, I do think "Mass Shootings" is open to a common sense definition, even if it departs from Lott's.

Oh, fair enough. Though:

1. If you're going to attempt to refute assertions such as Lott's, you can only do so when working from the same definitions.

2. If the intent is to identify types of threat/evil that innocent/law-abiding people must face and ways to mitigate/deal with them, it really isn't helpful to lump together things that are so disparate in motivation, implementation, and outcome. There are myriad forms of evil in the world. Not all can be handled the same way.

Ultimately, it is the latter that is my concern. We can split hairs about definitions all day long, but if the goal is to reduce/eliminate public, mass shootings, then we need to understand public, mass shootings. Understanding other types of shootings isn't particularly helpful.

A particular type of perpetrator, with a particular set of motivations and a particular set of criteria for determining who/where/how to attack, carries out an attack such as Columbine, Aurora, Virginia Tech, Umpqua, Charleston, etc. Lack of resistance by the intended victims is high on the list of determining criteria, which is why it is critical to understand that the establishment of "gun free zones" enables and encourages this particular type of attack (and attacker).

 

[T.Lex]

Re-ordered

Ultimately, it is the latter that is my concern. We can split hairs about definitions all day long, but if the goal is to reduce/eliminate public, mass shootings, then we need to understand public, mass shootings. Understanding other types of shootings isn't particularly helpful.

I agree about the need to understand "public, mass" shootings. But, where I think we will disagree is in how that is actually defined.

Because....

2. If the intent is to identify types of threat/evil that innocent/law-abiding people must face and ways to mitigate/deal with them, it really isn't helpful to lump together things that are so disparate in motivation, implementation, and outcome. There are myriad forms of evil in the world. Not all can be handled the same way.

Let's revisit the Gabbie Giffords shooting.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Tucson_shooting

I think we can agree it was "public." I think we might even agree it was "mass" as 6 people were killed and 13 shot, but survived.

Where (I think) we disagree is that Lott would put this into a totally separate category - assassination attempt.

As a gun-carrier, at a certain level, I don't care if shooter was trying to kill a specific person on a list. What I care about is that I'm with my family walking out of Walmart when shooter starts his shooting. Even more in that case, where the people killed weren't even the target!

As a gun-rights advocate, I care whether it was a GFZ or not. Not so I can artificially inflate the ratio of GFZ to non-GFZ shootings, but so we can use real world information to discuss these issues.

The workplace shootings should also count. Especially to provide examples of GFZ violence compared to "good guy with a gun" examples.

 

[T.Lex]

Upon further reflection, I will concede one category to you: the multiple location "domestic" shootings that happen in private residences. In those situations, it isn't really "public." Those private individuals made the decision whether to allow firearms in the home or not.

At some point, I may go back through and cull those out.

ETA:
Wait. WTF? I can't edit the OP now?

 

[chipbennett]

Re-ordered


I agree about the need to understand "public, mass" shootings. But, where I think we will disagree is in how that is actually defined.

Because....


Let's revisit the Gabbie Giffords shooting.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Tucson_shooting

I think we can agree it was "public." I think we might even agree it was "mass" as 6 people were killed and 13 shot, but survived.

Where (I think) we disagree is that Lott would put this into a totally separate category - assassination attempt.

I think Lott includes the Giffords shooting as one of the 2 in his "all but 2" assertion? I'm the one who has stated that I consider an assassination attempt as something different.

As a gun-carrier, at a certain level, I don't care if shooter was trying to kill a specific person on a list. What I care about is that I'm with my family walking out of Walmart when shooter starts his shooting. Even more in that case, where the people killed weren't even the target!

I agree. However, I want to understand and quantify/define potential risks as accurately as possible, especially where my family is involved.

As a gun-rights advocate, I care whether it was a GFZ or not. Not so I can artificially inflate the ratio of GFZ to non-GFZ shootings, but so we can use real world information to discuss these issues.

To me, it's not about inflating numbers. I believe that the available facts demonstrate that establishing "gun free zones", in which only the law-abiding disarm themselves, enable and encourage a particular type of attacker - and that eliminating the "gun free zone" designation would discourage that particular type of attacker.