Mass Shootings, a Perspective

Blog Post - Mass Shootings, a Perspective

UPDATE: New mortality numbers for 2014 were released (the government is slow in everything it does). Here are the updated statistics:

Average from 2009 to 2014:

Deaths: 2,531,291
Murders: 14,711

Mass murders (4+ murders) account for 0.2% of all murders, and 0.001% of all deaths. All this talk about how horrible the problem is and how America is plagued with mass murders ignores the fact that we're talking about about less than 30 deaths a year. More people die from falling out of trees.

Tags: Gun Rights / Crime

Comment list

  • Taylor Nelson
    14-Jun-2016 09:54 PM

    Just curious, could you post a link to where you got this data? Thanks!

  • Will Ricciardella
    14-Jun-2016 11:53 PM

    The sources are hot-linked in text and are blue in color. If the links are not working from your phone, click on them in landscape view, that should work.

  • Kent
    15-Jun-2016 01:46 AM

    How about a little more perspective from the year 2014- "Chicago Police reported 390 murders through Dec. 20, while the Cook County medical examiner’s office reported 410 homicides, including 16 fatal police shootings, during the same period. There have been at least 10 additional homicides and one fatal police shooting since then."

  • casom
    15-Jun-2016 10:37 AM

    The sources you provided have a lot of errors/omissions and stuff purposely put there to skew the data. I'll just say that according to the larger graphs, only 199 people were killed in mass public shootings between 2009 and 2015. Just a quick search through google shows this ( The Guardian article with the source to the actual news for every mass shooting (here: clearly shows that the death toll from mass shootings alone since 2013 is 1135 people at least. Just to put it in perspective too so you can see how fake those graphs are: the number of mass shootings in 2015 alone (330) exceeded the number of people supposedly killed by mass shootings from 2009 to 2015 according to the graph (199). If a mass shooting is a shooting of at least 4 people and there were at least 1320 people shot in mass shootings in 2015 alone, I'd say its a pretty long shot that less than 10% died. And we're talking about 2015 only. What about 2014? If only 10% of the people died in all the mass shootings of 2014, there would've been at least 111 people killed in 2014 alone. 111 + 132 = 243 people killed in mass shootings in just those two years at least. The graph says 199 in 6 years (lol). Unbiased America? Doesn't seem so.

  • Dave
    15-Jun-2016 07:20 PM

    Casom, that's because mass shootings have been redefined for ideological reasons by a small group of people. I'm not kidding...

    Google "The recent and troubling redefinition of mass shooting" (first hit) for an detailed explanation of what this is the case.

  • Miek Thompson
    15-Jun-2016 09:08 PM

    Curious what figures look like for recent datasets

  • Anthony DiSante
    15-Jun-2016 09:20 PM

    Nice chart, and an important point to make. But it would be even better if the green pie were roughly 1% the size of the blue pie, and then if you added a tiny red pie (again ~1% as big) to represent the mass murder deaths.

  • Wes
    16-Jun-2016 11:09 AM

    Even if mass shootings were an insignificant problem, it should be mentioned that 2/3 of all murders in the U.S. are committed with a firearm. That's about 10,000 people/year, and it doesn't count suicides and accidental shootings (e.g., children). This is in addition to several hundred thousand people who are robbed, raped, beaten etc. by someone with a gun each year. That's pretty significant.

  • Steve
    16-Jun-2016 05:42 PM

    I'd love to see a similar set of graphs that show just deaths by gunshot. First one would be all who died from gunshot wounds with the small slice where they were murdered. The second graph would show the small slice of all those who were murdered that happened in a "mass-shooting". The first graph will be overshadowed by suicide and the second by the daily murders in cities like Chicago, Detroit, East St Louis, etc.

  • James
    16-Jun-2016 06:43 PM

    Your argument concludes nothing, because this is your premise: an average person is statistically unlikely to die from a gun-related homicide in the U.S., a nation of 320 million people, where the rate of gun-related homicides is about 3.6 people per 100,000 (compared to 0.2 in other wealthy, developed nations). In order to have any semblance of a coherent and valid argument, you have to compare gun-related homicides in the U.S. per capita to other developed countries per capita. The U.S. gun-related homicide rate is 25 times higher than other developed countries, and the U.S. has the most firearms per capita in the world. It makes no difference whether you label gun-related homicides as mass shootings or not. Gun-related homicides in the U.S. is a problem which can only be remedied through gun safety reform legislation. Again, your argument is this: “Don’t worry, you’re unlikely to die from gun-related homicides, so there is no problem, just a bunch of people insisting we live in a ‘war zone.’” An incoherent, meaningless, emotional, and poorly-researched argument.

  • Kyle
    06-Aug-2016 11:48 AM

    Your chart is labelled wrong. You labeled it "Murdered in Mass Shootings" but it should actually read "Mass Murders". The difference is that there can be Mass shootings where fewer than 4 people die.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Captcha Image

Blog Search


Subscribe to our newsletter