DOJ releases 50 years of mass shooting data.

[AndyS]

Public Mass Shootings: Database Amasses Details of a Half Century of U.S. Mass Shootings with Firearms, Generating Psychosocial Histories
A troubled past and leaked plans are common to those who take part in mass shootings. Most use handguns, NIJ-supported research shows.

https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/public-mass-shootings-database-amasses-details-half-century-us-mass-shootings

Like most DOJ reports it's kinda dry reading but there are some highlights:

Persons who committed public mass shootings in the U.S. over the last half century were commonly troubled by personal trauma before their shooting incidents, nearly always in a state of crisis at the time, and, in most cases, engaged in leaking their plans before opening fire. Most were insiders of a targeted institution, such as an employee or student. Except for young school shooters who stole the guns from family members, most used legally obtained handguns in those shootings.

77% of those who engaged in mass shootings purchased at least some of their guns legally, while illegal purchases were made by 13% of the perpetrators.

The findings support safe storage of guns. Yet, the researchers noted that there are no federal laws requiring safe storage of guns, and no federal standards for firearm locks. The data also support “red flag” laws permitting law enforcement or family members to petition a state court to order temporary removal of a firearm from a person who presents a danger.

What surprises me is that about half of the shooters broadcast their intentions and nobody did anything about it! Of course that's made more difficult by the fact that only 19 states (and DC) have red flag laws and one state, Oklahoma, has an Anti Red Flag law. In the states that have red flag laws police and courts are often un-informed of their existence or are unwilling to enforce them. How about that, more than half the states have no recourse even if someone knows of a pending mass shooting and the states that do often treat warnings with 'meh'.

It doesn't have to be this way. GVPedia.org researched political donations by state by pro&anti regulation groups. In states where anti violence spending exceeded gun rights spending there was a 44% success in passing anti violence laws resulting in about a 5% decrease in gun deaths. It can be done. Now is a critical time to give. The gun industry has had 50 years to buy politicians and we have just passed the 10 year mark. Momentum is building and every $5 counts.

Do something: resources

[CaliforniaPeggy]

1. Thank you for this excellent, comprehensive post. Well worth the moment it takes to read. n/t

[Sancho]

2. ...great report...

People Control, Not Gun Control

This is my generic response to gun threads where people are shot and killed by the dumb or criminal possession of guns. For the record, I grew up in the South and on military bases. I was taught about firearms as a child, and I grew up hunting, was a member of the NRA, and I still own guns. In the 70’s, I dropped out of the NRA because they become more radical and less interested in safety and training. Some personal experiences where people I know were involved in shootings caused me to realize that anyone could obtain and posses a gun no matter how illogical it was for them to have a gun. Also, easy access to more powerful guns, guns in the hands of children, and guns that weren’t secured are out of control in our society. As such, here’s what I now think ought to be the requirements to possess a gun. I’m not debating the legal language, I just think it’s the reasonable way to stop the shootings. Notice, none of this restricts the type of guns sold. This is aimed at the people who shoot others, because it’s clear that they should never have had a gun.

1.) Anyone in possession of a gun (whether they own it or not) should have a regularly renewed license. If you want to call it a permit, certificate, or something else that's fine.
2.) To get a license, you should have a background check, and be examined by a professional for emotional and mental stability appropriate for gun possession. It might be appropriate to require that examination to be accompanied by references from family, friends, employers, etc. This check is not to subject you to a mental health diagnosis, just check on your superficial and apparent gun-worthyness.
3.) To get the license, you should be required to take a safety course and pass a test appropriate to the type of gun you want to use.
4.) To get a license, you should be over 21. Under 21, you could only use a gun under direct supervision of a licensed person and after obtaining a learner’s license. Your license might be restricted if you have children or criminals or other unsafe people living in your home. (If you want to argue 18 or 25 or some other age, fine. 21 makes sense to me.)
5.) If you possess a gun, you would have to carry a liability insurance policy specifically for gun ownership - and likely you would have to provide proof of appropriate storage, security, and whatever statistical reasons that emerge that would drive the costs and ability to get insurance.
6.) You could not purchase a gun or ammunition without a license, and purchases would have a waiting period.
7.) If you possess a gun without a license, you go to jail, the gun is impo

unded, and a judge will have to let you go (just like a DUI).
8.) No one should carry an unsecured gun (except in a locked case, unloaded) when outside of home. Guns should be secure when transporting to a shooting event without demonstrating a special need. Their license should indicate training and special carry circumstances beyond recreational shooting (security guard, etc.). If you are carrying your gun while under the influence of drugs or alcohol, you lose your gun and license.
9.) If you buy, sell, give away, or inherit a gun, your license information should be recorded.
10.) If you accidentally discharge your gun, commit a crime, get referred by a mental health professional, are served a restraining order, etc., you should lose your license and guns until reinstated by a serious relicensing process.

Most of you know that a license is no big deal. Besides a driver’s license you need a license to fish, operate a boat, or many other activities. I realize these differ by state, but that is not a reason to let anyone without a bit of sense pack a semiautomatic weapon in public, on the roads, and in schools. I think we need to make it much harder for some people to have guns.

[AndyS]

3. Sancho, You realize that you just described how the military deals with guns, right?

They seem to know a lot about guns. I would think any law abiding citizen, particularly if recognizing the militia clause in the 2nd, would find this acceptable . . .

[erronis]

5. Key phrase "law abiding citizen". They've chosen to be on the other side of the law.

And any controls on possession of guns and ammunition have been successively diluted by every repuglicon administration/legislature.

[Sancho]

8. It bothers me that lots of guns were legally purchased - even by clearly dangerous people.

There obviously should be barriers between unsafe people and easy access to guns.

[Sancho]

6. Yep....the military rules make sense...

[tikka]

10. yes

[bucolic_frolic]

4. Depressing. Did they ID by gender?

I always thought the wives, moms, girlfriends of potential shooters would and did calm more than a few down. But nobody did anything about the majority of them.

[AndyS]

7. Yes, there is a wealth of information in the report.

Gender, age, race and other measurable criteria.

[Orrex]

9. The gun cult is strong, and LaPierre's eager minions are everywhere.

Even among us.

[AndyS]

11. Yeah, I know 'cause I'm a favorite target . . . nt

[Aussie105]

12. It's a pretty clear message

to get guns out of the hands of non military people and non law enforcement people.

The whole licensed-to-carry-a-gun thing needs to go, no hyped up policeman is going to ask if you have a license for that handgun once the barrel swings his way.

In any other country, a civilian with a gun is instantly marked as a bad man with gun, and responded to appropriately.

But is America listening and prepared to do something?

Simply passing laws to stop the sales of guns and ammunition, laws to stop local manufacture and importation, would do it.

Once you get some kid with a military weapon shooting and killing people in the street and getting away with the self defense logic, then gets hailed as some second amendment hero, you have gone one step too far as a country.

America, a first world country? Expensive health care, shoddy education system, dead people bleeding in the streets, close to a million deaths from COVID, the highest in the world - how do you reconcile those facts?

The rest of the world can't.

Yeah DOJ, thanks for describing the problem. Nothing new is revealed in your data collection.
Now come up with a solution!
Or is that one step too far?

[liberalla]

13. Bookmarking