Many regular readers of TAH probably are probably of the opinion that the media grossly exaggerates and\/or deliberately slants any story that can possibly reflect badly on legal gun ownership.\u00a0 Regular readers are also probably convinced that the media often \u201cgets it wrong\u201d on such stories.\u00a0 Well, here\u2019s yet another bit of support for those theses.<\/p>\n
If one listens to the mass media, one would think that US mass shootings are increasing, killing more people – indeed, that they have become a veritable “epidemic”.\u00a0 Listening to the media, you’d also think that mass shootings are eminently preventable by \u201ccommon sense\u201d gun control measures and more\/better mental health care.<\/p>\n
Bottom line:\u00a0 actual research – something that the media rarely if ever does – concerning the issue shows the media has it 100% wrong.\u00a0 Again.<\/p>\n
Two researchers, James Alan Fox and Monica J. DeLateur \u2013 both of Northeastern University, Boston, MA – recently studied US mass shootings on their own time and dime.\u00a0 They recently published their results in Homicide Studies<\/span>: XX(X) 1\u201321.\u00a0 A synopsis of the article may be found here<\/a>; the latest full version (PDF) may be found here<\/a>.<\/p>\n Here\u2019s the \u201cCliff Notes\u201d version of some of Fox and DeLateur\u2019s conclusions:<\/p>\n IMO, Fox and DeLateur missed two items worth stressing.\u00a0 First:\u00a0 a primary reason that none of those committing mass shootings between 2009 and Sep 2013 were prohibited from possessing firearms due to mental illness is the extreme difficulty in many jurisdictions in getting an obviously sick person involuntarily committed for psychiatric treatment.\u00a0 (We can thank our liberal \u201cbrethren\u201d for that, since laws they championed require courts to give greater deference to the rights of those who are mentally disturbed than the safety of society.)\u00a0 Indeed:\u00a0 as the Aurora incident shows, that difficulty extends to even getting a disturbed individual\u2019s mental health counselor to alert law enforcement of a potential problem.<\/p>\n Second:\u00a0 the US population increased dramatically between 1976 and 2011 \u2013 from 218.04 million to 311.59 million<\/a>, or by 42.9%.\u00a0 Since the number of mass shooting incidents has remained essentially constant since 1976 at an average of roughly 20 per year, that means the rate<\/span> of mass shootings has declined substantially.\u00a0 In 1976, it was 1 such incident for roughly every 10,900,000 US residents (20 incidents in a population of 218.04 million); in 2011, it was roughly 1 incident per 14,180,000 US residents (22 incidents in a population of 311.59 million).<\/p>\n Finally, the true \u201cmoney quote\u201d is at the end of the article:<\/p>\n Eliminating the risk of mass murder would involve extreme steps that we are unable or unwilling to take\u2014abolishing the Second Amendment, achieving full employment, restoring our sense of community, and rounding up anyone who looks or acts at all suspicious. \u00a0Mass murder just may be a price we must pay for living in a society where personal freedom is so highly valued<\/span>.\u00a0<\/em> (emphasis added)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n In plain language:\u00a0 the only potential “cure” would be to impose an all-powerful police state that enforces conformity throughout society and stifles all dissent or eccentricity.\u00a0 Um, well, thanks – but no thanks.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Author\u2019s Note:\u00a0 Hat tip to Paul Bedard at the Washington Examiner<\/span> for his article<\/a> that pointed me to the Fox and DeLateur study.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"\n