There have been at least 50 school shootings in the United States so far this year, as of September 19. Thirteen were on college campuses, and 37 were on K-12 school grounds. The incidents left 24 people dead and at least 66 other victims injured, according to CNN’s analysis of events reported by the Gun Violence Archive, Education Week and Everytown for Gun Safety.
https://www.cnn.com/us/school-shootings-fast-facts-dg/index.html
Wait until they hear about the dozens of schools bombed in palestine as part of usa sponsored genocide.
Violence is deeply instilled and normalized in the history, culture and especially the state of our genocidal society.
Using the GVA as a source, is like expecting trump not to lie.
https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2018/08/27/640323347/the-school-shootings-that-werent
Thank you for fighting the good fight
I don’t see the gva anywhere in that article and the numbers in the CNN article are pretty close to the numbers NPR was able to verify
It’s literally in the first paragraph:
There have been at least 50 school shootings in the United States so far this year, as of September 19. Thirteen were on college campuses, and 37 were on K-12 school grounds. The incidents left 24 people dead and at least 66 other victims injured, according to CNN’s analysis of events reported by the Gun Violence Archive, Education Week and Everytown for Gun Safety.
And if you read the article from NPR and look at the data from GVA, you will see a pattern of school shootings that aren’t school shootings, but are counted as such because they happened near a school or some other reason.
An example is a pellet gun being used to shoot out the window on a school bus on the weekend…do you think that should be counted as a school shooting? I hope you don’t.
Frankly, it doesn’t matter what is and what is not counted as a school shooting. If one shooting happens, and one child is murdered-
It’s one too fucking many.
More kids die getting to school, more die from drowning, more die from preventable diseases…the only reason one is to many for you in this instance is because you hate the idea of an armed populous. It’s not about the deaths, it’s about how they die.
More kids die getting to school, more die from drowning, more die from preventable diseases.
This is a bad take. We can work to reduce the gun-clutching while also working on water safety, road safety and vaccines – which we did.
It’s not effective to just start naming ways people die to somehow address how a countable number die in a preventable, horrific way, via an implement whose entire sole purpose is killing.
Naming other hazards that are being addressed seems a little “whataboutist” to my eyes, and I’m sorry if that’s not your intent and you were just enjoying listing hazards.
See my other comment to soup. The issue with the data at hand is that bad/incorrect data drives bad/horrible policies. You don’t see 900+ kids a drowning, having legislation brought forward for only pools that hold 500 gallons or at 3’ deep or less. Why? Because that’s not going to actually help. So why is it that the “common sense” antigun groups want legislation that’s the equivalent to banning all pools over 500 gallons? Because the data they have and they are fed is junk data.
So… wait. You’re…… defending school shootings? If not then maybe back the fuck off. I’m simply saying ONE school shooting is too fucking many.
If you disagree with this. You have a SERIOUS problem.
If you got from what I wrote that I was defending school shootings, you’re brain dead. No where in my comment have I defended it. I have pointed out multiple times that bad data leads to terrible policies/laws.
You’re doing the same shit the anti-abortion nuts do. Make stats fit your narrative. It’s why another AWB won’t do shit. It’s why UBCs won’t do shit. It’s why waiting periods won’t do shit. Because all of those things and all of this “common sense” gun legislation isn’t common sense, it’s idiotic, because it’s built on junk data.
I’m not doing ANY shit. I’m asking you to define your position more clearly. And what I’m saying is that while you two had your little slap fight, neither of you stopped for a moment to consider that you’re talking about burdens of children’s lives here.
My point?
If we only had ONE SCHOOL SHOOTING PER YEAR WITH ONE FATALITY PER YEAR ITS ONE SHOOTING AND ONE FATALITY TOO MANY.
but you go ahead and have your little squabble over what counts as a school shooting and what doesn’t. Because there will always be parents who are having to bury their children, right?
Do me a favor by doing them a kindness and have it resolved as soon as possible so they can rest at ease knowing there’s some random guy on the internet vetting the bad ones from the good ones so that the can be confident in knowing that their child did in fact- die in a proper and official school shooting.
So would you support banning schools?
It might save a child’s life.
What an ignorant take on the subject. I love when people prove they’re not paying attention. It saves me a LOT of time.
Just block the troll and move on. :)
What source should be used?
And was there more than one school shooting this year? Because that’s one more than almost every other Western country.
I’m not sure why you’re trying to downplay this problem.
Edit: Don’t bother reading below for a source. They don’t give one. They’re just here to troll.
https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/school-shootings?page=1
Have a go through there. You’re literally putting republican logic to your statement…“who cares if it’s false, as long as there is a bit of truth somewhere”…
Facts matter when discussing these topics, because they are what’s used to create/shape laws. If laws are built upon lies, like the patriot act, then the law was not created with the right goals in mind.
That link shows “school incidents”, not “school shootings”:
They’re all in one link. They don’t have a distinction. That’s why the data is shit
I agree it should be separated, but that doesn’t make it bad data. Unless you don’t know how to read tables, but that’s more of an individual problem than an issue with the information provided.
deleted by creator
You’re literally putting republican logic to your statement…“who cares if it’s false, as long as there is a bit of truth somewhere”…
That is a disgusting lie. I said nothing of the sort.
I’m literally doing the opposite of that since I asked you what source should be used.
Then I asked you if there was more than one.
I didn’t say anything even remotely like, “who cares if it’s false, as long as there is a bit of truth somewhere.”
You should be ashamed of yourself with trolling this shitty.
I should have realized you’d lie about what I said in direct response to the thing I said yet again since this is the third or fourth time you’ve done it.
Oh, and now it’s time for you to tell the lie that I want to ban guns. You’ve done that one before.
That is a disgusting lie. I said nothing of the sort.
You did. You’re downplaying the fact that the GVA uses junk data to drive an agenda.
I’m literally doing the opposite of that since I asked you what source should be used.
By using the next line of:
Then I asked you if there was more than one.
Which implies that. Who cares as if there is more than one it’s the same problem. Which is not the case at all, if we had thousands of kids being killed constantly in school, that’s a totally different issue than if we had one outlier shooting every year.
I didn’t say anything even remotely like, “who cares if it’s false, as long as there is a bit of truth somewhere.”
You pretty much did. You are equally giving weight to false numbers.
You should be ashamed of yourself with trolling this shitty.
You clearly don’t understand trolling, at this point you should know I’m not a troll.
I should have realized you’d lie about what I said in direct response to the thing I said yet again since this is the third or fourth time you’ve done it.
Sure thing, totally… you’re all about the truth and you really are for legislation that’ll actually fix the problem, not emotionally driven legislation, because even 1 school shooting is the same as 50…
Oh, and now it’s time for you to tell the lie that I want to ban guns. You’ve done that one before.
The end goal is always, a ban from the anti2a crowd. Making something so damn impossible to obtain, is a defacto ban. Just remember that those who put the rules in place, will make sure minorities, LGBTQ+, and women will be the main ones unable to obtain firearms.
Stopped reading at your first line, which was another lie. I asked you which source should be used. That’s all I did. I just asked a fucking question. You didn’t even answer it.
This conversation is over. You are just a troll.
Sorry bud, I do usually agree with you, but I think you might be in the wrong on this one. Why don’t you find the NPR article convincing that maybe these numbersaremight be inflated (edit: didn’t mean to use a declarative statement there)? Are you contending that NPR is misrepresenting the numbers and/or trying to push an agenda? They don’t really have a track record of either as far as I’m aware.edit 2: leaving this because it’s still true:
Looking at the actual scope of an issue isn’t downplaying it. Nor is checking if the reporting is accurate. And accurate reporting (of data, I mean, as opposed to news) is extremely important when passing laws, so it is something to care about.
FFS! I never said the numbers weren’t inflated! I asked for a better source! They refused to give one.
edit: clarified my misunderstanding
If you want a better source, that’s fine; I don’t have one, I’m not that other guy and I’m not trying to prove anything myself. I just want to know what’s wrong with NPR as a source, or what’s wrong with that particular article.I think you might be taking issue with the fact thatthis guy wants to say the Gun Violence Archive counts non-shooting incidents as shootings? He’s wrong, they don’t; that GVA link points to “school incidents”, where even finding a gun is counted. CNN’s methodology for counting seems reasonable.Nothing’s wrong with it. If that’s a good source, it’s a good source. They said the GVA source was a bad one, so I asked for a better one and got a bunch of lies about myself in return from them.
They’ve already been trounced for pulling up a 6 year old article using 8 year old data.
Then they doggedly refused to do the math for recent years that there’s literally a school shooting every week in the US.
And that doesn’t even touch mass shootings in general.
The really sad part is they do eventually make a point that a lot of the problem is mental health and America’s obsession with gun violence. But simply refusing to even admit to the actual frequency of the shootings or that the availability of guns is part of the issue means they’ll continue to be ignored.
A bit like the green card lottery, school shootings are a lottery for “post natal abortions”©
Fun part: every parent gets to play.
I know the answer to all this. we just need more fetuses with guns.
Or only allow abortions to be post-natal and via firearm?
Damn. That was too dark. I’m gonna go hug my dog now.
The all-new Glock Ba-B-Gonne! When you have a baby you want gone, Ba-B-Gonne!
Apply directly to the baby. Apply directly to the baby.
Through the baby*
Dammit, that’s better.
Pls post a pic of your dog.
That is one happy dog!
OH MY GOD! I just realised that you’re that banana hating monster! And to think that I upvoted you … 🤢🤮 You disgust me!
I stand by my banana-hatred despite the fact that I spent EIGHT DOLLARS on a food truck banana split for my daughter at a festival today. And she didn’t even eat half of it.
Wait, did you just say that that’s a https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FLGA8F3Ahvs
Fucking op delivered, God damn.
Awwww, what a cutie. 🥺 13/10
Let me make two notes:
A “school shooting” is any time a gun goes off on any school grounds. You can go to the elementary soccer field and put one in the ground at midnight, “school shooting”. Mass shootings are not what you picture in your mind when that word comes up.
The Gun Violence Archive and Everytown for Gun Safety are two of the most biased sources related to guns.
hahaha this guy’s like “if you just shoot and injure 4 people but can’t definitively kill them, is that even a shooting?”
good note on the school thing though. I’m totally going to a parent who lost their child playing soccer in school and telling them “well they weren’t inside the classroom; you didn’t expect them to be safe anywhere in school, didya?”
deleted by creator
that honestly seems like on the low side
The front side is a little lower, but still high enough to kill children.
they don’t care about kids. they don’t care about life. they care about controlling women. I first heard George Carlin say “pro-life is just anti-woman” when i was a kid, and didn’t really understand very well. but now it’s so clear.
I like how America’s culture comes up to putting angry messages on cars.
We’re forced to have cars because we’ve been denied effective public transportation, even in metropolitan areas.
Roads lead to road rage
Road rage leads to other kinds of rage
Anybody else misread that exclamation point as excited at first? A little horrifying, NGL.
“If we push really hard, we can meet our Q4 quota and end the year strong!”
Maybe parents should raise their kids with dignity and respect and a dose of responsibility, maybe we can kill 2 birds with one stone.
What if I want to actively participate?
Go for kindergarten, surely they’re easier targets.
Idk i think a gaggle of abortioners at a clinic would be even easier targets. Plus most of them are gonna be worth 2 points.
True. You could hit a killtacular in no time.
That’s the fun stuff missing from modern GTAs
It was a Halo streak. For killing five ops in four seconds.
Miss that unreal tournament kill streaking goodness. GODLIKE
They’re going to scapegoat people with mental illness and start taking their rights away more and more. Then they’ll start using that to target people they don’t like. Take certain prescriptions? Now you’re on the “dangerous person’s list” now “dangerous people” can’t hold certain jobs or public office. Been put on a “mental health” hold by the police ever? Same thing. Then the police can just use their “discretion” to put anyone they don’t like on a mental health hold. LGBT? That means you’re “mentally unhealthy” don’t believe in God? Believe it or not “mental health problems” not Republican? Only a psycho believes in dirty socialism. Brown skin? (Insert racist stuff about inferior brain power) Now, of course we can’t allow the “mentally unhealthy people” to procreate! So we’ll have to sterilize them. Of course they can’t be trusted, so we’ll need to supervise them at all times! Work is good for mental health so we can give them “jobs” at the “mental health” camps!
Yeah, this is a slippery slope. Imagine you have a neighbor you don’t get along with. They could just report you for “mentally unstable behavior” and then you are added to a watch list! Then, of course, this list would be shared across government agencies, because “for safety”. This would affect every decision you make for the rest of your life! It’s almost like you would have a “red flag” attached to your name for the rest of your life!
All because someone just didn’t like you.
Judging by your comment, we are in agreement that “red flag laws” are NOT a good idea!
Gun stores are the final decider on who is and isn’t buying guns. There should be more training for them, but also more liability attached as well. They know the people who are making straw purchases and they ignore it because they want sales.
I know quite a few local FFLs and not a single one of them would risk their license and livelihood by knowingly selling to straw purchasers.
I fucking wish we could share medical details between government agencies, but we can’t even competently share driver’s license info.
I agree, Democrats are not going to do this in your country.
They are, however, going to continue arming fascist states and supporting with money and logistics their fascist wars.
And the fact that Republicans would be more eager to do that doesn’t mean a lot. Republicans look like useless nonsense evil, a bit like Russia’s regime, and Democrats look like effective intelligent evil - some kind of Empire in old Star Wars.
I really hope Democrats will not be like that after the election, the issue is - currently USA still has a Democratic administration. That administration didn’t even pretend it’s going to check Israel, Turkey and Azerbaijan.
Just my PoV as someone who does not live in the USA and is not going to move there in near perspective.
I get what you’re trying to say but you’re quite far on a Fantasy path there. Yeah, the US has some fucked up rules and yeah, there are fucked up people wanting fucked up control over others, but you’re talking Nazi Germany here
The police have access to warrantless tracking information on you through private companies in the form of license plate readers. Is a slow boil, but we’ll get there soon enough.
Going to? The US has been doing that since the day it gained its independence.
That doesn’t tell me anything. 50 ever? Per decade? Year? Month? Day? It’s the US, all of those are possible and valid answers
What about the OP is ambiguous that they mean 50 since the start of this year?
They possibly just didn’t read past the title lol
It can’t be fifty ever. The US is too exceptional for that. Clearly we have a higher lifetime total.
I’m sure we could name 50 high-profile ones. Jonesboro, Columbine, Sandy Hook, Uvalde, Parkland…the list goes on.
This year alone, don’t play stupid
It’s not meant to sound stupid, it was literally my first thought at reading the title. Any other country I would have taken it as “50 ever” but this being the US, is it 50 for the whole year? That sounds too low. 50 this month? What would be a bituch, I guess.
That was the point I was trying to make, that the US is at a point in history that such a statement needs more information, and that is bizarre to me.
I understand yours point, sorry for being harsh. Look here: https://abcnews.go.com/US/gun-violence-claimed-lives-5000-people-2024/story?id=107262776
I believe the kids say “based”.
I think those kids are drinking age now
What does that mean? Old person here.
The opposite of cringe, some times the opposite of biased.
But we don’t know what it means. And that’s okay.
