Technically true, but extraordinarily misleading.

Most people think of ‘mass shootings’ as indiscriminate public events like Parkland or Las Vegas.

However the stats cover any event in which where 4 or more people died.

The vast majority of these are drug deals gone wrong, gang violence, and other forms of organized crime.

Almost none of what most people think of as mass shootings involve handguns.

Most people do not think of a drug deal done wrong, which is very likely to involve handguns, as a mass shooting.

So when used this way, the statistics are contributing to the spread of misleading bullshit.

I think it's one of those "schrodinger's stats" where if you're using it to convince someone that america has an alarming number of mass shootings it is conveniently valid, but if you're using it to convince someone that rifles may not be the culprit it is conveniently invalid.

We should be able to agree here, at least, that commonly cited counts of Parkland-style mass shootings are overstated, and that the prevalence of tactical rifles in those kinds of mass shootings are not.

Of the 28 mass shootings of 10 or more victims in the last 50 years, 14 of them list the use of a semi automatic rifle or carbine, so while I agree that changes the numbers a bit, I don't think 50% is as conclusive as you're letting on.

This is from wikipedia, so take it with a grain of salt if you'd like.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shootings_in_the_United...

The percentage goes up if you select more recent shootings (say, since 2000, inconveniently leaving Columbine behind), which makes sense, because semi-automatic rifles have become more prevalent since then. And 20 years is still a plenty long time ago.

What you just explained is that people are mislead from the start and nobody should show them real data.

> nobody should show them real data.

I’m not sure what you mean by this.

The guy posted some statistics on handguns and you asked him not to mislead people. The facts are very clear that shooting 4 dudes in your apartment is considered a mass shooting. Such is the law in this case. People who think mass shootings are sensational breaking-news events like a mad teenager shooting at innocent people, have been led to believe so. It is simply not the case, I'm afraid.

Shooting 4 dudes in your apartment is considered a mass shooting by almost nobody.

You are welcome to argue for the authority of those who have classified it this way.

I’d love it if more people realized that what they are being told are ‘mass shootings’ are not what they have been led to believe.

>I’d love it if more people realized that what they are being told are ‘mass shootings’ are not what they have been led to believe.

That's what OP's sources are showing, lol. Hey I don't like how the law differs from any technical dictionary, but such is life.

That would be more a mic drop if I hadn't also provided reasoning for heightened concern about tactical rifles, which your stat doesn't rebut.