US saw highest number of mass killings on record in 2019, database reveals

[Prowler]

The US suffered more mass killings in 2019 than any year on record, according to researchers.

A database compiled by the Associated Press (AP), USA Today and Northeastern University recorded 41 incidents and a total of 211 deaths.

Mass killings are defined as four or more people being killed in the same incident, excluding the perpetrator.

Among the deadliest in 2019 were the killings of 12 people in Virginia Beach in May and 22 in El Paso in August.

Of the 41 cases in 2019, 33 involved firearms, researchers said. California had the highest number of mass killings per state, with eight.

The database has been tracking mass killings in the US since 2006, but research going back to the 1970s did not not reveal a year with more mass killings, AP reported. The year with the second-highest number of mass killings was 2006, with 38.

Though 2019 had the highest number of incidents, the death toll of 211 was eclipsed by the 224 people who died in mass killings 2017. That year saw the deadliest mass shooting in US history, when 59 people were gunned down at a festival in Las Vegas.

Many mass killings in the US fail to make headlines because they involve family disputes, drug deals or gang violence, and don't spill into public places, the researchers said.

The number of mass killings in the US had risen despite the overall number of homicides going down, said James Densley, a criminologist and professor at Metropolitan State University in Minnesota.

"As a percentage of homicides, these mass killings are also accounting for more deaths," he told AP.

Prof Densley said he believed the spike was partly a consequence of an "angry and frustrated time" in US society, but he added that crimes tended to occur in waves.

"This seems to be the age of mass shootings," he said.

Gun ownership rights are enshrined in the second amendment of the US constitution, and the spike in mass shootings has done little to push US lawmakers towards gun control reforms.

In August, following deadly attacks in Dayton, Ohio, and El Paso, Texas, President Donald Trump said "serious discussions" would take place between congressional leaders on "meaningful" background checks for gun owners.

But Mr Trump quietly rowed back on that pledge, reportedly after a long phonecall with Wayne LaPierre, the chief executive of the National Rifle Association - a powerful lobby group which opposes gun control measures.

Speaking to reporters after the call, the president said the US had "very strong background checks right now", adding that mass shootings were a "mental problem".

Leading Democrats have called publicly for stricter gun control measures.

Earlier this month, presidential candidate and former US Vice-President Joe Biden used the seventh anniversary of the Sandy Hook school shooting to renew a call for tighter regulations. Mr Biden's plans include a ban on the manufacture and sale of assault weapons and mandatory background checks for all gun sales.

Another Democratic presidential hopeful, Elizabeth Warren, outlined plans earlier this year to reduce gun deaths by 80% with a mixture of legislation and executive action. Ms Warren has also called for stronger background checks, as well as the ability to revoke licences for gun dealers who break the law.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50936575

So, are guns the problem? The people? Both? What solution do you propose?

[IndigoErth]

Like many problems, it's probably a bit of both.

Yeah, there's definitively a problem with handling mental health issues these days. Not to mention raising people seemingly without knowing how to handle their own emotions and issues, without a sense of taking personal responsibility rather than blaming (and sometimes harming) others over it, how not to get so swept up and easily lead by fear mongering, conspiracy and extremist BS, and how to have tolerance for existing in the world where not everyone is just like you and by and large are not in fact out to get you. Between families who aren't raising kids how to handle real life and corners of the internet (and other media in some cases) that persistently and eagerly try to recruit vulnerable minds they can distort and drag down...there's so much working against the mental health of too many people anymore.

On the gun side of the problem... Sure, the right to arm and protect yourself is probably a good thing. Should that mean that gun rights should be a frigging free for all? Probably not. It might make sense if the gun actually fit the need, not just a gluttonous want.

In other words, for example, someone living in the suburbs, rarely ever leaves the suburbs, doesn't hunt, and simply wants a gun for home and family protection just in case, probably really has no reason for neither a hunting rifle or anything that looks like it belongs in the hands of the military. License this person for small guns that make sense for the average home owner.

In the same sense as how a person's drivers license fits their need and being legally allowed to drive doesn't mean you're licensed for driving everything and anything you want, as some things require a separate license and training (e.g. a commercial license).

Into bigger guns for sport/hobby... No problem. Just require membership and participation with a gun club, require special licensing will also be linked to the club, and require the club to be able to verify and keep a quiet eye on the behavior of their members and give members the ability to anonymously speak up if a fellow member's behavior is concerning. Something like this could theoretically make it harder for many of the nuts out there to obtain a big arsenal if they can't without membership, nor go unnoticed if they do belong to a club and members notice they're behaving oddly. On the flip side... if some kid with bad intentions does join to try to gain access to weapons he wants to use one day to shoot up a place, he may then find himself in a place with people, esp older ones, to talk to and might actually be good for him and become a place of intervention.

edit: Exceptions for hunting rifles... Live in a rural area and hunt regularly or are a farm owner, fine. License this person easily as it does fit the need. Live suburban or urban and do go hunting or want it for sport/hobby... license in connection with a club.

But that's just my two cents on an issue that this country will probably never take any steps to help change because they're too afraid of offending the NRA or the small percentage of people who think any amount of rules or requirements are an affront to their rights that take priority over lives.


In general though this country has very stupid weapons laws. It will always baffle me how in my own state you can have the military style guns... but if you wanted a single throwing star to keep in a case on display on a shelf... well god no, that is illegal. Oh, but throwing knives, that's fine. Really. What the hell. How is one throwing star more of a concern than a military type "assault rifle"?

[Andrew NDB]

Purely societal. Parents needing to parent, largely, but nobody likes to talk about that. Additional legislation will do nothing but compromise our 2nd amendment rights. And "military style" guns is pretty meaningless. You can't fire a "military style" gun any faster than a pistol. "Military style" just means they look scarier.

Give up the 2nd, lose the 1st, yadda yadda.

[Vegita-San]

losing rights isn't good. but there need to be tougher laws and tougher consequences.

guns are one of the most horrible things ever invented.

[Andrew NDB]

losing rights isn't good. but there need to be tougher laws and tougher consequences.

Some states play things a little looser than others, but some states (like NY) are outright nutty with their laws. As far as consequences go, though, they're pretty stiff.

guns are one of the most horrible things ever invented.

We wouldn't have been able to win our freedom without them.

[MsMarvelDuckie]

Like many problems, it's probably a bit of both.

Yeah, there's definitively a problem with handling mental health issues these days. Not to mention raising people seemingly without knowing how to handle their own emotions and issues, without a sense of taking personal responsibility rather than blaming (and sometimes harming) others over it, how not to get so swept up and easily lead by fear mongering, conspiracy and extremist BS, and how to have tolerance for existing in the world where not everyone is just like you and by and large are not in fact out to get you. Between families who aren't raising kids how to handle real life and corners of the internet (and other media in some cases) that persistently and eagerly try to recruit vulnerable minds they can distort and drag down...there's so much working against the mental health of too many people anymore.

On the gun side of the problem... Sure, the right to arm and protect yourself is probably a good thing. Should that mean that gun rights should be a frigging free for all? Probably not. It might make sense if the gun actually fit the need, not just a gluttonous want.

In other words, for example, someone living in the suburbs, rarely ever leaves the suburbs, doesn't hunt, and simply wants a gun for home and family protection just in case, probably really has no reason for neither a hunting rifle or anything that looks like it belongs in the hands of the military. License this person for small guns that make sense for the average home owner.

In the same sense as how a person's drivers license fits their need and being legally allowed to drive doesn't mean you're licensed for driving everything and anything you want, as some things require a separate license and training (e.g. a commercial license).

Into bigger guns for sport/hobby... No problem. Just require membership and participation with a gun club, require special licensing will also be linked to the club, and require the club to be able to verify and keep a quiet eye on the behavior of their members and give members the ability to anonymously speak up if a fellow member's behavior is concerning. Something like this could theoretically make it harder for many of the nuts out there to obtain a big arsenal if they can't without membership, nor go unnoticed if they do belong to a club and members notice they're behaving oddly. On the flip side... if some kid with bad intentions does join to try to gain access to weapons he wants to use one day to shoot up a place, he may then find himself in a place with people, esp older ones, to talk to and might actually be good for him and become a place of intervention.

edit: Exceptions for hunting rifles... Live in a rural area and hunt regularly or are a farm owner, fine. License this person easily as it does fit the need. Live suburban or urban and do go hunting or want it for sport/hobby... license in connection with a club.

But that's just my two cents on an issue that this country will probably never take any steps to help change because they're too afraid of offending the NRA or the small percentage of people who think any amount of rules or requirements are an affront to their rights that take priority over lives.


In general though this country has very stupid weapons laws. It will always baffle me how in my own state you can have the military style guns... but if you wanted a single throwing star to keep in a case on display on a shelf... well god no, that is illegal. Oh, but throwing knives, that's fine. Really. What the hell. How is one throwing star more of a concern than a military type "assault rifle"?


Gods, how I wish we had a like button! So much THIS!!^

[Andrew NDB]

The driving comparison is always as flawed as it is... well, dumb. That isn't even a right. The right to bear arms IS.

[Mayhem]

The driving comparison is always as flawed as it is... well, dumb. That isn't even a right. The right to bear arms IS.
Sure, a right (albeit one only clarified that way for 13 years so far), but should that mean anyone without question, and any weapon? Probably not. As noted by many of the comments made surrounding the reasoning for the ruling, such as

"Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment, nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."

The sheer number of firearms in the system and the lack of a centralised way to register and note who owns what compounds certain problems. When the vast majority of mass killings are carried out using legally held weapons, then something has to change to improve the situation.

[Voltron]

The sheer number of firearms in the system and the lack of a centralised way to register and note who owns what compounds certain problems. When the vast majority of mass killings are carried out using legally held weapons, then something has to change to improve the situation.

This is the one that really fries my circuits.

For all the debate we have about voter identification and voter fraud, not a single person is worried about who can buy a firearm, no questions asked?

We have rules and regulations governing almost everything. Firearms, however, must be as free as we can possibly make them. Every man, woman, and child should be packing heat at all times.

When it was proposed that teachers should be armed, I damn near shat myself. It would only be a matter of time before some kid starts mouthing off to the wrong teacher on the wrong day and we end up with a national tragedy.

There definitely needs to be a more nuanced discussion on what to do about firearms. At the very least, there should be much harsher penalties for misuse of firearms. I shouldn't be able to go on Youtube and find hours of footage of morons accidentally blowing a hole in their roof or blowing their toe off while trying to look like a hard ass.