Let’s get something straight. It doesn’t matter what the technical definition of a mass shooting is. If there were 355 incidents where four or more people were shot and injured and no one died, that’s still a huge problem. Arguing the semantics of what is and isn’t a mass shooting is part of the problem.
Breitbart “helpfully” pointed out that a mass shooting is defined by the FBI as a shooting event where there were four or more fatalities but “liberal media” is reporting incidents that include times when four or more people were shot but did not die.
Ok. So what would you call that then?
Never mind Breitbart is at best putrid garbage and at worst a den of hatemongering trash people who use “conservative values” as a cover for being bigots. We’re going to ignore that right now and simply ask, if not mass shooting then what should an incident in which four or more people are shot be called?
These distinction is posed as if it is somehow important. It is not important. These acts are not any less violent because no one died. They are still extremely violent and indicative of a huge problem in our culture.
This isn’t a conversation that needs to be had. The difference between a mass shooting and an incident where a bunch of people got shot isn’t important except to those that have a vested interest in making sure the problem doesn’t seem as large as it is. Because if it’s not a big problem, we don’t have to fix it.
355 incidents where four or more people were shot in less than a year is a problem. A really big one. And it needs to be fixed.