this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2023
219 points (94.0% liked)

News

22839 readers
3724 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 42 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 73 points 1 year ago (2 children)

"No way to prevent this" says only nation where this regularly happens.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

One of the best (worst) headlines ever…

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Me, I like looking at Wikipedia's data:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States_in_2023

  • 2023, jan-jul: shootings: 427, 6 at schools
  • 2022, same: 441, 3 at schools
  • 2021, same: 413, 0 at schools (thanks covid!)
  • 2020, same: 344, 2 at schools

I think we can safely say 2023 is a bad year for schools, but a normal year for mass shootings in the USA.

Because it's perfectly normal to have hundreds of mass shootings every year and doing nothing about it. Amazing.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

2023 isn't over, and school will be in session through the end if the year. We'll get an impressive record setting year on both those numbers probably.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

All those numbers are for the same time periods.

Including more deaths this year means including more deaths that were truncated from the other years.

But hey, we can always strive for new heights.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Look, if we all dig deep and really commit, we can achieve mind-blowing numbers. Let's not throw in the towel just because we're ahead. Let's shoot for the stars! /s

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago (6 children)

This is depressing, but it also bothers me that there's such a large distinction between how the average person would picture a "school shooting" and what these articles are talking about. Is there a name for that in journalism?

Like, if someone told me "there was a school shooting at school X today", like most people I would immediately picture someone walking into the building and firing indiscriminately at everyone. Not, "a couple of teens got in a fight in the parking lot, and one pulled out a gun", or "someone shot at the school's sign". (Which are also horrible, but I feel like we need separate terms)

From the article:

According to the report, the most commonly known situations associated with such incidents included "escalation of dispute," "drive-by," "illegal activity," "accidental firing of a weapon" and "intentional property damage."

[–] FriendOfElphaba 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

To me, that’s like the people who complain that gang-related shootings count as gun crimes. Not everything has to be Columbine/Las Vegas/Sandy Hook/Virginia Tech… (too many to list, honestly too many to keep track of, and I read the news daily. They’re all symptoms of the gun problem in the US. A lot of fun crimes are done by criminals? What a shock! But they have drug dealers and gang members in other countries, and we don’t see the levels of gun violence we do in the US. America is literally off the charts when they do international studies.

A shooting at a school is a shooting at a school, period. I can’t think of anyone who would defend calling it anything else. It doesn’t matter if it’s two kids fighting over who gets to sell drugs or just someone who doesn’t like Mondays.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

It's already a sad state of affairs that you hear the phrase "school shooting" that your mind goes to the Columbine style shooting. That the concept has happened enough that people have a mental model for it.

I hear your desire to better classifications, but as the other reply noted to a parent, even someone shooting at a stop-sign is a red flag. None of that should be happening with any regularity. The fact that kids are carrying around guns and can even have them on school property is enough for parents to want something done to ensure their children are safe. It's enough for parents with money, to leave an area for fear of losing their children.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

None of it should be happening is right. I just get a skeezy feeling when articles use language they know will get people thinking one thing when they mean another.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Sure, but you shared the clarification the journalist used, so they've actually spelled out that it's not just school massacres in the article. It also doesn't necessarily imply the core title isn't true.

The more you read, the more you start to realize there are never clear definitions for anything. You always have to look for the author to clearly define what they're talking about.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Why do we need such a distinction? These are shootings at schools. They are school shootings.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Because a columbine type of school shooting is different than property damage.

And people writing these articles know that "some destructive teens did donuts in the school parking lot at night and shot the stop sign" isn't what people think when they say that a "school shooting" has happened.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If they kill a Columbine -1, is that a school shooting? What if they try to massacre people but there are no fatalities, is that a school shooting? The attempt to make "school shooting" fit only the worst case scenario means we ignore a problem until it has had its absolute worst outcome.

[–] ryathal 1 points 1 year ago

Is it a school shooting if it's two people in a parking lot at midnight on a Tuesday that are selling drugs? I would say no. Calling it a school shooting implies that the school/children are targeted specifically. Being dishonest about the facts backfires basically every time, as it shows you aren't acting in good faith.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Axios didn’t make the term up, the National Center for Educational Statistics did.

Your premise seems to be that these are mostly no big deal and the term school shooting is being used deliberately to conjure images of Columbine. It’s not clear how you reached that conclusion when the number of casualties of school shootings has nearly doubled year over year, per the article.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I forget. 2023 is an odd year, so do we do thoughts or prayers?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Thoughts and pears.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Wishes and spells

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Thots and pyres.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hey, it's Americans right to protect themselves from sweet innocent children.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

"Won't anyone ~~think of~~ gun down the children?!?!"

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago

Looks like all those thoughts and prayers are working

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It probably should've been a clue when this became a metric we started tracking like the daily temperature.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Really gross when you see politicians wearing AR-15 lapel pins. You almost get the idea that they are actively supporting this. Every time there is a school shooting, they get to stand up in front of their base and talk about how people are trying to take their guns away, which really lights a fire under them.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

This article is using an overly broad definition of school shooting to make the situation appear as if is worsening in America as opposed to improving.

"The report defines a school shooting as an incident where "a gun is brandished, is fired, or a bullet hits school property for any reason, regardless of the number of victims, time of day, or day of week."" & "Shootings that occurred during the COVID pandemic "on school property during remote instruction" were within that definition, the report noted."

This is a redicuilusly broad definition that inflates the numbers of shootings without indicating how many victims there are.

Using the study referenced in the article you can clearly see a reduction in the average number of deaths of "youth[s] ages 5-18 at school" from 1992 to 2020. Scroll down to the line graph on the study and filter out suicides (the trend line is less clear there and needs a separate discussion).

The article even sort of acknowledges this downward trend when it says "interpret these data with caution" given that latest figures are "outliers compared to prior years.""

I'm not saying this to pretend everything is fine and nothing needs to change. No its the opposite, something IS reducing the number of deaths and we need to isolate what it is and do it more. And its not gun control laws getting tighter. 1994 saw the advant for the American Assault Weapon ban and gun laws were arguably the tightest they've ever been in the US. Gun laws in the nation have only loosened since then such as: Permit-less concealled carry is in 26/50 states, all states are now shall issue CCL, and the AWB ended.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They're comparing 2021-2022 vs 2020-2021. Weren't many, if not most schools, closed for most of that study?

Seems disingenuous. That's definitely not to say it isn't an issue, because it is.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

USA 🇺🇸 USA