The recent mass shootings in 2012 kind of defy my senses and I have no explanation but I was discussing this on another forum with an Aussie who said that gun control has worked in Australia so I started to look for some data. I found this article on Mother Jones:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/201 ... otings-map

So I did some figuring and working from the 1999 date in Mother Jones to 2011 where the Aussies have had two mass shootings since their 96 gun law and took the difference of population between the two countries and discovered that from 1999 to 2011 they average the same percentage of mass shootings per year by population over those years, in fact Australia beats us by 1% but if you figure in 1999 to 2012, we beat them by 38%.

First, the plethora of shootings in 2012 alone is striking and I wonder if it is an aberration and also wonder if the 10 year lull in Australian shootings is also an aberration. I do believe it is only a matter of time before Australia will have another since they average a mass shooting every 3 to 4 years over a longer time span.

One problem if this is an aberration is that if new gun laws are instituted then the natural drop off after will be seen as a success of what I believe is a band aid on a social problem.

Anyone have any ideas why there are so many mass shootings this year alone?

Check into the home invasion rates for Australia. Most of their states are still working on codification of laws governing exactly what a 'home invasion' should be charged as and they seem to be one of the more common violent crimes since the confiscation acts went through in '96'. Any of our Aussie membership like to speak to this?

This type of crime was unheard of before 1996. That right there draws some level of correlation in my mind.

Everything seems to peaking. It is many factors, fear of the future generated by the media.
The obvious differences between rich and poor which are played up by the media.
Artificial panics generated by the media/govt. complex like "Fiscal Cliff"
Mayan end of the world endlessly "reported" upon by the media..
The fetishism of military style weapons and gear, and the idea
that we are now the baddest asses on the planet, perpetuated by the media.
Fear of Sharia law generated by the media.

The good thing is we have a free press that...wait... the press is in no way free.

They are now part of "The Media" INC.

GuitarsandGuns wrote:Everything seems to peaking. It is many factors, fear of the future generated by the media.
The obvious differences between rich and poor which are played up by the media.
Artificial panics generated by the media/govt. complex like "Fiscal Cliff"
Mayan end of the world endlessly "reported" upon by the media..
The fetishism of military style weapons and gear, and the idea
that we are now the baddest asses on the planet, perpetuated by the media.
Fear of Sharia law generated by the media.

The good thing is we have a free press that...wait... the press is in no way free.

They are now part of "The Media" INC.

So everything is the media's fault? I Don't buy it. They're an easy scapegoat. If they report on something they're contributing to mass hysteria. If they don't, it's a mass coverup and conspiracy against XYZ. Damned if they do and damned if they don't.

Guns are much more regulated in Australia, and hundreds of thousands were destroyed in their gun buyback over ten years ago. The possession of guns and ammunitions are both licensed, and you may even have to be a member of a gun club. Plus, Australia never suffered the level of gun violence the US does. So, it is a place in which it is not so easy to live out such fantasies.

As for mass shootings in the US, Americans have gone insane. Die Deutschen festgestellt, dass die harte Weise in den jahren 1917-18. Die Amerikaner sind verrückt.

As another possible theory, I'd throw out that in the last several years we have seen the absolute worst economic conditions in this country since the great depression, which puts additional stress onto society as a whole, and on individuals specifically. As this stress continues to build, in conjunction with all the other things going on, has pushed a lot of the folks who were already on edge right over it.

Couple that with all the other things that have been mentioned, and we have a powder keg in this country. The other HUGE factor in my eyes is that the gap between the wealthy and the rest of the country is the highest it's ever been, and folks can get pretty shaken when they have NO security in a job, future, family, etc.

I'm not saying that these are the sole causes, but if you look at the uptick since the 2008 Bush recession, it's certainly possible that it somehow correlates.

Also to add, gun homicides are actually down by 40% since the early 90's.

cricky101 wrote:So everything is the media's fault? I Don't buy it. They're an easy scapegoat. If they report on something they're contributing to mass hysteria. If they don't, it's a mass coverup and conspiracy against XYZ. Damned if they do and damned if they don't.

There's a big difference between journalism and rumor mongering. I see piss-little of the former these days, but plenty of the latter. The line between entertainment media and news media has largely vanished, carrying journalistic standards with it. The pseudo-news media doesn't know how to cover a story without sensationalizing it for entertainment value, and serious journalism just isn't very entertaining.

So, scapegoats? I think not. But then, we as the "news" consuming public are to blame for eating up their intellectual junkfood then wondering why our minds are getting flabby.

Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF300T using Tapatalk 2

cricky101 wrote:So everything is the media's fault? I Don't buy it. They're an easy scapegoat. If they report on something they're contributing to mass hysteria. If they don't, it's a mass coverup and conspiracy against XYZ. Damned if they do and damned if they don't.

There's a big difference between journalism and rumor mongering. I see piss-little of the former these days, but plenty of the latter. The line between entertainment media and news media has largely vanished, carrying journalistic standards with it. The pseudo-news media doesn't know how to cover a story without sensationalizing it for entertainment value, and serious journalism just isn't very entertaining.

So, scapegoats? I think not. But then, we as the "news" consuming public are to blame for eating up their intellectual junkfood then wondering why our minds are getting flabby.

Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF300T using Tapatalk 2

There is one aspect that hasn't been mentioned at all so far in this discussion.

I've read estimates between 20 and 35% of the American population goes to churches where "Take over __________ city/the state/America/the World" is preached, although you'll very often heard it in terms of "Take back America for Jesus" and similar language. The violent rhetoric has really peaked since President Obama was elected, and we've been able to demonstrate that most of the hostility is because he's African-American (with an African father to boot) who is highly educated, well-spoken, and respected around the world.

I thought we were going to have a violent uprising when he was first elected in 2008, and I was hearing language to that effect at the gas pumps, in stores, and elsewhere - thank God things cooled off. Then in this last year, especially after President Obama won re-election, there have been threats of and calls for armed rebellion from the leaders of the movement (referred to as dominionism, or "Christian" dominionism) - and suddenly silence at the local level. (Note: I have two or three "militia" supporters - also militant young-earth creationists, on this very short street we live on, with dozens, maybe hundreds within a few miles of here. Also at least one "Christian Identity" hate group in the local area, as well as an active Klan presence that scares my best friend.)

I'm not sure that local silence is a good or a very bad sign.

They've also been denouncing the public school systems as evil time and time again... because those schools actually teach things like evolution, history based on source documents, and they try to get the students to think instead of regurgitate facts. (In this county, a major part of education is obedience to authority... and most of the students know, or knew that they were being groomed for the groves and the mines.) In fact, evolution wasn't taught by name in the public schools in Florida until the last couple of years because of the same people - and they've been fighting tooth and nail to destroy the schools or to bring creation "science" into them (aka preach the Bible).

Many of the people who committed these acts spouted off or wrote things that are recognized as coming from specific groups or preachers, like the "Sovereign Citizen" movement - who for the most part are solidly tied to the "Tea Party", which in turn is under the thumb of the dominionists. There are also ties to the Koch Bros, to the Klan and related groups, and so on.

We're dealing with a complex web of connections - and the researchers I know who have been following and studying this stuff have noticed a big upswing in violence in their words.

I'd also mention that I think there is a lot of violence NOT reported or making the "radar"... like so far I've seen little mention of the UU church in Kentucky being shot up because it's "Liberal!" - and I remember how the subject was dropped like a hot potato as soon as it came out that the shooter was anti-liberal. I'm aware of a lot of violence - especially at the individual level, that goes unreported. As an example, I've heard many times the term "Burned out". Seems that in this county, lesbian or gay couples face a very high risk of coming home and finding their house in ashes (if it's not burned down around them). The same happened to me because of a letter I wrote to the editor defending the teaching of evolution - except instead of our home, they torched my electronics workshop (just before that happened, my parents raised hell at me and my wife because of that letter - those damned "Good Christians" went to them and threatened them, and ordered them to "Shut him UP!!!" I also learned I'd been preached against by name during the Sunday morning service at some of the local megachurches.)

The thing is, we're seeing religious-driven violence and violent rhetoric ramping up... and we firmly believe that the fundamentalist/dominionist rhetoric is what is leading to the violence. I and my friends are all really concerned for President Obama's welfare... we're scared that some nutcase will try something because of the sort of things that have been recorded/observed/taped/videotaped.

I've been writing a book on firearms and firearm politics for the uninitiated, and I've included most of the high-profile mass shootings since the '66 Texas sniper. I'm a huge stat freak, and have noticed the slow-but-steady decline in overall violent crime over the past 20+ years, as well as the strange increase in high-profile mass shootings. Such a disparity usually points to some sort of trend. My best guess: copycats. If a disturbed person wants to "make a statement," or have his name endlessly repeated in the news, then they know they can join the ranks of the other three-named shooters by heading over to the local school, or anywhere else where lots of people gather and security is lax, such as a mall or movie theater. Not only do they get their "moment," but each and every time another shooting happens, the media babbles about them AGAIN! (I swear I've heard Jared Lee Loughner's name repeated more lately then back when he shot Gabby Giffords!)

I also wouldn't discount the idea that these guys know they've got a good chance at not meeting armed resistance, because all of these places are so-called "gun-free" zones. They know they'll have a good long time to commit their mayhem before any cops can arrive.

Glockslinger wrote:I've been writing a book on firearms and firearm politics for the uninitiated, and I've included most of the high-profile mass shootings since the '66 Texas sniper. I'm a huge stat freak, and have noticed the slow-but-steady decline in overall violent crime over the past 20+ years, as well as the strange increase in high-profile mass shootings. Such a disparity usually points to some sort of trend. My best guess: copycats. If a disturbed person wants to "make a statement," or have his name endlessly repeated in the news, then they know they can join the ranks of the other three-named shooters by heading over to the local school, or anywhere else where lots of people gather and security is lax, such as a mall or movie theater. Not only do they get their "moment," but each and every time another shooting happens, the media babbles about them AGAIN! (I swear I've heard Jared Lee Loughner's name repeated more lately then back when he shot Gabby Giffords!)

I also wouldn't discount the idea that these guys know they've got a good chance at not meeting armed resistance, because all of these places are so-called "gun-free" zones. They know they'll have a good long time to commit their mayhem before any cops can arrive.

So far I lean more toward your idea about copy cat shootings as a strong factor.

The media probably has something to do with it but we have had sensationalist media for some time now. We do have the recession pressure but we have had that since 2008. We have an election year that seems to bring out a lot of crazy shyte. A couple could be blamed on religious ideology like the Ft Hood shooter but that would probably only be a few of them. We have the unease because of all the Mayan crap and I remember all the garbage around 2000. A few seem to be psychotic shooters like Loughner. Some seem totally disconnected from normal social behavior like Lanza. All of them have something seriously wrong with their thinking. The amoral quality of finding a place where someone could kill the most "innocents" is very disturbing to me.

We are called gun nuts that are "just waiting for a chance to shoot someone" if we carry but I would bet most of us think we could shoot someone if we had too but don't really know if we could and don't really want to shoot anyone.

Why 2012? Is it just an anomaly? Is it just a perfect storm of all of the above? I believe it is an anomaly but only time will tell.

A few numbers for scale -

Only about 1/8 of Ozzie households had guns before their ban, so the evolution of crime since then can't all be correlated to it. The crime rate in Oz has gone up, down, and up since then, probably reflecting age demographics as much as anything. Here's a good Wiki page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Australia

Mass shootings in the US grab the headlines, but amount to much less than 1% of the intentional homicides every year - including this year.
http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/ ... 2s0310.pdf
I think there's more of a classist/racist undertone to it; "How could this have happened?" meaning "to us?" If you can't feel safe in your white enclave, then it's time to do something. Never mind all the poor minority children - we lose 20 of them a day to auto accidents alone, but it's hardly news.

If we were to ban all rifles in the US - all of them - and were to somehow assure that no would-be killer switched to another weapon, we could reduce the intentional homicide rate by 2.5%. If you really wanted to cut down the murder rate, the first step would be getting the Federal government to stop running illegal drugs and guns. Yes, agencies within our government do, irrespective of whether or not I personally am a certifiable conspiracy nutcake.

gaucheGlock wrote:A few numbers for scale -

Mass shootings in the US grab the headlines, but amount to much less than 1% of the intentional homicides every year - including this year.
http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/ ... 2s0310.pdf
I think there's more of a classist/racist undertone to it; "How could this have happened?" meaning "to us?" If you can't feel safe in your white enclave, then it's time to do something. Never mind all the poor minority children - we lose 20 of them a day to auto accidents alone, but it's hardly news.

I couldn't agree with you more. More kids were killed in Chicago this year by gunfire than were killed in CT but what is the major difference?

Edit: One reason of course is that 20 are not killed all at once and all execution style. Chicago is certainly concerned about the shootings but nationally it is not until an upscale enclave is threatened that it seems to make a difference in headlines.