Do you not realize that bullets go through walls? Luckily it was contained but could have easily turned into a tragedy if some toddler sleeping next door gets hit by a stray bullet. You are arguing semantics, just because it happened at someone's home instead of public doesn't not make it a mass shooting. You just want the numbers to look better so you can ignore certain types of gun violence. When in reality it should be lumped together because it is a systematic problem that needs to be fixed.
It does though, because certain types of shootings don't put the public at risk. A shootout between two rival gangs is not the same as some psycho shooting up a grocery store.
Do you not realize that bullets go through walls? Luckily it was contained but could have easily turned into a tragedy if some toddler sleeping next door gets hit by a stray bullet. You are arguing semantics, just because it happened at someone's home instead of public doesn't not make it a mass shooting. You just want the numbers to look better so you can ignore certain types of gun violence. When in reality it should be lumped together because it is a systematic problem that needs to be fixed.
Again, not the same class of shooting as a random attack in a public place.
Gun violence is gun violence. Doesn't matter what location it takes place in.
Not all gun violence is a mass shooting. That's the point.
It is if it involves multiple wounded and or dead. The location doesn't matter.
It does though, because certain types of shootings don't put the public at risk. A shootout between two rival gangs is not the same as some psycho shooting up a grocery store.
No it's exactly the same, you would rather just ignore it because they are gang members.
I would rather ignore it because as a non-gang member I'm not at risk. Unlike some psycho in a grocery store.
You act as if gang members don't shoot innocent people. Your argument is stupid and I think you realize that.