Many Americans think of school shootings as mass casualty events involving an adolescent with an assault-style weapon. But a new study says that most recent school shootings orchestrated by teenagers do not fit that image — and they are often related to community violence.

The study, published Monday in the journal JAMA Pediatrics, analyzed 253 school shootings carried out by 262 adolescents in the US between 1990 and 2016.

It found that these adolescents were responsible for only a handful of mass casualty shootings, defined as those involving four or more gunshot fatalities. About half of the shootings analyzed — 119 — involved at least one death. Among the events, seven killed four or more people.

A majority of the shootings analyzed also involved handguns rather than assault rifles or shotguns, and they were often the result of “interpersonal disputes,” according to the researchers from University of South Carolina and University of Florida.

  • farcaster@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Or we could just not have more guns than people, like everywhere else in the rest of the first world. But “fuck you I’ve got mine” is the unofficial motto of the United States of America after all.

    • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      More like fuck you I barley have shit and I’m not giving up my ability to protect myself from anyone that might be coming for it.

      • farcaster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Killing someone to prevent them from stealing your stuff may well land you in prison. Guns cause a lot of misery in this country.

        I get it btw. But still. I think we’d all be better off with fewer guns :\

        • interceder270@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I get it btw.

          Get what? That if you can’t fight and don’t own a gun then you’re at the mercy of the police you hate to protect you?

          • farcaster@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I’ve lived in a few different countries, and they have many of the same problems as the US, but there’s of course far fewer guns, and those places are safer. That difference in safety is really palpable.

            Without all these guns, and the associated culture of violence and fear, perhaps American policing in general would be less violent. It’s something I’ve wondered about.

            I am sympathetic to the desire for self-defense, arms as a safeguard against tyranny, etc. But I personally don’t think it’s worth this.

            So it’s a complex issue, but I don’t think the 2A is a net positive. At least not anymore.

            • interceder270@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              and they have many of the same problems as the US

              Really? What nations are as polarizing as the US? Seems to me the vast majority of nations that aren’t as violent as the US are not nearly as diverse or suffer from the same extent of wealth inequality.

              Sweden, even with its anti-gun laws, has become the most dangerous scandinavian country by a longshot because they’re now dealing with racial problems the US has had to face for generations.

              • farcaster@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Plenty of diversity and wealth inequality problems in Europe. Just look up the stats if you’re really interested.

                And these issues are noticeable as you say in Sweden for example. And in Germany, and France, and Spain, etc.

                But I don’t see how proliferating guns in Europe would help make these places safer. I would imagine letting everyone have guns would see Sweden’s murder rate go up. Maybe another 5x to 10x and it would reach US per capita levels. Progress?

                • interceder270@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Sweden’s problems aren’t the same as Germany or France.

                  But I don’t see how proliferating guns in Europe would help make these places safer.

                  That’s because you’re ignoring all the nations who have outlawed guns yet have worse gun violence than the US because of their culture. You cherrypick evidence to support your agenda and ignore evidence that goes against it.

                  Some would call that ‘biased,’ but that would make them a rational person.

                  • farcaster@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    You know what never mind, you seem to think guns in the US are generally a good thing and think they’re generally bad. We’ll probably never agree. Hope you never have to use your guns mate.

        • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I should probably clarify that I don’t actually own a gun. My previous comment is just the attitude I typically see from people who do. I don’t live in an area with a high crime rate that would necessitate one and I’d be far more likely to use it on myself before I was ever in a self defense situation. That being said if I still lived in the town I grew up where there were break ins every few weeks many of which included assaults I would have one for sure.