America does not lead the world in mass shootings

are you dumb lol

Why is this time-frame designed to exclude incidents in the US like Virginia Tech, Orlando, Vegas, Parkland, Lubys, San Ysidro, Red Lake, Virginia Beach, Sutherland Springs, Santa Fe, Pittsburgh, Columbine, Thousand Oaks, Binghampton, etc.? It's just dishonest. And whatever Jow Forums is, we DO value honesty.

To be fair, there is other academic research that finds that America has more mass shootings than other countries. But the time frame for the data from that research ends in 2012. So there just isn't any academic research that takes the last 4 years into account yet. If that is dishonest, then all the research is dishonest.

Also, the rate of mass shootings started going up in the U.S. in 2005. Before the time frame of this study. So its possible that they choose the time frame to make America look good. But I don't find it very likely.

Honestly with all the immigration .... add 275 more deal people but add 25 million to the population (just making numbers up), I doubt that would even budge the data tbqh.

dead people*

>Finland
>0.185 per million
>Finland population: 5.503M
>0.185 * 5.503M = 1.018055 = 1
>ONE mass shooting puts Finland ahead of US in the mass shooting stats
Activated my my almonds for sure.

Attached: spurdo.jpg (750x1000, 40K)

We need the underlying list of incidents that were actually used to create these numbers, too. I have noticed that most such lists are incomplete. There are a handful of "reference" shootings that I use to see whether or not a given dataset should be taken seriously, like the Toa Baja massacre in Puerto Rico. If a dataset for something like "American mass-shootings" has that missing, then I don't take it seriously, because it is structually-incomplete.

>pic related
OP, you wouldn't be a Jew by any chance?

Attached: op-is-of-the-chosen-people.png (584x523, 22K)

You don't need any of that, OP is just playing creative games with numbers, see

This is also stupid because all "shootings" appear to have the same value ('1') regardless of the number of fatalities. This is an embarrassment.

Exactly. A homeboy poppin' off a few niglets on the street isn't exactly Virginia Tech.

I wasn't Jewish the last time I checked. Nope. Still not Jewish.

here a story they will barely cover

NEW YORK (CBSNewYork) — A shooting at a Brooklyn playground left one person dead and 11 others injured Saturday night.

It happened just before 11 p.m. inside the playground area of the Brownsville Recreational Center at the intersection of Christopher and Hegeman avenues.

About 2,000 people were in the area for the neighborhood’s annual “OldTimers” event. The event was coming to a close when the shooting occurred.

btw there were 100 cops there, thats 1 cop for every 20 people and they still couldnt control the black croud.

The mayor sez it does not meey the criteria of a mass shooting.

If you go by death count instead of frequency, the U.S. still doesn't crack the top 10. So this isn't an artifact from ignoring deaths per-shooting.

Attached: annual_death_rate_mass_shootingsjpg.jpg (444x513, 63K)

Sure. If by "creative games with numbers" you mean "controlling for population size." i.e., that thing that every social scientist and statistician does when they want to compare rates of crime or other violent acts between countries.

Nigger you've already been busted for using intentionally misleading stats It's over, go home, kike.

That's how per capita works mongoloid.

>f by "creative games with numbers" you mean "controlling for population size." i.e., that thing that every social scientist and statistician does when they want to compare rates of crime or other violent acts between countries.
That doesn't exactly make sense when if a country has ONE incident of a crime, then it's on the TOP of the chart, and if it doesn't, it's at the bottom.

How is it misleading?

And when I say make sense, I mean the chart isn't informative, but counter-intuitive and intentionally misleading.

please don't go on a mass shooting over this, it's just statistics!

>macedonia
>country

Attached: 235457455645654.jpg (600x600, 30K)

Don't you have some crack to smoke, favelanigger?
>youtube.com/watch?v=WppJ1wU9N54

What the hell are you talking about? There are countries with more than one mass shooting on that list besides the U.S. and France, and they all had at least 1 mass shooting.

You are also far more likely to die from drug abuse than the average favela nigger.

Attached: download.jpg (850x600, 86K)

I even color-coded the ones with only 1 mass shooting and you still can't figure it out?

Burger education. Have fun with your kikery thread.

Sad but true

I often wonder this too. Because you hear about "mass shootings" where 2 people died and 4 were wounded all the time. I think the qualifiers are as follows

>perpetrator white
>crowded location
>attack happens in the United states
>shooter uses ar 15 or "assault style" weapon

But obviously these are dishonest categories. Yesterday in Brooklyn a gang related shooting occurred at a block party, 11 people shot one killed, media silence.
I'll give you a black, all the people involved were hints.

Serbia and Switzerland both had 2 shootings, as did Belgium, Canada and Russia. And there are no countries on this list with no mass shootings. So what you said about
> if a country has ONE incident of a crime, then it's on the TOP of the chart, and if it doesn't, it's at the bottom.

Was literally false. The countries at the bottom still had at least 1 mass shooting.

thats basically per capita. it means nothing. we have flat rate more than all those other countries combined

per capita they have higher gdp growth than america. its because those are small countries with lower populations

Also, that list you posted isn't entirely true. If you look at appendix 3 in the actual paper that this article was based on, the top 10 countries all had more than one attack. Granted, that was based on a different time frame so it isn't directly comparable. But it does show that these results aren't dependent on the totals being too small for anything to make a difference besides sheer population. poseidon01.ssrn.com/delivery.php?ID=097121094120022106107016092095067023000008008093019054002070109099086022124107004108098036006047039023098026000107108094074111012044036045000027080101070109086055064076096092093017091001094066064081027090106022107120107125123093014004114116073004&EXT=pdf

Actually it does mean 1 thing: That America's high number of mass shootings is mostly due to its large population, not the actual ease of committing shootings in America, or the public's desire to commit them.

We've had like 1 mass shooting the last 20 years, why are we ranked so high?

Black shootings are not registered as "mass shootings", most are registered as "gang related"......
(((They))) do this to they and make it look as though white people are the mass shooting problem.
(((They))) also do the very same thing with "far-right" terrorist attacks. Islamic terrorist attacks are registered as "far-right" and them the paint it as if it's a conservative or Nazi white man thing.

Attached: USA crime rate.jpg (720x556, 56K)

give a saus

This is why you faggots didn't win the hyper war.

Attached: 1564008875113.png (1558x1006, 105K)