Over the last few days we’ve been learning a lot about the people behind ShootingTracker.com. It came from /r/GunsAreCool, a forum devoted expressly to the purpose of demonizing gun owners and advancing their anti-gun position, and is run by a man who admits that the site is pure propaganda. As if that’s not enough to tip you off to the fact that the numbers presented are completely bogus, one man has gone through the tracker to see what’s actually in there and if their work stands up to any form of scrutiny. The result? Even using Shooting Tracker’s own extremely loose definition of a “mass shooting” (four people shot, no matter their condition or the circumstances) the data simply doesn’t hold up. The following is a compilation of posts made by Reddit user /u/MrMember and is reprinted here with permission.
2013 – [Archived version of Shooting Tracker]
No citation and/or dead link unable to verify the story:
- 37
- 39
- 40
- 43
- 45
- 51 (no citation at all, citation listed points to a different shooting)
- 80
- 105
- 112
- 182
- 221
- 226
- 230
- 232
- 256
- 268
- 273 (no citation at all)
- 285 (no citation at all)
- 287 (no citation at all)
- 304
- 332
- 335
- 353
- 355 (no citation at all)
As for the articles with citations and working links, the following issues are present in the data and provide either misleading or patently false information.
#10 1/12/2013
This one lists one dead and four wounded in a mass shooting. Follow one of the links, however, and you’ll find that it is actually two separate incidents. The suspect shot two people at 1:10am on Jan 12. Later that day, around 11:55pm in an entirely separate incident, the suspect shot three people, killing one. Neither incident can be considered a mass shooting using GrC’s definition, and saying the entire day is considered one mass shooting is seriously stretching even their definition.
#28 2/11/2013
Two of the cited links are dead, but from the remaining one this simply isn’t a mass shooting. A boy was killed and his mother and another woman were hit by gunfire. I tried to find additional articles with more information but what I found confirmed what was in the first article. I don’t have any idea why the list states 1 killed and 4 wounded.
#31 2/13/2013
The cited source is dead but a Google search of the suspect’s name brings up this article. The suspect shot and killed two people, shot and injured the man trying to subdue him, and was then beaten into submission. Three people shot, not a mass shooting.
#66 4/6/2013
Follow the first citation and you’ll find that a total of four people were shot by the same man in two separate incidents that occurred a week apart. Again, seriously stretching GrC’s definition of a mass shooting.
#73 4/13/2013
Clearly whoever added this one just looked at the headline and didn’t bother to read the article. Two people shot, two other people injured while jumping through a window. Not a mass shooting.
#89 4/28/2013
Another one with dead links for citations, but a search of the suspect brings up this article. He killed four people in separate incidents over a two week period. Horrifying and incredibly sad, but not a mass shooting.
#95 5/5/2013
Another case of reading the title and not the article. No mass shooting occurred, the incidents were separate and unrelated.
#98 5/6/2013
Surprise, another pellet gun ‘shooting.’
#108 5/13/2013
This one is a mass shooting by GrC’s definition, but the number injured is wrong. The list states 5 injured, the article states 4.
#117 5/21/2013
Three people shot, not a mass shooting.
#125 5/28/2013
Five bodies were found buried in the desert. According to the medical examiner some of them had broken bones that were likely the result of firearms and blunt-force injury. No conclusive evidence of a mass shooting here.
#154 6/22/2013
Another one with incorrect numbers listed. It should be one killed and three wounded.
#164 6/27/2013
One killed and two wounded. Not a mass shooting.
#170 7/2/2013
One killed two wounded, not a mass shooting.
#178 7/6/2013
Three people shot, one person stabbed. Not a mass shooting. Yet another case of reading the title and not the article.
#185 7/10/2013
I have no idea where they got the 12 injured number from. Following the cited links I only see two murders. If I am missing something on this one let me know, otherwise it does not look like a mass shooting.
#194 7/14/2013
Three shot one stabbed, not a mass shooting.
#208 7/28/2013
Two separate incidents that weren’t confirmed to be related, not a mass shooting.
#222 8/11/2013
The suspect killed four people over eleven days. Another one that stretches the definition of mass shooting.
#246 8/28/2013
This one appears to be several separate incidents spread over a week that have all been added together. Stretching, definition, etc.
#258 9/15/2013
Read the article and not just the title ya dingus. Unrelated incidents.
#264 9/17/2013
#266 9/17/2013
Three people shot, one woman killed after she was ejected from her car. Not a mass shooting.
#279 9/26/2013
Three people shot, one person suffered a cut wound. Not a mass shooting.
#290 10/12/2013
Three people shot, one person struck by a car while fleeing. Not a mass shooting.
#296 10/20/2013
Three people were shot, the shooter was subdued. Not a mass shooting.
#310 10/31/2013
Three people shot, another man crashed his motorcycle trying to leave. Not a mass shooting.
#311 11/2/2013
“It is unknown at this time, since this case is all still under investigation, whether that shooting is related to the shootings on Shelby Avenue or whether the victim who went to Hardin Memorial came from a different shooting altogether,” Shumate said. Insufficient evidence to determine if it was a mass shooting.
#358 12/29/2013
Three people shot one person was run over. Not a mass shooting.
2014 – [Archived version of Shooting Tracker]
No citation and/or dead link unable to verify the story:
- 57
- 58
- 69
- 70 (no citation at all, cited link points to a different shooting)
- 71
- 74
- 75
- 108
- 109
- 138
- 161
- 162
- 163
- 189
- 209
- 228
- 234
- 255
- 327
- 332
I also found more incidents on this list that either had incorrect numbers, weren’t mass shootings at all, or played pretty fast and loose with GrC’s definition of a mass shooting.
#10 1/16/2014
Questionable as a mass shooting, as there were two separate incidents one day apart .
#19 1/28/2014
The number of injured listed (5) is incorrect. One person injured suffered a gunshot wound to the foot, the other four were not shot but injured in the chaos .
#31 2/15/2014
Felton said as of Sunday morning, police are unsure if all five victims are related to the same shooting . Not confirmed as a mass shooting.
#133 6/24/2014
The injury total is incorrect, it should be 4 instead of 7 .
#150 7/6/2014
Culpepper said two people are dead and two people are critically injured. It’s not clear if the victims suffered their injuries through the car crash or from the gunfire. Cannot be confirmed as a mass shooting.
#166 7/20/2014
The injuries in this one were from an explosion, not gunfire. No officers were shot. Not a mass shooting.
#223 8/27/2014
The shootings in this one were spread out over a five day period, stretching the definition of a mass shooting.
#231 9/1/2014
A bullet also flew through the window of an unmarked police van in the area, shattering glass onto a detective who was inside at the time, the NYPD said. The detective was taken to the hospital with minor injuries, police said. Three people shot, not a mass shooting.
#264 10/8/2014
Authorities didn’t say how the four were killed. Autopsies being conducted Thursday will determine the cause of death, Soares said. Not confirmed as a mass shooting.
#277 10/22/2014
Three people shot, not a mass shooting.
2015 – [Archived version of Shooting Tracker]
I didn’t find as many issues in 2015 as I did in the previous two years, but it also wasn’t error free. The following shootings, referenced by their number in the list, could not be verfied. Most of the citations pointed to dead links and one did not have a citation at all.
- 49
- 60
- 77
- 90
- 124 (no citation at all, link points to a different shooting)
- 145
- 189
- 218
- 225
- 237
The following incidents either weren’t mass shootings or could not be confirmed to be mass shootings due to lack of information.
#45 3/2/2015
Three men were shot, the rest suffered injuries unrelated to the shooting. Not a mass shooting.
#71 3/29/2015
Three people shot, one person injured but with no bullet wounds. Not a mass shooting.
#111 5/19/2015
This is an interesting one, but definitely not a mass shooting. One person confirmed shot. One cop shot with a stun gun (do stun guns count in mass shootings?). One cop had cuts on his face. One woman with minor injuries (no mention of gunshot wounds).
#125 5/30/2015
Three shot, one ‘taken to the hospital and treated for injuries he sustained in the fight. Not a mass shooting.
#195 7/17/2015
This one is a bit of a mess and I’m including it because it isn’t clear at all how many people were actually shot. The article clearly states that two people were shot and another person was beaten and stabbed, but it doesn’t state the nature of the other injuries or the death. This one cannot be confirmed as a mass shooting.
#287 9/26/2015
This one does not appear to be a mass shooting. The suspect shot two men, shot at a women but did not hit her, bludgeoned another man, shot another man who then crashed into a wall, then tried to get into another woman’s car before he was apprehended. All told three people were shot.
Conclusion
And finally some stats. Of the 996 total incidents listed on the mass shooting tracker:
54 could not be verified due to the lack of citations
34 were either not mass shootings or could not be confirmed as mass shootings due to the lack of information
7 stretched the definition of a mass shooting, with one person committing separate shootings anywhere from one day to two weeks apart
4 were mass shootings according to the shooting tracker’s definition but the listed number of victims was incorrect
1 was a ‘mass shooting’ committed with a pellet gun
——————————–
Back to my own words now. It’s pretty clear that the Shooting Tracker website isn’t even close to accurate. Even if we accept their premise that four people wounded equals a “mass shooting” it’s still plain to see that the website is not even consistent with its own rules. They include events line #95 in 2013 where the numbers from separate incidents were combined to make it seem like a bigger event. Or #150 from 2014 where the injuries are from a car accident and not even firearms related. For anyone who actually cares about getting facts right and presenting useful information sot hat the public can make an informed decision about current events it might be a good idea to stay well clear of this website. Or, if you only care about pushing an agenda and don’t mind presenting a propaganda piece as factual evidence, feel free to keep using this site.
How many of these mass shootings were gang related vs committed by people without a criminal past? Gun bans might prevent the latter but not the former.
Shhhhhh… Don’t mention that most are criminals involved in criminal enterprise. Think of the
children!narrative!That was almost exactly the first question to pop into my head – How many of these “mass shooting” were committed by a known violent criminal, gang banger, or domestic abuser/stalker? And how many were committed by a licensed (unconstitutional government permission slip) concealed carry holder or a private gun-owning citizen with no history of criminal or violent activity, or mental issues?
Next point, how many of the victims in any of these assaults, whether “mass shootings” or not, also had a weapon and attempted to fire back in self defense? THAT would be an interesting statistic.
I’ve seen at least two instances of a gang-member’s body being found on a school’s property being called a “School Shooting”, so who the hell knows with these people. Its a fact free zone.
This is my favorite shooting rampage debunker, even if it is 3 years old. He looks at the “4 victims” limit in a different way, noting that when someone at the scene (usually a civilian, sometimes an off-duty cop) stops a shooting rampage, it ends before there are four victims. A handy and subtle way to bias the statistics and clai that good guys with guns never stop bad buys with guns.
Good point. How many of these incidents were stopped by someone else with a gun? Concealed carry lisences make up ~4% of the population. Of which I would wager less than half actually carry at all times.
Since when has accuracy mattered to them? They’ll be called on it and nobody will care. how long have they continued to use the 40% myth despite it being conclusively put down?
Rough numbers, 50 out of 1000 shootings reported have problems and 50 can’t be verified. Does it really matter that they’re off by 10%? If you’re a gun grabber reading an article on how terribly unreliabe shootingtracker is, you’re thinking, but holy crap, what about the 900 that were right? It’s senseless to quabble over this.
For instance, there’s roughly 10,000 people in a country of 330,000,000 who are murdered each year by ballistic assailants (I guess thats an epidemic or something, CDC says 3,000 to 49,000 people die of the flu each year, but that’s not an epidemic or something.) Does it really matter that 10,000 people die? Would the gun grabbers pretend to be any less shocked, horrified, or demanding of action if it were 20,000? What if it were only 1,000? Or 500? The answer is no.
I think it’s important that if were going to play into their irrelevant numbers games that we make the numbers evern more irrelevanter by reminding folks that no amount of people who die or are attacked makes an individuals right to be able to protect themselves with a gun any less important, and the anywhere from 100,000 to 2.5million people per year who do protect themselves with a gun are thankful for it.
No, it’s 10% on TOP of the 85% that is completely wrong. The Congressional report on mass shootings (http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44126.pdf) showed that there were 25 mass shootings in 2013, shooting tracker said there were 363. MST is reporting 14x the actual number.
“No citation and/or dead link unable to verify the story”
Then it is not news, only a fary tale.
#108 – 5/17/2015 – 9 dead, 18 wounded in Waco Texas. Mass shooting or trigger happy cops?
They’re pathetic; in a thread on their subreddit, a reader writes;
But according to youdogknowsmoreaboutgunsthanwedo.com, 2 pellet gun shootings out of a 1000 total is fucking Goebbels.
Yet it’s way more than that, their bullshit is being discovered, story by story. But they’ll keep parroting it around. Because guns.
No, they don’t care. They cook the books and stretch things out by design because their data set would be as small as their I.Q. otherwise. They have to provide Pope Barry with is bogus statistics. Bloomberg likes to fund these groups through back door channels to keep the going. Otherwise, they would have limited donations to keep them running.
I also investigated the guy who runs this site, and found his Youtube channel. He loves violent games like Battlefield and Call of Duty. Hypocrite much?
I have the right to protect myself and if you don’t like it tough $hit. I was USAF military police honorably discharged with full pension. I am eligible for HR 218. I would protect you.
No double standards put DC politicians on Obamacare and SS.Thanks for your support and vote.Pass the word. mrpresident2016.com
So much work and effort into such a pig of a bike and still it hold just holds a candle to a
So, 90% of them are fully valid … not perfect, but not exactly deceptive, right?
54 could not be verified due to the lack of citations
34 were either not mass shootings or could not be confirmed as mass shootings due to the lack of information
7 stretched the definition of a mass shooting, with one person committing separate shootings anywhere from one day to two weeks apart
4 were mass shootings according to the shooting tracker’s definition but the listed number of victims was incorrect
1 was a ‘mass shooting’ committed with a pellet gun
How do you find exactly 100 entries that should be disregarded!!!??? LOL
mass shooting is vague.
the term mass is vague.
arguing over these definitions is just childish and lazy.
How many people were killed?
How many people were wounded physically?
How many people were wounded psychologically?
I mean, PTSD has to be involved here.
Then ask, do we even care since it is such a small number of the total number of people in the USA.
I remember an old man shooting an unarmed young man in my neighborhood with a shotgun when I was a child. That has an impact on a child like me. Everyone becoming so afraid when the other person has no weapon.
Check this part out on the shootingtracker.com site. LOL
”
Gun Violence Archive has always used the FBI derived definition:
FOUR or more shot and/or killed in a single event [incident], at the same general time and location, not including the shooter.
This difference is that we do not count the shooter among the victims when determining if a shooting reaches the threshold of Mass Shooting. It insures a clear separation between victims of a shooting and those who perpetrate the crime. GVA also does not parse the definition to exclude any type of gun violence such as gang shooting or domestic violence. The definition is purely numerical and reflects ALL shootings which reach that statistical threshold.
”
the FBI definition included the shooter in the count of victims??? LOL
Even I am not that sympathetic. LOL
Well, the FBI really means three then.
Comments are closed.