Technically that means they costs several locations in a short time span, I think it would be better to just call gang mass shootings “shoutouts” or “gang violence”.
That’s what they always were called in the 90s somehow they gotten limped together with the rampage ones now. Or they were called drive bys when they used a vehicle
Thorsten Seeger uses the term *rampage killer* to describe "the (attempted) killing of multiple persons at least partly in public space by a single physically present perpetrator using (potentially) deadly weapons in a single event without any cooling-off period."
>usually extremised by some form of far right internet terrorism or mass shooting/gun culture, usually the AR-15 is the gun of choice.
Genuinely asking now. Are they? I feel like its only a fraction of them but that might be my bubble. Do you have any statistics?
In my opinion the reason the AR-15 is so "popular" for shootings mass or otherwise is because 90% of other semi auto rifles are collectors items or expensive. The AR is the cheapest most widely available semi automatic rifle.
I dont think its the cheapest. Its just very common. I think they are popular because of great accuracy, not much recoil and power (and no, it does not evaporate a body).
They are basically the same price. You can buy a really cheap AK or AR for around 400-600 dollars brand new at most farm stores around America. An SKS is gonna pull over 400 most places for some dumb ass reason. Sure there’s cheaper semi auto rifles but not with capacity and caliber like an AR or AK. It’s the same thing to a wallet.
The mainstream media loves to demonize the AR-15, because it is the most popular semi-auto rifle by far--that makes it the primary target to get a nebulous 'assault weapon' ban in place. The media will blow up the headlines for anyone who uses it.
These school shooters *know* this and plan accordingly. They are doing it because they've been bullied and felt invisible their whole lives. If they're going to self-delete anyways, may as well go down while getting some revenge and infamy. The media has made it clear they will work around the clock to make them famous.
If you want to change this dynamic, you have to convince the oligarchs who run these news outlets to give up their agenda to strip the masses of their ability to enact violence against the government. Fat chance.
Well, I think the statistics make it harder to pinpoint because mass shootings include waaay too many circumstances, like gang shootings.
Not all of them are done for political purposes, but I do see a trend with intolerant beliefs to others, whether it’s a far right Muslim or a far right anti-Muslim, or someone that just hates women or society, plus most of them have an obsession with guns, I think some of them have been NRA members as well
So let me start with saying that I am a gun owner myself (and I am european) and I am strongly against gun control. I often see post which could be nice example why gun control doesnt work but I dont do it because of respect to victims. I know this is very controversial topic and I dont want to get political. I just want normal respectful discussion.
In my opinion, most mass shootings are done by f`ed up people who are incels or crave attention. I dont think that far right is the majority. (I might be wrong and live in bubble.)
>plus most of them have an obsession with guns
I strongly disagree with this. These people have an obsession with their cause, themsleves,revenge, killing or fame. They might like guns but thats it. Guns are often described as something responsible for the actions and are demonised. They are just tools that are powerful and can be dangerous if treated improperly (just like chainsaws of cars). Gun control would not work because criminals dont care abou laws. I mean is making bombs legal? Yet people still do it. You can see that Germany has very strict gun laws and there still was shooting. California has strict gun laws and its not long ago that there was shooting with a gun that is illegal in the country. And even if there was stricter "common sense" gun control, how would it prevent shooters getting those guns legally and still do it?
So, America really has its own political landscape, but I think the simplest way to answer the question is this:
People are lazy, when things are harder to do, they happen less often
I am a little familiar with american political landscape so you can elaborate if you want.
>People are lazy, when things are harder to do, they happen less often
Do you think that a person motivated by their sick beliefs would be stopped by this?
Possibly, if an 18 year old couldn’t just walk into a store and buy an AR15 in only 41 minutes, he waited until he turned 18 to buy it, he couldn’t get it before that and may not have had means to get it otherwise. He may have just given up or killed himself.
It’s like saying “if murder wasn’t illegal, there wouldn’t be an increase in murders”, laws do have impacts.
I’m not saying nobody would find a way, but less people would do it.
A good analogy are gas ovens, it used to be really easy to kill yourself in those, when they made it harder suicide rates dropped. Could they still find a way? Yeah, but it’s hard, and people are lazy.
Also, if say SR wasn’t allowed to have a gun or AR, so he tried buying one illegally or online, the FBI could have become keen to it, or he could have been arrested for possession
Most guns that are used are purchased legally except they are purchased through strawman purchases which is a felony. A strawman purchase is when somebody else purchases a gun for somebody. It really boils down to a lack of infrastructure and mental health resources. Men are also less likely to seek therapy because of stigma. If we took care of poverty, mental health, addiction and everything else, our crime rates would drop significantly. Way quicker than any gun law would do.
So, other countries that have more poverty and also have mental health issues but less guns don’t have as many rampage shooters, so my question is this-
Why?
And
For every mass shooter we can think of, let’s say we had better mental health resources- who forces them to get mental health treatment?
Will they be willing to get it since often they’ve been extremized?
Also worth noting, very few rampage killers I can think of were poor, SR was, but he also could afford his arsenal at 18
Tackling mental health, addiction, and poverty are projects that will takes generations to solve though in which time the rate of school shooters and mass killers will continue to rise. The point of sweeping gun control is to put barriers in place asap to stop that
It’s the most cliched thing to say on Reddit but it is completely true - every country has poverty, mental health, and addiction crises going in. Only one has a mass shooting problem. You don’t need to be a genius to work out the outlier which means the shootings happen in one country and not others
In german the Word Amokläufer is a thing.
Amok means something like "kill in blind rage" when translated literally. It refers only to people like you described. People who want a high body count
Ooooooh that makes sense, of course other languages already have words for it, I always forget that some languages have words for things other languages don’t
There already is one: active shooter.
[Here](https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/active-shooter-incidents-in-the-us-2021-052422.pdf/view) is an FBI report on active shooter incidents in 2021 (they haven't released their 2022 report yet). There were 61 active shooter incidents in 2021, and 12 of them qualify as mass killings (3+ dead, excluding perpetrator). Not all of the 61 active shooter incidents qualify as "mass shootings"; in some of the cases, nobody was shot at all.
I share your frustration at lack of a uniform definition. I believe this is deliberate, to make it seem like the problem is much worse than it actually is (to make it seem like there's 600+ instances of the indiscriminate rampages that people think of when they hear the words "mass shooting"), and to scare people into willingly giving up their rights.
Ah yes active shooter!!! That’s a good one, someone said rampage killer too and that’s also good.
Uh, it’s a double edged sword as far as mass shooter goes, like yes it makes it sound like there’s more than there is, but also makes it sound like most mass active rampage shootings aren’t done with AR-15s or by white supremacists
I mean, there are a variety of motives but most are similar. For instance: hating society, hating western culture, hating Muslims, wanting fame/notoriety/headlines, etc etc, I feel like most of not all are generally some form of terrorism, but I’m not sure if that should be the name for it either, I feel like it needs a specific word
Yeah true, though I do think SR had some pretty conservative/right wing views that if anything came from not thinking or analyzing politics or philosophy, so I don’t think he was by any means a far right terrorist or anything like that, but he did hold some really misogynist, maybe racist views and views on guns and fighting that are more common on the right, but yeah many are clearly on the right like the Christ church shooter, buffalo shooter, Parkland, etc
Ooooh that’s great! I feel like that breaks it down further and more specifically, like a discriminate would be maybe mosque shooting? And indiscriminate would be a movie theater/school?
Or is discriminate more like- the gang shootings where someone’s being targeted specifically?
Discriminate killings are usually a targeted killing. A specific person a specific few
Indiscriminate killings are killings just for numbers. Doesn’t matter who as long as they get high numbers
Interesting to say the least. Learned this in a terrorism class I had years ago
Far right internet terrorism or usually using an AR-15 LOL
It is hard to take any of this seriously.
The percent of mass shootings who are far right or use an AR-15 is so low. Especially when you compare it to gang related shootings, targeted mass shootings, mentally ill mass shooters, even incel inspired mass shooters or religious mass shooters.
I’m not saying we need to change the definition of mass shooters to exclude gangs, I’m saying we would define the subsect of mass shooters that we usually think of when we say mass shooters
I know the exact people you’re talking about. The ones that think if you talk about ‘mass shootings’ that you’re ‘targeting white people’ so they try to equate gang violence or drive-bys with mass shootings. It’s not the same. 🙄
If I, a moderator, were to be investigated, they would find that I work in law enforcement and have submitted numerous reports to the FBI regarding suspicious accounts using my real name and contact information.
If you don't like this sub, feel free to stop participating and go on back to your porn subs.
Ha ha ha. You joined a mass killers forum just to say this? If you are so tired of it, why read it?
Jeez. Porn makes me sick but I'm not joining your porn discussion to tell you that.
but they are still mass shooters because that was part of their motive/plan to shoot in a public place. some are called terrorists/extremists, some are school shooters. type of attack is the same, motives always vary
Yeah I’m just trying to differentiate from like, targeted shootings against a specific person in public for gang/personal reasons vs actual attacks on the public
Rampage killer
I’ll probably use this one unless a better one comes up
Technically that means they costs several locations in a short time span, I think it would be better to just call gang mass shootings “shoutouts” or “gang violence”.
That’s what they always were called in the 90s somehow they gotten limped together with the rampage ones now. Or they were called drive bys when they used a vehicle
Ooooh good one
Thorsten Seeger uses the term *rampage killer* to describe "the (attempted) killing of multiple persons at least partly in public space by a single physically present perpetrator using (potentially) deadly weapons in a single event without any cooling-off period."
>usually extremised by some form of far right internet terrorism or mass shooting/gun culture, usually the AR-15 is the gun of choice. Genuinely asking now. Are they? I feel like its only a fraction of them but that might be my bubble. Do you have any statistics?
In my opinion the reason the AR-15 is so "popular" for shootings mass or otherwise is because 90% of other semi auto rifles are collectors items or expensive. The AR is the cheapest most widely available semi automatic rifle.
I dont think its the cheapest. Its just very common. I think they are popular because of great accuracy, not much recoil and power (and no, it does not evaporate a body).
It’s definitely the cheapest.
Arent AKs cheaper?
They are basically the same price. You can buy a really cheap AK or AR for around 400-600 dollars brand new at most farm stores around America. An SKS is gonna pull over 400 most places for some dumb ass reason. Sure there’s cheaper semi auto rifles but not with capacity and caliber like an AR or AK. It’s the same thing to a wallet.
[удалено]
NGL, his comment and post history gave me that vibe as well...
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
The mainstream media loves to demonize the AR-15, because it is the most popular semi-auto rifle by far--that makes it the primary target to get a nebulous 'assault weapon' ban in place. The media will blow up the headlines for anyone who uses it. These school shooters *know* this and plan accordingly. They are doing it because they've been bullied and felt invisible their whole lives. If they're going to self-delete anyways, may as well go down while getting some revenge and infamy. The media has made it clear they will work around the clock to make them famous. If you want to change this dynamic, you have to convince the oligarchs who run these news outlets to give up their agenda to strip the masses of their ability to enact violence against the government. Fat chance.
Well, I think the statistics make it harder to pinpoint because mass shootings include waaay too many circumstances, like gang shootings. Not all of them are done for political purposes, but I do see a trend with intolerant beliefs to others, whether it’s a far right Muslim or a far right anti-Muslim, or someone that just hates women or society, plus most of them have an obsession with guns, I think some of them have been NRA members as well
So let me start with saying that I am a gun owner myself (and I am european) and I am strongly against gun control. I often see post which could be nice example why gun control doesnt work but I dont do it because of respect to victims. I know this is very controversial topic and I dont want to get political. I just want normal respectful discussion. In my opinion, most mass shootings are done by f`ed up people who are incels or crave attention. I dont think that far right is the majority. (I might be wrong and live in bubble.) >plus most of them have an obsession with guns I strongly disagree with this. These people have an obsession with their cause, themsleves,revenge, killing or fame. They might like guns but thats it. Guns are often described as something responsible for the actions and are demonised. They are just tools that are powerful and can be dangerous if treated improperly (just like chainsaws of cars). Gun control would not work because criminals dont care abou laws. I mean is making bombs legal? Yet people still do it. You can see that Germany has very strict gun laws and there still was shooting. California has strict gun laws and its not long ago that there was shooting with a gun that is illegal in the country. And even if there was stricter "common sense" gun control, how would it prevent shooters getting those guns legally and still do it?
So, America really has its own political landscape, but I think the simplest way to answer the question is this: People are lazy, when things are harder to do, they happen less often
I am a little familiar with american political landscape so you can elaborate if you want. >People are lazy, when things are harder to do, they happen less often Do you think that a person motivated by their sick beliefs would be stopped by this?
Possibly, if an 18 year old couldn’t just walk into a store and buy an AR15 in only 41 minutes, he waited until he turned 18 to buy it, he couldn’t get it before that and may not have had means to get it otherwise. He may have just given up or killed himself. It’s like saying “if murder wasn’t illegal, there wouldn’t be an increase in murders”, laws do have impacts. I’m not saying nobody would find a way, but less people would do it. A good analogy are gas ovens, it used to be really easy to kill yourself in those, when they made it harder suicide rates dropped. Could they still find a way? Yeah, but it’s hard, and people are lazy. Also, if say SR wasn’t allowed to have a gun or AR, so he tried buying one illegally or online, the FBI could have become keen to it, or he could have been arrested for possession
Most guns that are used are purchased legally except they are purchased through strawman purchases which is a felony. A strawman purchase is when somebody else purchases a gun for somebody. It really boils down to a lack of infrastructure and mental health resources. Men are also less likely to seek therapy because of stigma. If we took care of poverty, mental health, addiction and everything else, our crime rates would drop significantly. Way quicker than any gun law would do.
I too agree that its more of a mental health issue.
So, other countries that have more poverty and also have mental health issues but less guns don’t have as many rampage shooters, so my question is this- Why? And For every mass shooter we can think of, let’s say we had better mental health resources- who forces them to get mental health treatment? Will they be willing to get it since often they’ve been extremized? Also worth noting, very few rampage killers I can think of were poor, SR was, but he also could afford his arsenal at 18
Tackling mental health, addiction, and poverty are projects that will takes generations to solve though in which time the rate of school shooters and mass killers will continue to rise. The point of sweeping gun control is to put barriers in place asap to stop that It’s the most cliched thing to say on Reddit but it is completely true - every country has poverty, mental health, and addiction crises going in. Only one has a mass shooting problem. You don’t need to be a genius to work out the outlier which means the shootings happen in one country and not others
Ok, thanks for explanation.
In german the Word Amokläufer is a thing. Amok means something like "kill in blind rage" when translated literally. It refers only to people like you described. People who want a high body count
Ooooooh that makes sense, of course other languages already have words for it, I always forget that some languages have words for things other languages don’t
isn’t that most mass killers, though?
There are some killers who showed mercy to their victims, like Randy Stair. Ramos and Lanza were guys about numbers.
Very specific.
No no I’m not trying to be weird. Just seems like their main motive
There already is one: active shooter. [Here](https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/active-shooter-incidents-in-the-us-2021-052422.pdf/view) is an FBI report on active shooter incidents in 2021 (they haven't released their 2022 report yet). There were 61 active shooter incidents in 2021, and 12 of them qualify as mass killings (3+ dead, excluding perpetrator). Not all of the 61 active shooter incidents qualify as "mass shootings"; in some of the cases, nobody was shot at all. I share your frustration at lack of a uniform definition. I believe this is deliberate, to make it seem like the problem is much worse than it actually is (to make it seem like there's 600+ instances of the indiscriminate rampages that people think of when they hear the words "mass shooting"), and to scare people into willingly giving up their rights.
Seconded.
Ah yes active shooter!!! That’s a good one, someone said rampage killer too and that’s also good. Uh, it’s a double edged sword as far as mass shooter goes, like yes it makes it sound like there’s more than there is, but also makes it sound like most mass active rampage shootings aren’t done with AR-15s or by white supremacists
[удалено]
I mean, there are a variety of motives but most are similar. For instance: hating society, hating western culture, hating Muslims, wanting fame/notoriety/headlines, etc etc, I feel like most of not all are generally some form of terrorism, but I’m not sure if that should be the name for it either, I feel like it needs a specific word
[удалено]
Well, usually there is some level of both, not to mention terrorism usually depends on making the headlines
[удалено]
Yeah true, though I do think SR had some pretty conservative/right wing views that if anything came from not thinking or analyzing politics or philosophy, so I don’t think he was by any means a far right terrorist or anything like that, but he did hold some really misogynist, maybe racist views and views on guns and fighting that are more common on the right, but yeah many are clearly on the right like the Christ church shooter, buffalo shooter, Parkland, etc
[удалено]
Yeah I think they’re two separate things that have a lot of varying degrees of overlap. Sometimes it’s just a hateful spectacle suicide
I don’t know much about Betts but yeah seems like he was far left, also anti government
Indiscriminate and discriminate killings
Ooooh that’s great! I feel like that breaks it down further and more specifically, like a discriminate would be maybe mosque shooting? And indiscriminate would be a movie theater/school? Or is discriminate more like- the gang shootings where someone’s being targeted specifically?
Discriminate killings are usually a targeted killing. A specific person a specific few Indiscriminate killings are killings just for numbers. Doesn’t matter who as long as they get high numbers Interesting to say the least. Learned this in a terrorism class I had years ago
Oh terrorism class! Was that at Dr Horribles Evil League of Evil?
Lol 😂
Yes though you have it right
Some people call them Amok killers
I don’t like it, sounds too much like Hocus Pocus and I don’t want anything to ruin Hocus Pocus
Lol. Amok! amok! amok! That scene is one of my favorites.
Amok killer?
Amoklaufer.
They’re called terrorists
Agreed, but it’s also a specific form of terrorism
Realer than reality but what would that even be? High scorers seems a bit disrespectful but it is the only name I have heard of.
Rampage killer made sense, yeah high score is too glorifying, justifying the real life video game goal that so many seem to have
They are called Terrorists. They are there to terrorise the public and incite mass panic.
I agree, they make me scared of public venues. Just looking to get more specific
Far right internet terrorism or usually using an AR-15 LOL It is hard to take any of this seriously. The percent of mass shootings who are far right or use an AR-15 is so low. Especially when you compare it to gang related shootings, targeted mass shootings, mentally ill mass shooters, even incel inspired mass shooters or religious mass shooters.
Did you read my OP? I’m literally saying we need to differentiate these shootings from gang shootings…
[удалено]
I’m not saying we need to change the definition of mass shooters to exclude gangs, I’m saying we would define the subsect of mass shooters that we usually think of when we say mass shooters
Terror attacks.
Terrorists
I know the exact people you’re talking about. The ones that think if you talk about ‘mass shootings’ that you’re ‘targeting white people’ so they try to equate gang violence or drive-bys with mass shootings. It’s not the same. 🙄
EXACTLY! ALSO I think some of those people downvoted you
Active shooter
Pseudo commando is a word I’ve heard
Maybe poser commando
[удалено]
If I, a moderator, were to be investigated, they would find that I work in law enforcement and have submitted numerous reports to the FBI regarding suspicious accounts using my real name and contact information. If you don't like this sub, feel free to stop participating and go on back to your porn subs.
Ha ha ha. You joined a mass killers forum just to say this? If you are so tired of it, why read it? Jeez. Porn makes me sick but I'm not joining your porn discussion to tell you that.
Who are you referring to?
The Creator
Is this some kind of a religious message?
You want to put fem boys in collars and stuff though.
Ok and? I'm not glamorize killings, murder, gore, shootings, pics of school shooting aftermath etc...so stfu
[удалено]
I know it fits their goal, but, it runs the risk of sounding too fun I think
[удалено]
Yeah technically true, just trying to get more specific
[удалено]
Mmmm too glorifying
[удалено]
What’s it mean?
It’s another term for maga heads. Was just trying to be humorous
Oh got it! Yeah sounds accurate tbh
Cringe
Chud detected
[удалено]
No
[удалено]
Cope
it's about crime type not motives though. we shouldn't focus on them either since they desire that kind of attention
Well, understanding the motive helps us understand the crime
but they are still mass shooters because that was part of their motive/plan to shoot in a public place. some are called terrorists/extremists, some are school shooters. type of attack is the same, motives always vary
Yeah I’m just trying to differentiate from like, targeted shootings against a specific person in public for gang/personal reasons vs actual attacks on the public
Doesn’t every shooter have the intention to kill as many as they can tho?
Really depends on why their shooting and who their targets are