|
Abstract
|
In a report released in September, 2013, the FBI claimed that between 2000 and 2013 there were 160 "active shooting incidents" in public places (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2013). Even more worrisome, these attacks increased dramatically from just a single one in 2000 to 17 in 2013 and murders from 7 to 86 over the same period. Statistically, over time they find that attacks and the number of people killed had increased at an average annual rate of 16% (Figures 1 and 2).With the FBI officially behind the claims, media outlets worldwide gave this extensive coverage.
While the FBI report provides graphs illustrating "active shooting incidents," not mass shootings, the media has understandably interpreted the report as implying that mass public shootings have similarly increased. For example, the report's introduction assures readers, "The study does not encompass all mass killings or shootings in public places and therefore is limited in its scope. Nonetheless, it was undertaken to provide clarity and data of value to both law enforcement and citizens as they seek to stop these threats and save lives during active shooter incidents" (FBI, 2013, p. 5).The report discusses mass public shootings, but it never makes it clear to the readers that these types of fatalities and attacks are actually not increasing over time. This caused great confusion.
The FBI report enters what has been a lively debate on whether mass public shootings have been increasing. The FBI report closely matches an earlier sample gathered by Mother Jones magazine (Follman, 2014).Academics, such as James Alan Fox, have taken the Mother Jones numbers to task, primarily for their arbitrary and, more important, inconsistent classification of cases over time (Fox, 2013).But the problems are much more extensive than previously noted.
Unfortunately, the FBI report engages in bait and switch and sleight of hand. As we will show, mass public shootings have only increased ever so slightly over the last four decades. While the FBI study discusses "mass shootings or killings," they miss a large number of mass public shootings that should be included in the sample. Their graphs are based on many cases that had absolutely nothing to do with mass killings or even killings of any kind. Worse, the cases that they miss and the cases that shouldn't have been included are not random. Both of these actions work to make it look as if there was a much larger increase in mass public shootings than actually occurred. Over the last four decades there has been no statistically significant increase in these attacks.
Problems with the Data
Out of the 160 cases the FBI report counts from 2000 to 2013, 32 instances involved a gun being fired with no one killed (see Appendix 2).And 11 of those have either zero or just one person wounded. Another 35 cases involved one single person murdered. It is hard to see how the FBI could have erroneously included these cases, which make up 42% of their 160 cases, in any discussion of "mass killings." Surely they do not fit the FBI's old definition, which required four or more murders. And it does not even fit their new one of three or more murders.... |