Secret Service Study on Mass Shootings

Secret Service Study on Mass Shootings

This is a discussion on Secret Service Study on Mass Shootings within the Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; I was digging for something and found this report. It is downloadable in pdf format and provides some interesting statistics and reading about mass shootings. ...

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 28
Like Tree46Likes

Thread: Secret Service Study on Mass Shootings

  1. #1
    VIP Member Array OldChap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5,064

    Secret Service Study on Mass Shootings

    I was digging for something and found this report. It is downloadable in pdf format and provides some interesting statistics and reading about mass shootings.

    https://www.secretservice.gov/data/p...Y2019_MAPS.pdf

    This is not classified or restricted data.
    "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has limits."

  2. #2
    Senior Member Array KevinRohrer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Medina, Ohio
    Posts
    649
    This was obviously published for public consumption.
    Last edited by KevinRohrer; August 9th, 2019 at 10:31 PM.
    OldChap likes this.
    Member: Orange Gunsite Family, NRA--Life, American Legion

  3. #3
    Distinguished Member
    Array 1942bull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    SE PA
    Posts
    1,599
    Quote Originally Posted by KevinRohrer View Post
    This was obviously published for public consumption. I saw a few things in it that were factual but misleading.
    Ok, I will ask. What is a misleading fact. I do not mean to challenge your conclusion but rather to understand the terminology. A “fact” is indisputable. Something that is “misleading” gives the wrong impression or is an incorrect statement. So are you saying that the report contained misleading statements rather than misleading facts. Can you elaborate. I found the report to be interesting but have drawn no conclusions from it. That is why I am interested in other observations and opinions.
    OldChap likes this.
    USMC 9/59 through 9/69
    Vietnam June ‘66 to February ‘68
    MOS: 4641, Combat Photographer

    Memberships:
    Gun Owners of America
    Second Amendment Foundation
    Pennsylvania Firearms Owners Against Crime

  4. Remove Advertisements
    DefensiveCarry.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #4
    Member
    Array Hatchee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Boonedocks NC
    Posts
    359
    Quote Originally Posted by 1942bull View Post
    Ok, I will ask. What is a misleading fact. I do not mean to challenge your conclusion but rather to understand the terminology. A “fact” is indisputable. Something that is “misleading” gives the wrong impression or is an incorrect statement. So are you saying that the report contained misleading statements rather than misleading facts. Can you elaborate. I found the report to be interesting but have drawn no conclusions from it. That is why I am interested in other observations and opinions.
    Perhaps when some facts are given and others are omitted. Or if the fact is not explained or put into proper context.
    OldChap, OD*, ButtShot14 and 1 others like this.
    .................................................. ............
    SIG P365, Walther PPS 9mm, Ruger LCP ii; Wife's: Sig P238, LCP ii, Remington 11-87 20G

  6. #5
    Member Array KILTED COWBOY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    TEXAS
    Posts
    288
    I think a misleading fact may be like when they say that 20,000 people are killed by gun violence yearly,
    but when you dive deeper you find that 15,000 are suicides and 3000 are accidental discharges.
    So the 20,000 number is factual, but misleading you to believe all were homicides, mass killing etc.
    By the way those numbers were made up and not factual
    baren, gasmitty and 5lima30ret like this.

  7. #6
    VIP Member Array OldChap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5,064
    Not that it really matters to the report's data, but isn't a fact "put into context" actually just a conclusion?

    If you state that 22 people died at the WM in El Paso, that is a fact that really has no attending conclusion. No explanation needed.

    I do believe that this study and the "facts" about mental health must be taken with a grain of salt. In my experience, any seasoned mental health professional will admit that much of what they do is really black magic. There is really no way to arrive at proveable "facts" about someone's mental activity. You look at their actions and responses to stimuli first and then make assumptions. There is no empirical proof, unlike almost all other medical disciplines. Hence the grain of salt. And to top it off, many of the actors are dead, making their mental health a moot point.

    I was thinking there were distortions or inaccuracies in the USSS report as such. I've read it through three or four times now. I see nothing of the sort. (Only what I mentioned above) Are there examples we should point out to those who read it?

    I think a misleading fact may be like when they say that 20,000 people are killed by gun violence yearly,
    but when you dive deeper you find that 15,000 are suicides and 3000 are accidental discharges.
    So the 20,000 number is factual, but misleading you to believe all were homicides, mass killing etc.
    By the way those numbers were made up and not factual
    @KILTED COWBOY I ran the report through several searches and found nothing about what you wrote here in the USSS report itself. Now I see that you said this was just a general example. More coffee...More coffee.
    "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has limits."

  8. #7
    VIP Member Array jmf552's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    5,743
    Quote Originally Posted by 1942bull View Post
    Ok, I will ask. What is a misleading fact. I do not mean to challenge your conclusion but rather to understand the terminology. A “fact” is indisputable. Something that is “misleading” gives the wrong impression or is an incorrect statement. So are you saying that the report contained misleading statements rather than misleading facts. Can you elaborate. I found the report to be interesting but have drawn no conclusions from it. That is why I am interested in other observations and opinions.
    Negotiators, lawyers, reporters, pundits, marketers and politicians use misleading facts all the time. In fact there is a word for intentionally using true facts to mislead: paltering. Here are some examples. All are facts. All could be misleading, depending on the context.
    • Smallpox was eradicated within a year of the release of the original Sony Walkman.
    • On average, a person has approximately one fallopian tube.
    • I am undefeated in professional wrestling.
    • I was the Time Magazine Person of the Year in 2006.
    • Every single person who drank the water in Detroit in 1891 died.
    • There are more planets inhabited by robots in our solar system than planets populated by people.
    baren, graydude, OldChap and 3 others like this.
    Attack Squadron 65 "Tigers", USS Eisenhower '80 - '83, peackeeping w/Iran, Libya, Lebanon and E. Europe

  9. #8
    VIP Member
    Array spclopr8tr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    SE Tennessee
    Posts
    3,505
    Wait, in 2018 there were less than 30 mass attacks? And three of those were with vehicles, not guns. I was just reading this week in 2019 we are already up to 256 gun mass attacks. Hmmm. . .

    The summary chart is very tellling.

    • Most of the attackers utilized firearms, and half departed the site on their own or committed suicide.
    • Half were motivated by a grievance related to a domestic situation, workplace, or other personal issue.
    • Two-thirds had histories of mental health symptoms, including depressive, suicidal, and psychotic symptoms.
    • Nearly all had at least one significant stressor within the last five years, and over half had indications of financial
    instability in that timeframe.
    • Nearly all made threatening or concerning communications and more than three-quarters elicited concern from
    others prior to carrying out their attacks.
    OldChap and graydude like this.
    "The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed." Alexander Hamilton

    Patron Life Member NRA
    SAF - CCRKBA
    NAGR / GOA
    TFA-LAC / Save the 2A
    Handgunlaw.us Donor

  10. #9
    Member Array M1911A1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Northwest Washington State
    Posts
    131
    Quote Originally Posted by jmf552 View Post
    Negotiators, lawyers, reporters, pundits, marketers and politicians use misleading facts all the time. In fact there is a word for intentionally using true facts to mislead: paltering. Here are some examples. All are facts. All could be misleading, depending on the context.
    • Smallpox was eradicated within a year of the release of the original Sony Walkman.
    • On average, a person has approximately one fallopian tube.
    • I am undefeated in professional wrestling.
    • I was the Time Magazine Person of the Year in 2006.
    • Every single person who drank the water in Detroit in 1891 died.
    • There are more planets inhabited by robots in our solar system than planets populated by people.
    Thank you!
    I've passed your list on, with suitable commentary.
    OldChap likes this.
    Steve
    Retired Leathersmith and Practical Shooter

    "Qui desiderat pacem, præparet bellum."

  11. #10
    VIP Member Array jmf552's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    5,743
    Quote Originally Posted by M1911A1 View Post
    Thank you!
    I've passed your list on, with suitable commentary.
    FWIW, I got it from another site.
    OldChap likes this.
    Attack Squadron 65 "Tigers", USS Eisenhower '80 - '83, peackeeping w/Iran, Libya, Lebanon and E. Europe

  12. #11
    Distinguished Member
    Array 1942bull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    SE PA
    Posts
    1,599
    Quote Originally Posted by jmf552 View Post
    Negotiators, lawyers, reporters, pundits, marketers and politicians use misleading facts all the time. In fact there is a word for intentionally using true facts to mislead: paltering. Here are some examples. All are facts. All could be misleading, depending on the context.
    • Smallpox was eradicated within a year of the release of the original Sony Walkman.
    • On average, a person has approximately one fallopian tube.
    • I am undefeated in professional wrestling.
    • I was the Time Magazine Person of the Year in 2006.
    • Every single person who drank the water in Detroit in 1891 died.
    • There are more planets inhabited by robots in our solar system than planets populated by people.
    Good point. However, a fact is a fact and a misleading statement is not a fact. You cited facts. They were true. That is a fact. When facts deceive it is the reader who has failed to understand and apply the fact. It is a fact that guns do not kill anything. That is as true as the fact that people kill people. Conflating the two is misleading only to those who do not discern. Using that human failure to mislead is common, but the greater question is whether the Secret Service intentionally attempted to conflate facts to create a false narrative. Candidly, I would need more facts to decide that fir myself.
    OldChap likes this.
    USMC 9/59 through 9/69
    Vietnam June ‘66 to February ‘68
    MOS: 4641, Combat Photographer

    Memberships:
    Gun Owners of America
    Second Amendment Foundation
    Pennsylvania Firearms Owners Against Crime

  13. #12
    Member Array M1911A1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Northwest Washington State
    Posts
    131
    Quote Originally Posted by 1942bull View Post
    ...a fact is a fact and a misleading statement is not a fact...When facts deceive it is the reader who has failed to understand and apply the fact...[emphasis added]
    When facts are presented in a misleading context, it is not the reader who has failed in understanding. Rather, it is the presenter's malfeasance and malevolent manipulation which is at fault. (Sorry 'bout that. )
    It is true that it is the reader's/listener's/viewer's duty to be a critical recipient of the information received. However, when the "news" source is presented as being respected and respectable in the general sense, the recipient may be forgiven if the source slips in some biased information while otherwise being straightforward.

    I am reminded by this discussion of the difference between The New York Times that I read as a young person perhaps 60 years ago, and The New York Times of today.
    Yesterday's Times was a Liberal newspaper, but one which carefully separated the facts of the "news" from Liberal editorial opinions. Today's Times mixes opinion into its "news" facts, and has even published not-fact-checked, outright lies.
    Taking the "news" from today's Times would be both mentally and physically exhausting, to a truly conscientious, critical reader.
    OldChap, Psycho41 and 1942bull like this.
    Steve
    Retired Leathersmith and Practical Shooter

    "Qui desiderat pacem, præparet bellum."

  14. #13
    Senior Member Array KevinRohrer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Medina, Ohio
    Posts
    649
    Quote Originally Posted by 1942bull View Post
    Ok, I will ask. What is a misleading fact. I do not mean to challenge your conclusion but rather to understand the terminology. A “fact” is indisputable. Something that is “misleading” gives the wrong impression or is an incorrect statement. So are you saying that the report contained misleading statements rather than misleading facts. Can you elaborate. I found the report to be interesting but have drawn no conclusions from it. That is why I am interested in other observations and opinions.
    I forgot that this study only included 2-years rather than a longer look at the problem. When I originally looked at the outcome paragraph, the numbers didn't look right because the study is too limited in scope. Rather than get into an semantics battle, I deleted the offending sentence. Mea Culpa.
    OldChap likes this.
    Member: Orange Gunsite Family, NRA--Life, American Legion

  15. #14
    Senior Moderator
    Array Rock and Glock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    404 Page Not Found
    Posts
    21,902
    I just started through this over a cup of coffee. It is telling, as it returns to a mantra I have spouted occasionally, that "They were failed by the adults," meaning the indicia were present, but no one acted on the indicia. Refer to Pulse, Parkland, and others.

    Regardless of whether these attacks were acts of workplace violence, domestic violence, school-based violence, or inspired by an ideology, similar themes were observed in the behaviors and circumstances of the perpetrators,5 including:

    • Most of the attackers utilized firearms, and half departed the site on their own or committed suicide.

    • Half were motivated by a grievance related to a domestic situation, workplace, or other personal issue.

    • Two-thirds had histories of mental health symptoms, including depressive, suicidal, and psychotic symptoms.

    • Nearly all had at least one significant stressor within the last five years, and over half had indications of financial
    instability in that timeframe.

    • Nearly all made threatening or concerning communications and more than three-quarters elicited concern from
    others prior to carrying out their attacks.

    The violence described in this report is not the result of a single cause or motive. The findings emphasize, however, that we can identify warning signs prior to an act of violence. While not every act of violence will be prevented, this report indicates that targeted violence may be preventable, if appropriate systems are in place to identify concerning behaviors, gather information to assess the risk of violence, and utilize community resources to mitigate the risk.
    We need to quit failing, on the personal, mental health level.

    They need to quit focusing on banning the silly evil talisman gun.

    It is a human problem. Not a gun problem.

    Thanks, @OldChap

    THE WEAPONS: Though most of the attacks were carried out using a firearm (n = 24, 89%), three attackers used vehicles to cause harm (11%).6 Of the 24 who used firearms, at least 10 possessed their weapon illegally at the time of the incident. Two of those ten were minors. The remaining eight had felony convictions, were the subjects of protective orders, or had some other factor present that would have prohibited them from purchasing or possessing a firearm based on federal or state laws.7
    42% were carrying a gun illegally. That is a good starting point.
    OldChap likes this.
    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ: Buy These Stickers Here



    "If we suppose them sincere, we must pity their ignorance; if insincere, we must abhor the spirit of deception which it betrays." Alexander Hamilton

  16. #15
    VIP Member Array OldChap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5,064
    Quote Originally Posted by KevinRohrer View Post
    I forgot that this study only included 2-years rather than a longer look at the problem. When I originally looked at the outcome paragraph, the numbers didn't look right because the study is too limited in scope. Rather than get into an semantics battle, I deleted the offending sentence. Mea Culpa.
    I probably should have made a note that this is a briefing publication. The study may well be on-going, but law enforcement needs critical decision-making intelligence now, not after years of study. There are a number of intelligence briefings put out primarily for law enforcement and specialized military units daily. Most of those are not available to the general public, as this one was. Since the USSS is responsible for key asset protection, they sometimes need reliable summary intelligence reports that focus on recent trends, and I suspect that is what this report is.

    @Rock and Glock You are spot-on. The problem is a general failing of anyone to take the threat precursors seriously. There are preventative measures that may be taken without the grotesque violations of the Constitution proposed by the socialist/communist leaning crowd, who I maintain is really not that terribly interested in any loss of life, only the furtherance of their agenda to disarm enough of the public that they can move forward with their socialistic Utopian plans.
    Rock and Glock likes this.
    "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has limits."

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •