Well, it's been 48 hours.
Another mass shooting/active shooting/whatever term you use.
This time at a school. Kentucky again.
The typical reactions ensued.
More screams of "change something" by the usual suspects.
More, "but don't change our somethings" by the usual suspects. Although most of the 2A press is currently at SHOT in Vegas, so the yelling isn't as pronounced as it could be from that side.
More bullshit "this is the XXth school shooting this year!" clickbait, cleverly not mentioning that said number includes at least two suicides, a drive-by in the neighborhood of a school, a negligent discharge, an incident with a pellet gun, and what looks like an armed robbery in a school parking lot.
It is true that mass shootings are the one type of violent crime that's actually growing in the U.S. (Violent crime in general dropped steadily from 1992-2014, went up some in 2015-2016, but looks to have gone down again in 2017, though all of the data hasn't come in on last year yet). Made all the more unsettling by the ambiguous motives of many (LVPD has effectively given up on discovering a motive of the Vegas shooter).
A lot of detail has been obscured due to the shooter being a minor, but enough news outlets have reported that the shooting can be reconstructed somewhat.
The shooter walked into a central atrium of the school, fired a single shot, seemed surprised that he had, and kept shooting. When he ran out of ammo, he ran and surrendered to police.
This fits the most common type of mass shooter I've seen. They enter a target area, keep going until they encounter resistance, then either surrender or suicide.
And this is any kind of resistance: The Aurora had a magazine jam. VA Tech failed to break down a barricade. Gabby Giffords was dogpiled by the crowd.
That this shooter (apparently) didn't have any other magazines meant he met resistance as soon as he ran dry, which is the first bright spot I can find. (In contrast, sandy hook and the SC church shooters only stopped when they ran out of victims).
If I *must* make a guess, I'd say the one weapon and magazine were all he could successfully steal, which limited his options.
As of this morning, the toll stands at two dead, one still in critical, one still in serious, and roughly a dozen others treated and released. No consensus among the press as to how many shot vs associated injuries. Not knowing the shooter's background or seeing a better map of the school (I looked), I'm not going to credit any one aspect over the other as to why he managed to kill so few.
We're still no closer to determining motivation (and definitely no closer to being able to identify potential future shooters). I'm not a psychologist, so this is me as a student of human nature speaking. But if I had to guess what this type of shooter gains for as long as their rampages last?
Control. Not power in and of itself, but control.
From the moment they enter until the moment they encounter resistance, their world is theirs to manipulate.
I may be making a connection out of nothing here. But in a modern world where a sense of how helpless individuals truly can be in the face of all manner of challenges, I suppose it's possible that the prospect of even a few moments of complete control may be seductive enough for some to give in.
Another mass shooting/active shooting/whatever term you use.
This time at a school. Kentucky again.
The typical reactions ensued.
More screams of "change something" by the usual suspects.
More, "but don't change our somethings" by the usual suspects. Although most of the 2A press is currently at SHOT in Vegas, so the yelling isn't as pronounced as it could be from that side.
More bullshit "this is the XXth school shooting this year!" clickbait, cleverly not mentioning that said number includes at least two suicides, a drive-by in the neighborhood of a school, a negligent discharge, an incident with a pellet gun, and what looks like an armed robbery in a school parking lot.
It is true that mass shootings are the one type of violent crime that's actually growing in the U.S. (Violent crime in general dropped steadily from 1992-2014, went up some in 2015-2016, but looks to have gone down again in 2017, though all of the data hasn't come in on last year yet). Made all the more unsettling by the ambiguous motives of many (LVPD has effectively given up on discovering a motive of the Vegas shooter).
A lot of detail has been obscured due to the shooter being a minor, but enough news outlets have reported that the shooting can be reconstructed somewhat.
The shooter walked into a central atrium of the school, fired a single shot, seemed surprised that he had, and kept shooting. When he ran out of ammo, he ran and surrendered to police.
This fits the most common type of mass shooter I've seen. They enter a target area, keep going until they encounter resistance, then either surrender or suicide.
And this is any kind of resistance: The Aurora had a magazine jam. VA Tech failed to break down a barricade. Gabby Giffords was dogpiled by the crowd.
That this shooter (apparently) didn't have any other magazines meant he met resistance as soon as he ran dry, which is the first bright spot I can find. (In contrast, sandy hook and the SC church shooters only stopped when they ran out of victims).
If I *must* make a guess, I'd say the one weapon and magazine were all he could successfully steal, which limited his options.
As of this morning, the toll stands at two dead, one still in critical, one still in serious, and roughly a dozen others treated and released. No consensus among the press as to how many shot vs associated injuries. Not knowing the shooter's background or seeing a better map of the school (I looked), I'm not going to credit any one aspect over the other as to why he managed to kill so few.
We're still no closer to determining motivation (and definitely no closer to being able to identify potential future shooters). I'm not a psychologist, so this is me as a student of human nature speaking. But if I had to guess what this type of shooter gains for as long as their rampages last?
Control. Not power in and of itself, but control.
From the moment they enter until the moment they encounter resistance, their world is theirs to manipulate.
I may be making a connection out of nothing here. But in a modern world where a sense of how helpless individuals truly can be in the face of all manner of challenges, I suppose it's possible that the prospect of even a few moments of complete control may be seductive enough for some to give in.
RSS Feed
