It’s important in the sense that if it’s “just gang shit” then people think it’s less random, and so they have some agency to avoid it, which makes it less scary. They’re also not in social groups even close to gangs, so it’s not something that would ever happen to them.
chalupapocalypse@lemmy.world 1 week ago
This sounds more like gang shit
A group of four men fired at least 30 gunshots into a crowd that gathered near the Amazura nightclub
curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 week ago
It doesnt matter the reason, its still a mass shooting.
chalupapocalypse@lemmy.world 1 week ago
I guess, the term mass shooting just makes me think of one dude going off the rails.
The fact that we need subgenres for this shit is disgusting either way.
madcaesar@lemmy.world 1 week ago
I still think your distinction is important. They are both tragedies of course, but it’s important to know and understand the cause.
curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 week ago
The majority accepted is 4 or more injured or killed, not including the shooter (gun violence archive).
The DOJ version is 4 or more killed, which is just the mass murder definition with a shooter, leaving out a lot of incidents.
In either case though, the motive is irrelevant because its not going to be known at the time.
Gigasser@lemmy.world 1 week ago
I would just refer to people who “go postal” as rampage killers. Spree killer and mass shooter already have their own definitions after all.
Preflight_Tomato@lemm.ee 1 week ago
It’s important in the sense that if it’s “just gang shit” then people think it’s less random, and so they have some agency to avoid it, which makes it less scary. They’re also not in social groups even close to gangs, so it’s not something that would ever happen to them.
curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 week ago
It doesnt make a difference for the definition of a mass shooting (really any of them, there are multiple definitions).
Clent@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 week ago
'Merica!
We’ve normalized mass shootings.