How Many of the "Spree Shooters" Came from Broken Homes?

[Psychic Missile]

I presented the citation - if you have something that shows it's wrong, please post it.

I looked at the wikipedia page sections concerning family life and the cited source for each of the people I mentioned. To disprove the thesis of the article, here's an article about Mateen's family life and here's one article about Harris and Klebold's family life and here's another for Harris and here's another for Klebold. In Venker's original article she says Cho is the only one raised by both his mother and father.

[Cow Poke]

OK, thanks - can't look right now, but I will follow up. I did notice in my own research (I had forgotten) that Whitman, the Austin shooter, had killed his mother and wife with a knife before going on the shooting spree.

Thanks for your diligence.

[Teallaura]

This is the kind of thing for which I was looking

Of the 27 Deadliest Mass Shooters, 26 of Them Had One Thing in Common

All 27 had one thing in common - in fact ALL shooters have one thing in common - they use firearms. It's the one and only factor that is universal in that group.

Skewed samples* do not prove anything - and honestly, I agree that fatherlessness probably plays a part. But it isn't that simple.



Citations:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skewness
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sample_size_determination

[Cow Poke]

All 27 had one thing in common - in fact ALL shooters have one thing in common - they use firearms.

Yeah, gee... why did nobody else notice that?

It's the one and only factor that is universal in that group.

Skewed samples do not prove anything - and honestly, I agree that fatherlessness probably plays a part. But it isn't that simple.

There are millions of people who use firearms who don't hurt anybody at all. I'm specifically looking for common factors that would make them want to murder people. But thank you ever so much for your brilliant observation.

[Teallaura]

Yeah, gee... why did nobody else notice that?

Ask a stupid question.

There are millions of people who use firearms who don't hurt anybody at all. I'm specifically looking for common factors that would make them want to murder people. But thank you ever so much for your brilliant observation.

You specifically said that the article was 'kinda' what you are looking for - so if you are looking for skewed samples that tell you what you want to hear, you got it already. Otherwise, if it reports nearly 100%, is deliberately skewed (note the word 'deadliest') and has a sample size smaller than a bread box, it's statistical crap - period.

What you need - assuming you're serious - is a study of all shooters - not just those who happen to kill more people. People simply aren't that uniform - which is why it's not that easy to anticipate which people may be that far gone - so the raw numbers shouldn't approach 100% (there are rare exceptions but for those you need math skills to weed out) and really, a good analysis is reported as a probability, not '26 of 27'. There simply aren't anywhere near enough mass shootings to justify such a tiny sample size especially if you're looking for common denominators.

But even if you find them, how do you use that information? It's even more draconian applied to gun control (sorry, mister, but you didn't have a dad so you can never own a gun?) - and while it can and should be applied to learning how to keep that psyche from developing in the first place, that's a very long term solution - it wouldn't stop any shootings for years into the future.

If you are legitimately interested in common denominators and you are serious about understanding what is really going on with these people, then you DO have to consider all the common denominators - including the one that is contained in the definition - shooters. It's not enough to look at what triggered the rampage - you have to llok at what triggered that specific type of rampage - which means you have to also look at the role of firearms, the denominator you are so willing to toss aside.

But just don't count the weapons - that's not even remotely sensible analysis.

[Cow Poke]

You specifically said that the article was 'kinda' what you are looking for - so if you are looking for skewed samples that tell you what you want to hear, you got it already.

I wasn't.

[Sparko]

All 27 had one thing in common - in fact ALL shooters have one thing in common - they use firearms. It's the one and only factor that is universal in that group.

Skewed samples* do not prove anything - and honestly, I agree that fatherlessness probably plays a part. But it isn't that simple.



Citations:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skewness
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sample_size_determination

They also had trigger fingers. Every. Single. One. of. Them.

In fact without trigger fingers none of these people would have been able to pull off these massacres. Clearly we need to ban trigger fingers and anything that could be used as trigger finger. And luckily there is no constitutional amendment guaranteeing the possession of fingers of any kind. I propose renaming them "Assault Fingers" and having them surgically removed. Guns don't kill people, Assault Fingers do.

Support Finger Free Zones in our schools and churches.

[Teallaura]

They also had trigger fingers. Every. Single. One. of. Them.

In fact without trigger fingers none of these people would have been able to pull off these massacres. Clearly we need to ban trigger fingers and anything that could be used as trigger finger. And luckily there is no constitutional amendment guaranteeing the possession of fingers of any kind. I propose renaming them "Assault Fingers" and having them surgically removed. Guns don't kill people, Assault Fingers do.

Support Finger Free Zones in our schools and churches.

Take it up with CP - he's the one that wants to study common denominators.

FYI, guns are modified for the disabled so no, that actually might not be 100% - at least it can potentially not be.