1059
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 9 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

So, I can imagine someone with a gun menacing the attacker at gunpoint and forcing them to surrender. No shots fired.

But the data doesn't include this for bystanders. Maybe that's because it doesn't happen in real life, or maybe they muddied the watters. We can't know because we can't see the data they used to make this graphic.

[-] michaelmrose@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

For practical purposes imagine yourself in a public area with the gunman actively shooting people with an AR-15, to the left of you a guys head is turned to mush, down the way someone takes a hit to a limb leaving their arm dangling in an unnatural way. All around you are dead and dying you ignore the pistol in your pocket and run at him screaming "I'm going to take you down brudder".

The people who subdued people without shooting them probably didn't have a gun.

[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 months ago

Not all shooters are blindly suicidal. They can be menaced with a gun and told to surrender. Yeah, in some situations it won't work, but in some situations it will.

42 incidents. Not even one of them used a gun to force a surrender? Hard to believe.

[-] michaelmrose@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

It's incredibly easy to believe. Many people own guns most of them don't go around armed literally all the time. Fewer yet are going to get in a gun fight to the death with a shooter who is actively killing people all around them. Of those willing to do so basically anyone with even half a brain is going to take the shot. By the time you have yelled "drop the" they have enough time to bring the gun to bear on you. It makes more sense to execute you than comply.

What you are describing is a movie fantasy.

[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 months ago

42 people choosing to risk their lives while unarmed is also pretty hard to believe.

Also, your claim that surrender is a fantasy contradicts the fact that a bunch of shootings ended in surrender to the police. I think that strongly implies a bystander with a gun could achieve a similar result.

[-] michaelmrose@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

Basically you doubt... reality and want to somehow assign credit for guns you hallucinated exist even when people used their feet and fists. Face it random joe with a gun saving the day during a mass shooting is so rare as to be non-existent. Good guys with guns are basically worthless in such misadventures.

If we look at home use is even dumber. Having a gun in the average house increases your chance of death.

[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

What I doubt is that, of 42 people who stopped a shooter, literally zero of them used a gun to nonviolently deescelate. Zero? That's definitely possible, I'm not arguing against that. What I'm saying is, because the data isn't organized well, it's unclear. It only says that they subdued the attacker without shooting. That does not indicate that they didn't have a gun.

Sometimes, rarely, you can stop a bad guy with a gun by just pointing a gun at him.

[-] michaelmrose@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

I think you don't understand how few people have a gun at their hip at any given time despite how many having one at home.

[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 months ago

Well it looks like at least 22 people definitely had a gun, or 33% of shooters that were subdued by a bystander were shot.

But not even one of them used a gun to force a surrender without firing? Possible! Unlikely.

this post was submitted on 08 Sep 2024
1059 points (100.0% liked)

Data is Beautiful

5031 readers
1 users here now

A place to share and discuss visual representations of data: Graphs, charts, maps, etc.

DataIsBeautiful is for visualizations that effectively convey information. Aesthetics are an important part of information visualization, but pretty pictures are not the sole aim of this subreddit.

A place to share and discuss visual representations of data: Graphs, charts, maps, etc.

  A post must be (or contain) a qualifying data visualization.

  Directly link to the original source article of the visualization
    Original source article doesn't mean the original source image. Link to the full page of the source article as a link-type submission.
    If you made the visualization yourself, tag it as [OC]

  [OC] posts must state the data source(s) and tool(s) used in the first top-level comment on their submission.

  DO NOT claim "[OC]" for diagrams that are not yours.

  All diagrams must have at least one computer generated element.

  No reposts of popular posts within 1 month.

  Post titles must describe the data plainly without using sensationalized headlines. Clickbait posts will be removed.

  Posts involving American Politics, or contentious topics in American media, are permissible only on Thursdays (ET).

  Posts involving Personal Data are permissible only on Mondays (ET).

Please read through our FAQ if you are new to posting on DataIsBeautiful. Commenting Rules

Don't be intentionally rude, ever.

Comments should be constructive and related to the visual presented. Special attention is given to root-level comments.

Short comments and low effort replies are automatically removed.

Hate Speech and dogwhistling are not tolerated and will result in an immediate ban.

Personal attacks and rabble-rousing will be removed.

Moderators reserve discretion when issuing bans for inappropriate comments. Bans are also subject to you forfeiting all of your comments in this community.

Originally r/DataisBeautiful

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS