The recent mass shooting in Oregon has triggered another storm of discussion around “gun violence” in the United States.

First off, I think this is another great case of political speak.  Gun violence hardly adequately describes what is for me basically random mass murder using guns.  Gun lobbyist’s argue just because people use gun’s to murder, this is not a reason to restrict the availability of guns.

I know, why don’t we ban all murderers instead, that will solve the problem.

The real concern is the threat of murder.  In reality, one of the easiest and most effective tools to use for murder is a gun.   I could use a hammer. my bare hands, poison or hundreds of other options.  That being said,  statistically, murder by gun far exceeds any of the other methods as the most used.

Mass Shootings – Key Traits

Mass shootings are a well studied phenomenon in the United States (around the world too). Here are a few key observations:

• majority conducted by males
• majority of males subjects are thirty to fifty
• majority of murderers suffered documented mental issues
• for mass killings using guns almost every case resulted in the gunman killing themselves (suicide) or allowing the authorities to shoot them to death (still suicide).
• Ease of availability of guns was defined as a key factor in every case.  This was considered a key enabler for the gunman being able to carry out their plans.

Note:  Professionals that study these crimes advise the only viable method of prevention is through leaks (i.e., the gunman talking about the attack beforehand) and this prevention method mostly relies on luck.  There is not solid way to ensure leaks are heard and communicated to the right place.

Considering these key attributes of the random mass murders occurring in the United States it seems obvious to me the number one  variable that can be exercised to mitigate the risk of occurance is limiting the availability of the weapon of choice – guns.

Is there a problem?

In Saturday’s Globe and Mail there was a chart showing  annual gun deaths per capita for thirty-two developed countries.  United States (no surprise there) came out as the highest and not by a little but five times higher their nearest competitor.  Canada was middle of the pack with five murders per million people.  It is easy to do a little searching and find among those thirty two countries those with the lowest rate of gun deaths have the most restrictive laws.  For me this is statistical proof in the value of restricting access to guns.

We can only hope

Is it finally time for the United States to come together as a nation and react to this problem in a real and effective way?  We can only hope.