If 10 shooters kill 6 people is it still a "Mass Shooting"?


It is only 29 hours since the 2:00AM shootings in Sacramento yielded six dead and another dozen wounded. 

Early reports said 50 to 70 rounds fired; another said 40 of those little evidence markers on the ground at the scene.

Little is known, and early reports are often spectacularly unreliable. But where there's blood, it's never too early for the Blood Dancing.

You know.  2:00AM on a weekend night. Crowd on the street. A little family friction becomes a spark. Democrat-controlled hell-hole. Rounds are fired (and sights not used, apparently). And . . . 

Next thing you know, the droolers-in-chief are saying the solution to urban violence is to take guns away from Bible-thumping, flag-waving Duck Dynasty fans. 


Gun Legislation: Science NOT Settled, Proposals NOT Common Sense

On 31 March 2022 Aaron Brown and Justin Monticello on REASON published an article on a 2020 Rand analysis of 27,900 gun control studies.

Bottom line: "From this vast body of work, the RAND authors found only 123 studies, or 0.4 percent, that tested the effects rigorously. Some of the other 27,777 studies may have been useful for non-empirical discussions, but many others were deeply flawed."

The Reason.com authors are not saying that it would be impossible that a study could scientifically conclude that gun control leads to positive results. But they do say that "... short of legitimate scientific evidence, belief in the efficacy of additional gun control laws is, and will remain, a matter of faith, not reason."

"We should not look to pass laws that sweep up innocent victims while potentially doing more harm than good, all with the alleged backing of science that can't possibly tell us what we need to know."

Yeah, I'm sure Democrats will really listen to that advice.

Oh, there's a video on the Reason.com article too (about a 16 minute trip). The video is kind of refreshing because statistician Aaron Brown seems like a really clear-speaking and interesting guy.