This is why the mass shootings are so devastating. It’s not just body counts.

https://www.pilotonline.com/news/virginia-beach-mass-shooting/vp-nw-ptsd-workers-compensation-20191208-prczwn6wgzcs7jlywat4a3gwvm-story.html

One of the issues in the gun debates is that the number of victims in mass shootings is tiny compared to the overall gun death rates.

Of course that is not true. Aside from the deceased we have the wounded, the co-workers who were shot at or hid, the families of all these people, the friends, etc.

Plus the utter randomness of targets as well as the fact that the slaughters taking place in normally safe areas. Shopping centers, schools, churches, concerts, offices, theaters are no longer safe in the minds of many who were close to a shooting by kin, friendship or as witnesses.

Effectively the damage is much worse than if a person got robbed and shot in a tough part of town. Or as a gang member. Or trying to score some dope. Or in a bar fight. Or even a domestic situation.

450 people is astounding, but not surprising. If this were the first such shooting in years, maybe a raised eyebrow would be warranted. But now that mass shootings are common place, when they hit close to home it traumatizes a lot more, in my opinion. And this only counts those workers in the building. Not outside relations.

This is something the gun lobby should heed before leaning too heavily on the body counts to minimize the impact of random shootings.

IMHO

9 thoughts on “This is why the mass shootings are so devastating. It’s not just body counts.

  1. Sounds to me like a lot of people with very dubious claims are cashing in on the tragedy. Were there even 450 people in the building?

    In any case, the best remedy for the feelings of helplessness and terror is for people to be equipped and trained to fight.

    Like

  2. I’ve been in combat. It is not nice but one goes on. Some people handle it differently and with more difficulty. One has to separate the trauma from reality. The reality is that if someone was outside the building and heard the gunshots….well, they don’t have PTSD in the real terms. In their terms maybe they think that. The folks who witnessed the carnage, that’s a different story.

    Liked by 4 people

    1. “The difference between comedy and tragedy is distance. If you’re close enough to see the blood, it ain’t funny anymore.”

      1961 Paris Air Show. I was nine. A B-58 Hustler attempted a high-speed barrel roll over the runway and left itself with 3 dead in a burning heap some miles from the end of runway. Announcers tried their best to deflect attention from the scene, and other planes performed aerobatic stunts at the opposite end of the runway, but…

      I saw the smoke and flames from the crash. I can still see them. It was about as great of a distance as can be for such mayhem, but still traumatic nevertheless. Now the PTSD part of it — I think about it every time I fly. It doesn’t stop me, nor even result in anything more than a elevated heart rate on takeoff, but I do think to myself a small command to the pilot, “Okay, no stunts now.”

      I imagine anyone who sees “the carnage” even on TV is changed, and we see it more, and more.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. If we’re going to do the math, let’s at least do it the same for both types of shooting, mass shootings (4 or more casualites per event) and “regular” shootings (1-3 casualities per event).

    At 3 to 5 per year, the number of mass shootings is infinitesimal compared to the number of regular shootings, which occur tens of thousands of times per year.

    If we assume that every direct victim of shooting has the same number of indirect victims (say, 10 people who are family, friends, associates or bystanders), the total number of victims of mass shootings remains infinitesimal compared to the total number of victims of regular shootings.

    As a result, there really is no statistical basis for claiming that mass shootings are more “devastating” than regular shootings.

    Which is why the issue remains: We can have liberty or we can have gun control, but we can’t have both.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States

    Like

    1. You didn’t read what I said.

      “Plus the utter randomness of targets as well as the fact that the slaughters taking place in normally safe areas. Shopping centers, schools, churches, concerts, offices, theaters are no longer safe in the minds of many who were close to a shooting by kin, friendship or as witnesses.

      Effectively the damage is much worse than if a person got robbed and shot in a tough part of town. Or as a gang member. Or trying to score some dope. Or in a bar fight. Or even a domestic situation.”

      As far as your statement:

      “We can have liberty or we can have gun control, but we can’t have both.”

      You are wrong.

      IMHO

      Liked by 1 person

    2. RE: “You didn’t read what I said.”

      I read you fine. You claim that the social impact of mass shootings is greater than the social impact of regular shootings, but the math doesn’t support the claim. Now, since the math doesn’t work, you want to emphasize that the quality of the trauma is worse. This is irrational.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s