Originally Posted by MP0WER
the facts show that the vast majority of gun-violence in America takes place in inner-citys, not college campuses, not movie theaters, not elementary schools, or malls etc... But rather run down, dark, drug infested inner-cities.
You know, I think that actually DOES explain some of the publics appetite to focus on mass shootings.
We all know that if you choose to associate with people in the gang/drug world, your risk goes way up. But that's your choice to do that, you know the risks going in. If you live lawfully, but get nailed at the movie theater, that will instill more fear. Going to see Batman, or attending first grade, should not be in the same category of "risky life choices" as associating with crack dealers, or trying to pass a gang initiation. People think: if I play with fire, I could get burned, fair enough. But, if I choose to not play with fire, and I still could get burned, OK now I want that fixed.
I could see the general public having a higher tolerance for gang violence, and a lower tolerance for random mass shootings, if they believe that such a situation is a reflection of outcomes being more connected to personal choices than chance. If I said, I could wave a magic wand, and guarantee you that your risk of being an innocent victim in a mass shooting were cut in half, but the cost of that would be that gang-on-gang homocides were to double; I bet most people with be more OK with that tradeoff than if you said, lets change nothing.
Fact is, many people believe that mass shooting = rifles, and gang shootings = handguns, so as long as they believe that, of course they will be more inclined to support a focus on rifles. The media doesnt help, but obviously they are not in the business to inform people, they are really in the business to maximize ratings and thus advertising revenue. The NRA doesnt help either, but then they too are not in the business to represent the interests of gun owners as much as they are in the business to represent gun makers. I'd argue both of those very influential players are a bigger part of the problem than the government is.