By Jay Van Kirk

Mass shootings occur on a regular basis in the United States, and depending on the definitions applied to the shootings an argument can be made that mass shootings of all types occur far more often than what is reported in the media as a “mass shooting.” Unfortunately, school shootings are also part of this analysis of mass shootings, and school shootings in the United States have occurred on a recurring basis since at least 1853. In the modern era, however, school shootings have become more frequent and more deadly as demonstrated by the May 24th, 2022, school shooting in Uvalde, Texas. This heinous crime at Robb Elementary School resulted in the deaths of nineteen children, and two teachers. Although there has been extensive research on mass shooters, mass shootings, and mass shootings in schools, there has not been enough emphasis on the application of homeland javascript:void(0);security principles of target hardening in schools as a risk mitigation factor for mass shootings. In fact, there is much that can be done to keep schools safe through basic target hardening measures, and many of these security updates can be immediately undertaken at the state and local level with relatively minor additional cost to schools and the taxpaying public. This paper references the mass shooting on February 14, 2018, at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, and makes policy recommendations toward basic target hardening measures which may be applied as necessary within the public school K-12 environment. The school shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School was selected due to the fact that it has been recently investigated regarding the facts and circumstances of the incident, and provides ample information for analysis of effective target hardening measures.

Des Moines, IA: Des Moines Area Community College, 2022. 17p.

By William Krouse and Daniel J. Richardson

In the wake of tragedy in Newtown CT, Congress defined “mass killings” as “3 or more killings in a single incident” (P.L. 112-265). Any consideration of new or existing gun laws that follows mass shootings is likely to generate requests for comprehensive data on the prevalence and deadliness of these incidents. Despite the pathos of mass shootings, only a handful of researchers and journalists have analyzed the principal source of homicide data in the United States—the Supplementary Homicide Reports (SHR) compiled by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)—to determine whether those incidents have become more prevalent and deadly. According to the FBI, the term “mass murder” has been defined generally as a multiple homicide incident in which four or more victims are murdered, within one event, and in one or more locations in close geographical proximity. Based on this definition, for the purposes of this report, “mass shooting” is defined as a multiple homicide incident in which four or more victims are murdered with firearms, within one event, and in one or more locations in close proximity. Similarly, a “mass public shooting” is defined to mean a multiple homicide incident in which four or more victims are murdered with firearms, within one event, in at least one or more public locations, such as, a workplace, school, restaurant, house of worship, neighborhood, or other public setting. This report analyzes mass shootings for a 15-year period (1999-2013). CRS analysis of the FBI SHR dataset and other research indicates that offenders committed at least 317 mass shootings, murdered 1,554 victims, and nonfatally wounded another 441 victims entirely with firearms during that 15-year period. The prevalence of mass shooting incidents and victim counts fluctuated sporadically from year to year. For the period 2007-2013, the annual averages for both incidents and victim counts were slightly higher than the years from 1999-2007.

Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, 2015. 51p.

By Michael Luca, Deepak Malhotra. and Christopher Poliquin

There have been dozens of high-profile mass shootings in recent decades. This paper presents three main findings about the impact of mass shootings on gun policy. First, mass shootings evoke large policy responses. A single mass shooting leads to a 15% increase in the number of firearm bills introduced within a state in the year after a mass shooting. This effect increases with the extent of media coverage. Second, mass shootings account for a small portion of all gun deaths, but have an outsized influence relative to other homicides. Third, when looking at bills that were actually enacted into law, the impact of mass shootings depends on the party in power. The annual number of laws that loosen gun restrictions doubles in the year following a mass shooting in states with Republicancontrolled legislatures. We find no significant effect of mass shootings on laws enacted when there is a Democrat-controlled legislature, nor do we find a significant effect of mass shootings on the enactment of laws that tighten gun restrictions.

Boston, MA: Harvard Business School, 2019. 59p.

By Ralph Larkin. 

On April 20, 1999, two Colorado teenagers went on a shooting rampage at Columbine High School. That day, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold killed twelve fellow students and a teacher, as well as wounding twenty-four other people, before they killed themselves. Although there have been other books written about the tragedy, this is the first serious, impartial investigation into the cultural, environmental, and psychological causes of the massacre. Based on first-hand interviews and a thorough reading of the relevant literature, Ralph Larkin examines the numerous factors that led the two young men to plan and carry out their deed. Rather than simply looking at Columbine as a crucible for all school violence, Larkin places the tragedy in its proper context, and in doing so, examines its causes and meaning.

Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2007. 265p.

By Steffen Hurka.

Politicization and Policy Change in Western Europe. While the causes of rampage violence have been analysed thoroughly in diverse academic disciplines, we hardly know anything about the factors that affect their consequences for public policy. This book addresses rampage shootings in Western Europe and their conditional impact on politicization and policy change in the area of gun control. The author sets out to unravel the factors that facilitate or impede the access of gun control to the political agenda in the wake of rampage shootings and analyses why some political debates lead to profound shifts of the policy status quo, while others peter out without any legislative reactions. In so doing, the book not only contributes to the theoretical literature on crisis-induced policy making, but also provides a wealth of case-study evidence on rampage shootings as empirical phenomena.

London; New York: Routledge, 2017. 201p.