Mass Shootings in the US Fast Facts

CNN - Apr 17th, 2025

The United States has experienced a persistent increase in mass shootings since the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020. In 2021, the country recorded its highest number of mass shootings since the Gun Violence Archive (GVA) began tracking in 2013, with 689 incidents across 44 states and Washington, DC. Although 2022 saw a slight decrease to 502 mass shootings, it remains a significant concern. This trend coincides with a broader rise in gun violence during the pandemic, with the firearm homicide rate in 2020 reaching its highest since 1994. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported a 35% increase in the firearm homicide rate between 2019 and 2020. The GVA defines a mass shooting as one that injures or kills four or more people, excluding the shooter, and continuously updates data as new information becomes available.

The increase in mass shootings and gun violence highlights the deep-rooted issues of firearm accessibility and societal stress exacerbated by the pandemic. Researchers and policymakers are increasingly alarmed by these developments, as they impact public safety and well-being. The ongoing challenge is to understand the underlying factors contributing to this surge and implement effective measures to address gun violence. The situation is monitored closely by organizations like the GVA, providing crucial data for informed policy decisions. As these incidents continue to occur, the national dialogue around gun control and violence prevention remains a critical topic of discussion and action in the United States.

Cdc United States Gun Violence Covid 19 Pandemic Mass Shootings Gun Violence Archive Firearm Homicide Rate

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

8.2

Fair Story

Consider it well-founded

The article provides a comprehensive and data-driven analysis of mass shooting trends in the United States, particularly during and after the Covid-19 pandemic. It scores highly in accuracy, timeliness, and public interest due to its reliance on credible sources and its relevance to ongoing societal debates. The clarity and readability of the article are commendable, ensuring that complex data is accessible to a general audience. However, the article could benefit from greater balance by including a wider range of perspectives and expert analyses to provide a more nuanced understanding of the issue. While the article is informative, its engagement and impact could be enhanced by incorporating narrative elements or policy recommendations. Overall, it is a well-researched piece that effectively informs readers about a critical public safety issue, though there is room for deeper exploration of the topic's complexities.

Accuracy

The article's factual accuracy is high, with the main claims well-supported by data from credible sources such as the Gun Violence Archive (GVA) and the CDC. The assertion that mass shootings escalated in 2020 during the Covid-19 pandemic is corroborated by multiple studies and reports. The story accurately cites the number of mass shootings in 2021 and 2023, aligning with GVA data, though there is a slight discrepancy in the exact number for 2023. The claim that 2021 was the worst year since GVA began tracking is also verified, with consistent data across sources. The story's reliance on established data sources enhances its verifiability and precision.

Balance

The article provides a focused perspective on the issue of mass shootings, primarily from a statistical and data-driven standpoint. However, it lacks a broader range of viewpoints that could include sociopolitical analyses or expert opinions on potential causes and solutions. While the data is presented neutrally, the absence of diverse perspectives might limit the understanding of underlying factors contributing to the trends. The article could benefit from including voices of policymakers, law enforcement, or community leaders to provide a more comprehensive view.

Clarity

The article is well-structured and written in a clear, straightforward manner, making it accessible to a general audience. The logical flow of information, from the historical context of mass shootings to recent data trends, aids comprehension. The tone is neutral and factual, focusing on presenting data without emotive language. This clarity ensures that readers can easily grasp the key points and understand the scope of the issue being discussed.

Source quality

The sources used in the article are credible and authoritative, with data primarily drawn from the Gun Violence Archive and the CDC. These organizations are well-regarded for their comprehensive tracking and analysis of gun violence data. The article attributes information appropriately, enhancing its reliability. However, it relies heavily on these two sources, and incorporating additional independent studies or expert analyses could further strengthen the credibility and depth of the reporting.

Transparency

The article is transparent in its use of data and definitions, clearly explaining the criteria for what constitutes a mass shooting according to the GVA. It also acknowledges the provisional nature of the data and the potential for updates as new information becomes available. However, the article could improve by providing more context on the methodology behind data collection and the potential limitations or biases inherent in the sources used. This would enhance readers' understanding of the basis for the claims made.