It’s a heavy topic. Every time you turn on the news or scroll through your feed, there’s another headline about shootings in the states. But if you actually sit down and try to look at the raw numbers—the stuff the CDC and the FBI put out—it gets messy fast. You’ve probably noticed that one source says things are getting better while another claims we’re in a permanent crisis. Honestly, both can be true depending on which specific "shooting" you're talking about and where you’re standing.
People often treat gun violence like a single, monolithic problem. It isn't.
If we want to actually understand what’s happening with shootings in the states, we have to stop looking at the country as one big block. The reality is a patchwork. You have states like Massachusetts with strictly enforced laws and low rates, and then you have places like Mississippi or Louisiana where the numbers tell a completely different, much darker story. It’s not just about "more guns" or "fewer guns," though that’s the loudest argument on Twitter. It’s about poverty, the specific type of firearm used, and even how local police departments report their data to the feds.
The Massive Gap Between Perception and Reality
When most of us hear about shootings in the states, our minds go straight to mass shootings. It’s natural. They are horrific, high-profile events that shatter communities. However, researchers like those at the Violence Project or the Gun Violence Archive will tell you that these events—while increasing in frequency—account for a tiny fraction of total gun deaths.
Suicide is the elephant in the room.
Most people don't realize that roughly 50% to 60% of all gun-related deaths in the U.S. are suicides. That’s a staggering number. In rural states like Wyoming or Montana, the "gun problem" isn't usually about gang violence or mass shootings; it’s a mental health crisis involving veterans and older men in isolated areas. If you ignore that, you aren't really talking about shootings in the states in a meaningful way. You're just looking at the part that makes for the most dramatic news coverage.
Then you have the "everyday" violence. This is the stuff that rarely makes national news. It’s the domestic dispute in a suburb or a robbery gone wrong in a city center. According to the Pew Research Center, the peak of gun deaths actually occurred back in the early 90s, dropped significantly for two decades, and then started climbing again around 2014. Why? Researchers are still arguing about that. Some point to the proliferation of handguns; others look at the "Ferguson Effect" or the breakdown of community-police relations. It's a tangle.
📖 Related: The Battle of the Chesapeake: Why Washington Should Have Lost
Why "Mass Shootings" Are Hard to Count
You'll see different numbers everywhere. One site says there were 600 mass shootings last year, and another says there were 20. Why the discrepancy?
Basically, it comes down to the definition. The FBI traditionally looked at "mass killings," which they define as four or more people murdered in a single incident. But the Gun Violence Archive counts any incident where four or more people are shot, regardless of whether they died. That’s a massive difference in data points. It’s why the map of shootings in the states looks like it’s glowing red on some websites and relatively sparse on others.
The Geography of Risk: It’s Not Just the Big Cities
There is this persistent myth that shootings in the states are strictly a "big city" problem. You’ve heard people talk about Chicago or Baltimore like they are war zones. While those cities definitely struggle with high rates of homicides, the per capita data—which is the only fair way to compare a small town to a metropolis—shows a different picture.
Look at the South.
States like Alabama, Missouri, and Arkansas often have higher rates of gun death per 100,000 people than New York or California. Why? Because density isn't the only factor. You have to look at the intersection of "permitless carry" laws, high poverty rates, and a lack of access to emergency trauma care. If you get shot in a rural county in Missouri, you might be an hour away from a Level 1 trauma center. In Brooklyn, you’re probably ten minutes away. That difference alone changes a "shooting" statistic into a "homicide" statistic.
The Impact of "Ghost Guns" and Technology
We also need to talk about how the hardware is changing. Over the last five years, police departments from Los Angeles to Philly have seen an explosion in "ghost guns"—firearms without serial numbers, often made from kits or 3D-printed parts.
👉 See also: Texas Flash Floods: What Really Happens When a Summer Camp Underwater Becomes the Story
- They are untraceable.
- They require no background check.
- They are incredibly easy to get if you have a mailbox and a credit card.
Special Agent in Charge Charlie Patterson from the ATF has noted that these weapons are becoming the tool of choice for people who are legally prohibited from owning a gun. This adds a whole new layer of difficulty for law enforcement trying to track the flow of illegal firearms across state lines. It makes the traditional "interdiction" strategy—stopping the flow of guns from "loose law" states like Indiana into "strict law" cities like Chicago—much harder to execute.
What the Data Actually Tells Us About Prevention
Is there any good news? Sorta.
We are starting to see that some interventions actually work, but they aren't always the ones that get the most political traction. For instance, Community Violence Intervention (CVI) programs have shown real success in cities like Richmond, California, and Omaha, Nebraska. These programs don't just rely on more cops; they hire "interruption" specialists—often former gang members—who go into the streets to de-escalate beefs before someone pulls a trigger.
It turns out that a huge percentage of urban shootings in the states are retaliatory. One person gets shot, their friends feel they have to "get back," and it spirals. If you stop the first retaliation, you might save ten lives down the line. It's simple, but it's hard work.
Then there are the "Red Flag" laws, or Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPO). These allow family members or police to petition a court to temporarily remove firearms from someone who is a danger to themselves or others. In states like Florida—which passed a red flag law after the Parkland shooting—the data suggests these orders are frequently used to prevent suicides and potential mass casualty events.
The Misconception of "The Mental Health Fix"
Everyone likes to blame "mental health." It's an easy answer. But experts like Dr. Jeffrey Swanson from Duke University have spent years pointing out that the vast majority of people with mental illness are never violent. In fact, they are more likely to be victims of violence. If you miraculously "cured" all serious mental illness in the U.S. tomorrow, our violent crime rate would only drop by about 4%.
✨ Don't miss: Teamsters Union Jimmy Hoffa: What Most People Get Wrong
The real issue is "behavioral" risk—things like a history of domestic violence, substance abuse, or a recent crisis like losing a job. Those are the predictors that actually correlate with shootings in the states.
The Socioeconomic Reality
You can’t talk about gun violence without talking about money.
Or the lack of it.
Concentrated poverty is the single best predictor of where homicides will happen. When you look at a map of shootings in the states, you are often looking at a map of redlining, disinvestment, and failing schools. In neighborhoods where the "formal" economy has abandoned people, the "informal" economy—drugs, protection, theft—takes over. And in the informal economy, disputes are settled with violence because you can't exactly call the police to adjudicate a drug debt.
Addressing shootings in the states means addressing the fact that some neighborhoods haven't seen a new grocery store or a bank branch in thirty years. It’s a systemic failure, not just a criminal one.
Practical Steps and Insights
If you’re looking to understand this issue more deeply or get involved in solutions, you have to look past the partisan shouting. The reality is more nuanced than "ban all guns" or "arm everyone."
- Follow the evidence, not the headlines. Sites like The Trace provide non-profit, deep-dive reporting on the specifics of gun policy and its effects. They look at things like the "iron pipeline" and the mechanics of gun trafficking.
- Focus on local data. National trends are interesting, but your local police department’s annual report will tell you way more about what’s actually happening in your backyard. Are the shootings in your city related to domestic violence? Robberies? Suicides? The solution for one doesn't work for the others.
- Support CVI programs. If you want to see a drop in urban violence, look for organizations in your area that do community outreach and violence interruption. They are often underfunded but highly effective.
- Secure your own hardware. A massive number of shootings in the states involve stolen guns or kids finding an unsecured firearm at home. Simple things like biometric safes or cable locks save lives, period.
The conversation about shootings in the states is often exhausted and angry. That’s understandable. But the more we lean into the actual data—the weird, uncomfortable, and non-partisan facts—the better chance we have of actually moving the needle. It's about recognizing that a suicide in Wyoming and a drive-by in St. Louis are different problems requiring different solutions, even if the tool involved is the same.