Gun Violence Dataset Overview (Mass Shootings in 2024)

This dataset provides an in-depth look at mass shootings across the United States in 2024, up until October 20th, sourced from the Gun Violence Archive. It captures essential details such as incident ID, date, state, city, victims (killed and injured), and suspects involved. Additionally, geographical coordinates are included to allow for spatial analysis of gun violence trends.

Key Features of the Dataset

• Incident IDs: A unique identifier for each incident, categorized and grouped based on their range.
• Incident Date: Captures the time period over which the incidents occurred, broken down into monthly intervals.
• State and City/County: A breakdown of incidents across various states and cities, identifying regions with the most gun violence activity.
• Victims Killed and Injured: Provides a count of victims in each incident, allowing for the analysis of both fatal and non-fatal outcomes.
• Suspects Killed, Injured, and Arrested: Captures data related to suspects involved in the incidents, including their status post-incident (e.g., killed, injured, or arrested).
• Latitude and Longitude: Geographical coordinates for the locations of the incidents, enabling mapping and geospatial analysis.
• Coordinates Found: Indicates whether valid geographical coordinates were found for each incident.

This dataset is a comprehensive collection of gun violence incidents, offering insights into both the human toll and geographical spread of mass shootings in 2024. The goal of the analysis is to identify patterns, trends, and areas of concern that can inform public safety measures and policy interventions.

1) Data Introduction • The Gun Violence Dataset in US is a tabularized data set for gun violence analysis that includes the date, location, victim and suspect information, and geographic coordinates of major 2024 shootings across the U.S.

2) Data Utilization (1) Gun Violence Dataset in US has characteristics that: • Each row contains key information about the shooting, including incident-specific ID, date of occurrence, state and city/county, number of deaths and injuries, suspects (death, injury, arrest), latitude, and longitude. • Data is designed to analyze the distribution of gun incidents and the extent of damage by month and region, and spatial analysis through geographic coordinates is also possible. (2) Gun Violence Dataset in US can be used to: • Analysis of shooting trends by region: Use data by location, magnitude of damage, and time to visualize and analyze the regional and temporal distribution and risk areas of gun violence. • Establishing public safety policies and prevention strategies: Based on victim and suspect information and incident characteristics, it can be used to establish effective gun control, prevention policies, resource allocation strategies, and more.

THIS DATASET WAS LAST UPDATED AT 7:11 AM EASTERN ON DEC. 1

OVERVIEW

2019 had the most mass killings since at least the 1970s, according to the Associated Press/USA TODAY/Northeastern University Mass Killings Database.

In all, there were 45 mass killings, defined as when four or more people are killed excluding the perpetrator. Of those, 33 were mass shootings . This summer was especially violent, with three high-profile public mass shootings occurring in the span of just four weeks, leaving 38 killed and 66 injured.

A total of 229 people died in mass killings in 2019.

The AP's analysis found that more than 50% of the incidents were family annihilations, which is similar to prior years. Although they are far less common, the 9 public mass shootings during the year were the most deadly type of mass murder, resulting in 73 people's deaths, not including the assailants.

One-third of the offenders died at the scene of the killing or soon after, half from suicides.

About this Dataset

The Associated Press/USA TODAY/Northeastern University Mass Killings database tracks all U.S. homicides since 2006 involving four or more people killed (not including the offender) over a short period of time (24 hours) regardless of weapon, location, victim-offender relationship or motive. The database includes information on these and other characteristics concerning the incidents, offenders, and victims.

The AP/USA TODAY/Northeastern database represents the most complete tracking of mass murders by the above definition currently available. Other efforts, such as the Gun Violence Archive or Everytown for Gun Safety may include events that do not meet our criteria, but a review of these sites and others indicates that this database contains every event that matches the definition, including some not tracked by other organizations.

This data will be updated periodically and can be used as an ongoing resource to help cover these events.

Using this Dataset

To get basic counts of incidents of mass killings and mass shootings by year nationwide, use these queries:

Mass killings by year

Mass shootings by year

To get these counts just for your state:

Filter killings by state

Definition of "mass murder"

Mass murder is defined as the intentional killing of four or more victims by any means within a 24-hour period, excluding the deaths of unborn children and the offender(s). The standard of four or more dead was initially set by the FBI.

This definition does not exclude cases based on method (e.g., shootings only), type or motivation (e.g., public only), victim-offender relationship (e.g., strangers only), or number of locations (e.g., one). The time frame of 24 hours was chosen to eliminate conflation with spree killers, who kill multiple victims in quick succession in different locations or incidents, and to satisfy the traditional requirement of occurring in a “single incident.”

Offenders who commit mass murder during a spree (before or after committing additional homicides) are included in the database, and all victims within seven days of the mass murder are included in the victim count. Negligent homicides related to driving under the influence or accidental fires are excluded due to the lack of offender intent. Only incidents occurring within the 50 states and Washington D.C. are considered.

Methodology

Project researchers first identified potential incidents using the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Supplementary Homicide Reports (SHR). Homicide incidents in the SHR were flagged as potential mass murder cases if four or more victims were reported on the same record, and the type of death was murder or non-negligent manslaughter.

Cases were subsequently verified utilizing media accounts, court documents, academic journal articles, books, and local law enforcement records obtained through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. Each data point was corroborated by multiple sources, which were compiled into a single document to assess the quality of information.

In case(s) of contradiction among sources, official law enforcement or court records were used, when available, followed by the most recent media or academic source.

Case information was subsequently compared with every other known mass murder database to ensure reliability and validity. Incidents listed in the SHR that could not be independently verified were excluded from the database.

Project researchers also conducted extensive searches for incidents not reported in the SHR during the time period, utilizing internet search engines, Lexis-Nexis, and Newspapers.com. Search terms include: [number] dead, [number] killed, [number] slain, [number] murdered, [number] homicide, mass murder, mass shooting, massacre, rampage, family killing, familicide, and arson murder. Offender, victim, and location names were also directly searched when available.

This project started at USA TODAY in 2012.

Contacts

Contact AP Data Editor Justin Myers with questions, suggestions or comments about this dataset at jmyers@ap.org. The Northeastern University researcher working with AP and USA TODAY is Professor James Alan Fox, who can be reached at j.fox@northeastern.edu or 617-416-4400.

In recent years, gun violence in the United States has become an alarmingly common occurrence. From 2016, there has been over ****** homicides by firearm in the U.S. each year and firearms have been found to make up the majority of murder weapons in the country by far, demonstrating increasing rates of gun violence occurring throughout the nation. As of 2025, Mississippi was the state with the highest gun violence rate per 100,000 residents in the United States, at **** percent, followed by Louisiana, at **** percent. In comparison, Massachusetts had a gun violence rate of *** percent, the lowest out of all the states. The importance of gun laws Gun laws in the United States vary from state to state, which has been found to affect the differing rates of gun violence throughout the country. Fewer people die by gun violence in states where gun safety laws have been passed, while gun violence rates remain high in states where gun usage is easily permitted and even encouraged. In addition, some states suffer from high rates of gun violence despite having strong gun safety laws due to gun trafficking, as traffickers can distribute firearms illegally past state lines. The right to bear arms Despite evidence from other countries demonstrating that strict gun control measures reduce rates of gun violence, the United States has remained reluctant to enact gun control laws. This can largely be attributed to the Second Amendment of the Constitution, which states that citizens have the right to bear arms. Consequently, gun control has become a highly partisan issue in the U.S., with ** percent of Democrats believing that it was more important to limit gun ownership while ** percent of Republicans felt that it was more important to protect the right of Americans to own guns.

Context

The Gun Violence Archive is an online archive of gun violence incidents collected from over 2,000 media, law enforcement, government and commercial sources daily in an effort to provide near-real time data about the results of gun violence. GVA in an independent data collection and research group with no affiliation with any advocacy organization.

Content

This dataset includes files that separate gun violence incidents by category, including deaths and injuries of children and teens, and a collection of mass shootings.

Inspiration

• What has been the trend of gun violence in the past few years?
• What states have the highest incidents per capita per year? How has this metric changed over time?
• Are officer involved shootings on the rise? Where are they most concentrated? Do they correlate with the rates of accidental deaths and mass shootings?

Acknowledgements

This dataset is owned by the Gun Violence Archive, and can be accessed in its original form here.

Number and percentage of homicide victims, by type of firearm used to commit the homicide (total firearms; handgun; rifle or shotgun; fully automatic firearm; sawed-off rifle or shotgun; firearm-like weapons; other firearms, type unknown), Canada, 1974 to 2018.

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed. The study constructed a comprehensive, longitudinal dataset of all counties nested within U.S. States from 1970 to 2012. The study's main purpose was to facilitate research that would further understanding on firearm legislation and its impacts on violence. This comprehensive data collection effort included information on firearm legislation implemented across U.S. States over time in combination with multiple measures of firearm-related violence and injury. Moreover, to better understand the conditions under which firearm legislation is more or less effective, incorporation of county characteristics allowed for examination of whether the effectiveness of state-level firearm legislation depends upon particular characteristics of counties. The researchers conducted a secondary analysis utilizing a variety of archived external government and census sources. The Study's Dataset Include two Stata Files: CJRC_firearms_research.dta (95 Variables, 129,027 Cases) state_law_data.dta (19 Variables, 2,168 Cases)

In the United States, gun laws vary from one state to the next; whether residents need a permit or a background check to purchase a firearm, whether residents must undergo firearm training before making this purchase, and whether residents can openly carry their guns in public is dependent upon state legislation. As of January 15, 2025, ** U.S. states required background checks and/or permits for the purchase of a handgun. A further ** states had regulations on openly carrying firearms in public; however, only California, Connecticut, Florida, and Illinois had completely prohibited open carry for all firearms. In comparison, Maryland, New Jersey, and New York prohibited open carry for handguns but either did not have regulations in place or required a permit for other types of guns. A constitutional right The Second Amendment of the Constitution, which states that citizens have the right to bear arms, has made it difficult for any gun control legislation to be passed on a national level in the United States. As a result, gun control laws in the U.S. are state-based, and often differ based on political perspectives. States with strong gun laws in place, such as Massachusetts, generally experience less gun violence, however, some states with strong gun laws, such as Maryland, continue to face high rates of gun violence, which has largely been attributed to gun trafficking activity found throughout the nation. A culture of gun owners In comparison to other high-income countries with stricter gun control laws, the United States has the highest gun homicide rate at **** gun homicides per 100,000 residents. However, despite increasing evidence that easy access to firearms, whether legal or illegal, encourages higher rates of gun violence, the United States continues to foster an environment in which owning a firearm is seen as personal freedom. Almost **** of U.S. households have reported owning at least one firearm and ** percent of registered voters in the U.S. were found to believe that it was more important to protect the right of Americans to own guns, compared to ** percent who said it was more important to limit gun ownership.

Context

There's currently a lack of large and easily-accessible amounts of detailed data on gun violence.

Content

This project aims to change that; we make a record of more than 260k gun violence incidents, with detailed information about each incident, available in CSV format. We hope that this will make it easier for data scientists and statisticians to study gun violence and make informed predictions about future trends.

The CSV file contains data for all recorded gun violence incidents in the US between January 2013 and March 2018, inclusive.

Acknowledgements

Where did you get the data?

The data was downloaded from gunviolencearchive.org. From the organization's description:

Gun Violence Archive (GVA) is a not for profit corporation formed in 2013 to provide free online public access to accurate information about gun-related violence in the United States. GVA will collect and check for accuracy, comprehensive information about gun-related violence in the U.S. and then post and disseminate it online.

How did you get the data?

Because GVA limits the number of incidents that are returned from a single query, and because the website's "Export to CSV" functionality was missing crucial fields, it was necessary to obtain this dataset using web scraping techniques.

Stage 1: For each date between 1/1/2013 and 3/31/2018, a Python script queried all incidents that happened at that particular date, then scraped the data and wrote it to a CSV file. Each month got its own CSV file, with the exception of 2013, since not many incidents were recorded from then.

Stage 2: Each entry was augmented with additional data not directly viewable from the query results page, such as participant information, geolocation data, etc.

Stage 3: The entries were sorted in order of increasing date, then merged into a single CSV file.

Inspiration

I believe there are plenty of ways this dataset can be put to good use. If you have an interesting idea or feel like messing around with the data, then go for it.

I was originally inspired to compile it in the wake of the Parkland shooting and the mass media coverage that followed. Reports like this and this showed that Nikolas Cruz had exhibited plenty of warning signs on social media before the shooting; what if we could build a machine learning system that preemptively detected such signs?

The Division of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS) collects crime reports from more than 500 New York State police and sheriffs’ departments. DCJS compiles these reports as New York’s official crime statistics and submits them to the FBI under the National Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program. UCR uses standard offense definitions to count crime in localities across America regardless of variations in crime laws from state to state. In New York State, law enforcement agencies use the UCR system to report their monthly crime totals to DCJS. The UCR reporting system collects information on seven crimes classified as Index offenses which are most commonly used to gauge overall crime volume. These include the violent crimes of murder/non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault; and the property crimes of burglary, larceny, and motor vehicle theft. Firearm counts are derived from taking the number of violent crimes which involve a firearm. Population data are provided every year by the FBI, based on US Census information. Police agencies may experience reporting problems that preclude accurate or complete reporting. The counts represent only crimes reported to the police but not total crimes that occurred. DCJS posts preliminary data in the spring and final data in the fall.

This data was obtained from https://mappingpoliceviolence.us/.

Mapping Police Violence is a 501(c)(3) organization that publishes the most comprehensive and up-to-date data on police violence in America to support transformative change.

This is a database set on openly sharing information on police violence in America.

Some information on this data according to their website: Our data has been meticulously sourced from official police use of force data collection programs in states like California, Texas and Virginia, combined with nationwide data from The Gun Violence Archive and the Fatal Encounters database, two impartial crowdsourced databases. We've also done extensive original research to further improve the quality and completeness of the data; searching social media, obituaries, criminal records databases, police reports and other sources to identify the race of 90 percent of all victims in the database.

We believe the data represented on this site is the most comprehensive accounting of people killed by police since 2013. Note that the Mapping Police Violence database is more comprehensive than the Washington Post police shootings database: while WaPo only tracks cases where people are fatally shot by on-duty police officers, our database includes additional incidents such as cases where police kill someone through use of a chokehold, baton, taser or other means as well as cases such as killings by off-duty police. A recent report from the Bureau of Justice Statistics estimated approximately 1,200 people were killed by police between June, 2015 and May, 2016. Our database identified 1,100 people killed by police over this time period. While there are undoubtedly police killings that are not included in our database (namely, those that go unreported by the media), these estimates suggest that our database captures 92% of the total number of police killings that have occurred since 2013. We hope these data will be used to provide greater transparency and accountability for police departments as part of the ongoing work to end police violence in America.

Mass shootings occur with horrifying frequency in the United States. Many point to electoral politics as a potential path to change this. Here, we test whether mass shootings increase electoral participation using the most granular dataset to date. We draw information on mass shootings from the Gun Violence Archive and estimate national block group-level turnout using 4 snapshots of the national voter file. Using a regression discontinuity in time design, we find that mass shootings mobilize local voters (especially in heavily Democratic areas), but do not shift presidential vote choices. Further, we show that pre-election mass shootings were associated with increased support for a 2016 Californian gun reform ballot initiative. Our results show the (geographically-bounded) salience of mass shootings for local political engagement and ballot reform efforts.

The State Firearm Database catalogs the presence or absence of 134 firearm safety laws in 14 categories covering the 26-year period from 1991 to 2019. The classification system categorizes state firearm provisions using a methodology that both captures differences and maintains a level of comparability between states. Because of this, the database is not the most detailed nor the most comprehensive record of all state firearm policies. Other resources may provide users with a deeper understanding of individual provisions, while this database serves as an efficient way to compare the broad scope of state firearm laws across the country. These provisions covered 14 aspects of state policies, including regulation of the process by which firearm transfers take place, ammunition, firearm possession, firearm storage, firearm trafficking, and liability of firearm manufacturers. In addition, descriptions of the criteria used to code each provision have been provided so that there is transparency in how various law exemptions, exceptions, and other nuances were addressed.

This study was undertaken to obtain information on the characteristics of gun ownership, gun-carrying practices, and weapons-related incidents in the United States -- specifically, gun use and other weapons used in self-defense against humans and animals. Data were gathered using a national random-digit-dial telephone survey. The respondents were comprised of 1,905 randomly-selected adults aged 18 and older living in the 50 United States. All interviews were completed between May 28 and July 2, 1996. The sample was designed to be a representative sample of households, not of individuals, so researchers did not interview more than one adult from each household. To start the interview, six qualifying questions were asked, dealing with (1) gun ownership, (2) gun-carrying practices, (3) gun display against the respondent, (4) gun use in self-defense against animals, (5) gun use in self-defense against people, and (6) other weapons used in self-defense. A "yes" response to a qualifying question led to a series of additional questions on the same topic as the qualifying question. Part 1, Survey Data, contains the coded data obtained during the interviews, and Part 2, Open-Ended-Verbatim Responses, consists of the answers to open-ended questions provided by the respondents. Information collected for Part 1 covers how many firearms were owned by household members, types of firearms owned (handguns, revolvers, pistols, fully automatic weapons, and assault weapons), whether the respondent personally owned a gun, reasons for owning a gun, type of gun carried, whether the gun was ever kept loaded, kept concealed, used for personal protection, or used for work, and whether the respondent had a permit to carry the gun. Additional questions focused on incidents in which a gun was displayed in a hostile manner against the respondent, including the number of times such an incident took place, the location of the event in which the gun was displayed against the respondent, whether the police were contacted, whether the individual displaying the gun was known to the respondent, whether the incident was a burglary, robbery, or other planned assault, and the number of shots fired during the incident. Variables concerning gun use by the respondent in self-defense against an animal include the number of times the respondent used a gun in this manner and whether the respondent was hunting at the time of the incident. Other variables in Part 1 deal with gun use in self-defense against people, such as the location of the event, if the other individual knew the respondent had a gun, the type of gun used, any injuries to the respondent or to the individual that required medical attention or hospitalization, whether the incident was reported to the police, whether there were any arrests, whether other weapons were used in self-defense, the type of other weapon used, location of the incident in which the other weapon was used, and whether the respondent was working as a police officer or security guard or was in the military at the time of the event. Demographic variables in Part 1 include the gender, race, age, household income, and type of community (city, suburb, or rural) in which the respondent lived. Open-ended questions asked during the interview comprise the variables in Part 2. Responses include descriptions of where the respondent was when he or she displayed a gun (in self-defense or otherwise), specific reasons why the respondent displayed a gun, how the other individual reacted when the respondent displayed the gun, how the individual knew the respondent had a gun, whether the police were contacted for specific self-defense events, and if not, why not.

BackgroundPrior research suggests that United States governmental sources documenting the number of law-enforcement-related deaths (i.e., fatalities due to injuries inflicted by law enforcement officers) undercount these incidents. The National Vital Statistics System (NVSS), administered by the federal government and based on state death certificate data, identifies such deaths by assigning them diagnostic codes corresponding to “legal intervention” in accordance with the International Classification of Diseases–10th Revision (ICD-10). Newer, nongovernmental databases track law-enforcement-related deaths by compiling news media reports and provide an opportunity to assess the magnitude and determinants of suspected NVSS underreporting. Our a priori hypotheses were that underreporting by the NVSS would exceed that by the news media sources, and that underreporting rates would be higher for decedents of color versus white, decedents in lower versus higher income counties, decedents killed by non-firearm (e.g., Taser) versus firearm mechanisms, and deaths recorded by a medical examiner versus coroner.Methods and findingsWe created a new US-wide dataset by matching cases reported in a nongovernmental, news-media-based dataset produced by the newspaper The Guardian, The Counted, to identifiable NVSS mortality records for 2015. We conducted 2 main analyses for this cross-sectional study: (1) an estimate of the total number of deaths and the proportion unreported by each source using capture–recapture analysis and (2) an assessment of correlates of underreporting of law-enforcement-related deaths (demographic characteristics of the decedent, mechanism of death, death investigator type [medical examiner versus coroner], county median income, and county urbanicity) in the NVSS using multilevel logistic regression. We estimated that the total number of law-enforcement-related deaths in 2015 was 1,166 (95% CI: 1,153, 1,184). There were 599 deaths reported in The Counted only, 36 reported in the NVSS only, 487 reported in both lists, and an estimated 44 (95% CI: 31, 62) not reported in either source. The NVSS documented 44.9% (95% CI: 44.2%, 45.4%) of the total number of deaths, and The Counted documented 93.1% (95% CI: 91.7%, 94.2%). In a multivariable mixed-effects logistic model that controlled for all individual- and county-level covariates, decedents injured by non-firearm mechanisms had higher odds of underreporting in the NVSS than those injured by firearms (odds ratio [OR]: 68.2; 95% CI: 15.7, 297.5; p < 0.01), and underreporting was also more likely outside of the highest-income-quintile counties (OR for the lowest versus highest income quintile: 10.1; 95% CI: 2.4, 42.8; p < 0.01). There was no statistically significant difference in the odds of underreporting in the NVSS for deaths certified by coroners compared to medical examiners, and the odds of underreporting did not vary by race/ethnicity. One limitation of our analyses is that we were unable to examine the characteristics of cases that were unreported in The Counted.ConclusionsThe media-based source, The Counted, reported a considerably higher proportion of law-enforcement-related deaths than the NVSS, which failed to report a majority of these incidents. For the NVSS, rates of underreporting were higher in lower income counties and for decedents killed by non-firearm mechanisms. There was no evidence suggesting that underreporting varied by death investigator type (medical examiner versus coroner) or race/ethnicity.

Number of homicide victims, by method used to commit the homicide (total methods used; shooting; stabbing; beating; strangulation; fire (burns or suffocation); other methods used; methods used unknown), Canada, 1974 to 2024.

Firearms are the leading cause of death for minors in the United States and US gun culture is often discussed as a reason behind the prevalence of school shootings. Yet, few studies systematically analyze if there is a connection between the two: Do school shooters show a distinct gun culture? This article studies gun culture in action in school shootings. It studies if school shooters show distinct meanings and practices around firearms prior to the shooting, as well as patterns in access to firearms. To do so, I analyze a full sample of US school shootings. Relying on publicly available court, police, and media data, I combine qualitative in-depth analyses with cross-case comparisons and descriptive statistics. Findings suggest most school shooters come from a social setting in which firearms are a crucial leisure activity and hold meanings of affection, friendship, and bonding. These meanings translate into practices: all school shooters had easy access to the firearms they used for the shooting. Findings contribute to research on firearms and youth violence, public health, as well as the sociology of culture.

Context

Mass Shootings in the United States of America (1966-2017)

The US has witnessed 398 mass shootings in last 50 years that resulted in 1,996 deaths and 2,488 injured. The latest and the worst mass shooting of October 2, 2017 killed 58 and injured 515 so far. The number of people injured in this attack is more than the number of people injured in all mass shootings of 2015 and 2016 combined.

The average number of mass shootings per year is 7 for the last 50 years that would claim 39 lives and 48 injured per year.

Content

Geography: United States of America

Time period: 1966-2017

Unit of analysis: Mass Shooting Attack

Dataset: The dataset contains detailed information of 398 mass shootings in the United States of America that killed 1996 and injured 2488 people.

Variables: The dataset contains Serial No, Title, Location, Date, Summary, Fatalities, Injured, Total Victims, Mental Health Issue, Race, Gender, and Lat-Long information.

Acknowledgements

I’ve consulted several public datasets and web pages to compile this data.

Some of the major data sources include Wikipedia, Mother Jones, Stanford, USA Today and other web sources.

Inspiration

With a broken heart, I like to call the attention of my fellow Kagglers to use Machine Learning and Data Sciences to help me explore these ideas:

• How many people got killed and injured per year?

• Visualize mass shootings on the U.S map

• Is there any correlation between shooter and his/her race, gender

• Any correlation with calendar dates? Do we have more deadly days, weeks or months on average

• What cities and states are more prone to such attacks

• Can you find and combine any other external datasets to enrich the analysis, for example, gun ownership by state

• Any other pattern you see that can help in prediction, crowd safety or in-depth analysis of the event

• How many shooters have some kind of mental health problem? Can we compare that shooter with general population with same condition

Mass Shootings Dataset Ver 3

This is the new Version of Mass Shootings Dataset. I've added eight new variables:

Incident Area (where the incident took place), Open/Close Location (Inside a building or open space) Target (possible target audience or company), Cause (Terrorism, Hate Crime, Fun (for no obvious reason etc.) Policeman Killed (how many on duty officers got killed) Age (age of the shooter) Employed (Y/N) Employed at (Employer Name) Age, Employed and Employed at (3 variables) contain shooter details

Mass Shootings Dataset Ver 4

Quite a few missing values have been added

Mass Shootings Dataset Ver 5

Three more recent mass shootings have been added including the Texas Church shooting of November 5, 2017

I hope it will help create more visualization and extract patterns.

Keep Coding!

This study examines the entire range of case-processing decisions after arrest, from charging to sentencing of firearm-related crimes. This study analyzes the cumulative effects of each decision point, after a charge has been issued, on the subsequent decisions of criminal justice officials. It examines criminal justice decisions regarding a serious category of crime, gun-related offenses. These offenses, most of which are felonious firearm possession or firearm use cases, vary substantially with respect to bail, pretrial detention, and sentencing outcomes (Williams and Rosenfeld, 2016). The focus of this study is St. Louis, where firearm violence is a critical public problem and where neighborhoods range widely in both stability and level of disadvantage. These communities are characterized on the basis of a large number of demographic and socioeconomic indicators. The study aims to enhance understanding of the community context of the criminal justice processing of firearm-related crimes.

Gun ownership in the United States is the highest in the world, and constitutionally protected by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. Firearms are widely used in the United States for self-defence, hunting, and recreational uses, such as target shooting.

Source: https://www.kaggle.com/datasets/nidzsharma/us-mass-shootings-19822023

https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F13190980%2F56c639fee11c268267f9cf4ece33cf6a%2Fnewplot%20(6).png?generation=1680562776580204&alt=media" alt="">

Data columns:

• 0 case
• 1 location
• 2 date
• 3 summary
• 4 fatalities
• 5 injured
• 6 total_victims
• 7 location.1
• 8 age_of_shooter
• 9 prior_signs_mental_health_issues - Cleaned
• 10 mental_health_details - Cleaned
• 11 weapons_obtained_legally
• 12 where_obtained
• 13 weapon_type
• 14 weapon_details
• 15 race - cleaned
• 16 gender - cleaned
• 17 latitude - filled from location with Google Maps API
• 18 longitude - filled from location with Google Maps API
• 19 type
• 20 year - retrieved from date column
• 21 quarter - retrieved from date column
• 22 half - retrieved from date column
• 23 month_name - retrieved from date column
• 24 day_of_week - retrieved from date column
• 25 age_group - "Teenage", "Early Adulthood", "Middle Adulthood", "Old Age"
• 26 decade - retrieved from date
• 27 name - retrieved from splitting summary
• 28 current_age - retrieved from splitting summary
• 29 description - retrieved from splitting summary