Before rushing to play pin the tale on the honkey, did anyone bother to check the history of mass killings?

Because I have — a comprehensive list dating from 1982 through 9/16/2013 is found at Mother Jones here — and guess what?

Of the last 20 mass killings of that period, 9 were perpetrated by non-whites.

That would be 45 percent, which exceeds non-whites’ 37 percent share of the population.

Of the last 30 mass killings, 11 were committed by non-whites — right at the 37 percent mark.

And what if we go all the way back to 1982? We then have 66 mass killings in which the races of the perpetrators were known, and 22 of them, or one-third, were at the hands of non-whites. Note here that America’s demographics have been changing, with non-whites comprising only about 20 percent of the population in 1982; thus, if we consider an approximate average non-white population of 28.5 percent during the 31-year period in question, it appears that, again, mass murderers are slightly disproportionately non-white.

In other words, there is no evidence whatsoever that mass killings are a characteristically white phenomenon.

So is this true?

  • Can you add a notability claim? Your source citation challenges the claim but does not show notability. – March Ho Oct 4 '15 at 9:41
  • Correlation != Causation. Repeat. – Oddthinking Oct 4 '15 at 9:49
  • 2
    Can you clarify what claim you are skeptical about? The quote does not include the claim that "mass murderers are mostly white". It includes many viable claims but you should clarify which is the one you are skeptical about. – Sklivvz Oct 4 '15 at 9:54
  • Technically speaking, the quoted section is claiming that is not the case that mass murderers in the US are mostly white. However, "Are mass murderers in the US not mostly white?" is more confusing than "Are mass murderers in the US mostly white?". – Andrew Grimm Oct 4 '15 at 13:16
  • @AndrewGrimm agreed, I'm marking as dupe. Good catch. – Sklivvz Oct 4 '15 at 14:22

Browse other questions tagged .