"The data set excludes all multiple murders related to drugs, gangs or domestic violence."

I mean include gang violence and that number looks a whole lot different given there are around 2k gang murders per year.

The fact that people exclude things like the shooting of 17 people at a funeral in a mass shooting in Chicago last year (the deceased was in a gang and the shooter was in a rival gang) makes me wonder if they aren't picking and choosing their data to fit a narrative.

Since I'm at my cap on nytimes articles I had to find the source elsewhere, I found it here.

Ironic, being critical of the article for not including gang violence, and accusing the article of not being transparent and intentionally inflating the numbers to fit a narrative.

But then not even including the title of "the source"... "Since 1982, 74 Percent Of Mass Shooters Obtained Their Guns Legally."

Anyone else think a 3% difference does not qualify as "looks a whole lot different" as implied in the rest of the post and was excluded to fit a narrative?