

It almost certainly was some kind of gang or drug dealer territory kind of dispute… but yeah, it waa definitionally a mass shooting, but I guess mass shootings only happen if most of the victims are white and not poor, because uh…
Anyway, I did manage to scramble away, have a panic attack, then call 911, ambulances got there in 10 minutes, cops were seemingly already nearbh and blazed past before I even made the 911 call.
… another insane part was that as I was scrambling away, around a block and down a hill, having a panic and/or heart attack…
… there’s a very preppy looking guy walking a little yappy dog, up the hill, with ear buds in.
He pulls one out and asks ‘Was that a car backfiring?’
I respond, gasping for air: ‘NO. GUNSHOTS. DRIVEBY. Get InSIDE!’
… this guy then looks at me in disgust like I just called him a slur, puts his earbud back in, jauntily continues walking up the hill toward a bunch of screaming, injured people.
Sure, ok buddy, I’m the asshole, yep.
-.-
This all occured in an area where a very wealthy neighborhood and a pretty poor one meet.
Guess this asshat didn’t realize the lines separating his neighborhood from… the 'hood… had just been redrawn.
No, that is not how statistics nor language work.
1 in 15 means that out of all American adults, 1 in 15 have been on the scene of at least one mass shooting.
Its a broad overview, and says nothing about your or any particular person’s chance of then knowing someone who’s been at a mass shooting within a tiny sample size of 15 people.
You are inserting more complex kind of analysis about demographic / locale / social network specificity into a statement that does not actually imply that, at all, and you seemingly don’t understand the concept of sample sizes and statistical significance: You need a very large, unbiased sample set to be able to draw broader conclusions… a sample size of 15 people is not sufficient.
The chance that any random person in a large and varied population knows someone with green eyes is not the same calculation or chance a random person in that same large and varied population will have green eyes.
Go look at the paper and you can find Table 3, which actually looks at the likelihoods, broken down by varying demographic factors.
There was no investigation into ‘how many people do you know who’ve witnessed a mass shooting’.
That was not a question that was asked, the study did not investigate that.
It is 1:30 AM and I am too tired to give your a crash course on statistics, maybe try SkillShare or find a textbook or wiki page or community college course or something.
Further:
A few years ago, I was walking along a side walk near a gaggle of 10+ people, late at night, maybe 100 ish feet from them.
Car screeched in, did a drive by with a krink, an AK pistol, shot a bunch of them.
That was a mass shooting.
Congrats, you presumably know 15 or more people, one of them is now me, I was present at a mass shooting, you now know someone present at a mass shooting, as does everyone reading this comment.