But Northeastern University criminologist James Alan Fox, the leading researcher on the topic for the past 35 years, tells Reason, "There is no evidence that we are in the midst of an epidemic of mass shootings." The number of incidents and casualties are simply too small to make such claims and, he stresses, the media coverage of shootings often ends up creating a false sense that gun violence - which is at or near historic lows - is ubiquitous and growing.
In a wide-ranging interview with Nick Gillespie, Fox explains the common characteristics of mass killers, why violent crime involving guns has declined over the past several decades, and how cable TV and social media contribute to a false sense of panic.
Audio production by Ian Keyser.
Comment: So there you have it; statistically, there's been no basic change in the background rate of mass shootings (the definition of which is officially 4 or more people shot and killed, not including the shooter(s)).
There have been particularly high death tolls in mass shootings in the last couple of years (Orlando nightclub, Las Vegas concert venue, Texas church, Parkland school, and El Paso Walmart), and the media amplification of these attacks makes it seem as if there's an 'epidemic of mass shootings' (relative to the normal background rate).