Are we too worried about mass shootings?

People these days are expressing much anxiety over mass shootings. But should they be worried when compared to other potential risks in life?

These shootings are despicable and horrific acts. But how do the odds of being killed in one of these events stack up against other methods of untimely deaths?

Putting emotions aside, let’s look at the facts:

Despite California having the toughest gun laws in the country, gang and revenge shootings continue to happen across the state — primarily in large cities.

Yet most people don’t seem to be that concerned with these targeted disputes, as evidenced by generally ignored nightly carnage around the country in cities such as Chicago, Baltimore and Detroit. But these same people do worry about random attacks committed by deranged individuals.

Statistics are hard to decipher when political interests affect the analysis of data. Vague and often misinformed definitions of such things as “assault rifles,” “automatic weapons” or “mass shootings” confuse the issue as well.

But cutting though the distortions, there appear to have been at least eight people killed in California this year by acts from domestic terrorists using firearms.

Based on the 2019 figure, the chances of being killed in a domestic terrorist mass shooting in California this year are about one in five million. To put this figure into perspective, that’s about one person out of the number it takes to fill 100 major league baseball stadiums.

Here’s another approach: If you combined the city populations of Los Angeles, San Francisco and Stockton, only one individual would be killed in a California domestic terrorist mass shooting.

Now, how do these odds compare with other types of untimely deaths? Here are some figures provided by the National Safety Council, et al.

1. Earthquake: 1 in 130,000

2. Choking on food: 1 in 3,461

3. Boat: 1 in 2,499

4. Fire: 1 in 1,579

5. Alcohol: 1 in 123

6. Car wreck: 1 in 108

7. Drug overdose: 1 in 72

8. Diabetes: 1 in 51

9. Stroke: 1 in 29

10. Heart disease or cancer: 1 in 6.

As you can see, the chances of dying from these causes are many times greater than a domestic terrorist attack.

Mass shooting odds can change or be subject to different interpretations. But these odds can never come close to most other causes of premature death.

Does this mean the demise of one innocent person perpetrated by a deranged individual should be dismissed using mathematical statistics? Of course not.

But why has there been so much political and media hype over the issue? It creates so much unwarranted fear in millions of people, and here are some of the reasons:

There’s the obvious emotional trauma when an attack happens against innocent persons.

There is also the image of victims hopelessly trying to control their immediate fates, along with the outright evil of an act which truly shocks the conscience. All of these points certainly affect public perception and fear.

As a consequence, people in democratic societies too often are willing to give up their personal freedoms, along with their right of self-defense, in exchange for the delusion that government will provide for their personal safety and security.

But if you have not been the casualty of a mass shooting, it’s not because government has done a great job of protecting you. It’s because the odds are overwhelming you will never be a victim from such an act.

When most people understand the remote possibility of death from a domestic terrorist-inspired mass shooting, perhaps they’ll prefer our legislators spend more time, effort and money on issues where the odds are less than 1 in 100 - instead of placing focus where the probability falls into the millions.