GVA uses a purely statistical threshold to define mass shooting based ONLY on the numeric value of 4 or more shot or killed, not including the shooter. GVA does not parse the definition to remove any subcategory of shooting. To that end we dont exclude, set apart, caveat, or differentiate victims based upon the circumstances in which they were shot. GVA believes that equal importance is given to the counting of those injured as well as killed in a mass shooting incident.
The FBI does not define Mass Shooting in any form. They do define Mass Killing but that includes all forms of weapon, not just guns.
In that, the criteria are simpleif four or more people are shot or killed in a single incident, not involving the shooter, that incident is categorized as a mass shooting based purely on that numerical threshold.
It should also be stated that GVA is the only one that I'm aware of that bases the definition of mass shooting on 4 or more shot, not necessarily killed. This, conveniently, is what most of the mainstream media goes off of despite the fact 'mass killing' has been defined as 4 or more killed in a single incident.
When you consider that, it's 20, not 251. With 3 or more killed it goes up to 32. That is by no means to say it is acceptable, just that the mainstream media doesn't decide what a "mass shooting" is or isn't just so they can fuel there political bullshit.
Good point, but we shouldn't have as many as that either. ---