Note
0.0(0)
study
Chat with Kai
Explore Top Notes
Teres Major Syndrome
noteNote
studied byStudied by 8 people
5.0(1)
Classic Literature
noteNote
studied byStudied by 21 people
4.0(1)
Chapter 10: Non-Essential & Essential Clause
noteNote
studied byStudied by 158 people
5.0(1)
Unit 1 Test
noteNote
studied byStudied by 3 people
5.0(1)
week 11
noteNote
studied byStudied by 1 person
5.0(1)
Imperialism Rise in Nationalism • During the French and Industrial Revolution, nationalism continued to inspire nations to increase their political and economic power. • Nationalism became the ideal force in the political, economic, and cultural life in the world, becoming the first universal ideology-organizing all people into a nation state. Nationalism Defined • The strong belief that the interest of a particular nation-state is of primary importance. o Nation-State – a state where the vast majority shares the same culture and is conscious of it. It is an ideal in which cultural boundaries match up with political ones. • As an ideology, it is based on the idea that the individual’s loyalty and devotion to the nation-state surpass other individual/group interests. • Exalting one nation’s belief above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests, excluding the interests of others. Changing the World through a Nationalistic Vision • The French Revolution significantly changed the political world and how countries govern. • The Industrial Revolution significantly changed the economic world. • The Age of Imperialism (1870-1914) dramatically changed the political, economic, and social world. What is Imperialism? • Imperialism- The policy of extending the rule of authority of an empire or nation over foreign countries, or of acquiring and holding colonies and dependencies. Power and influence are done through diplomacy or military force. Reasons for Imperialism • There are 5 main motives for empires to seek to expand their rule over other countries or territories: 1. Exploratory • Imperial nations wanted to explore territory unknown to them. • The main purpose for this exploration of new lands was for resource acquisition, medical or scientific research. o Charles Darwin • Other reasons: o Cartography (map making) o Adventure 2. Ethnocentric • Europeans acted on the concept of ethnocentrism o Ethnocentrism- the belief that one race or nation is superior to others. • Ethnocentrism developed out of Charles Darwin’s “survival of the fittest” theory. Philosophers used the theory to explain why there were superior races and inferior races. o This became known as Social Darwinism. • Most imperial nations believed that their cultural values or beliefs were superior to other nations or groups. • Believed imperial conquest would bring successful culture to inferior people. 3. Religious • Imperial expansion promoted a religious movement of people setting out to convert new members of conquered territories. • With the belief that Christianity was superior, missionaries believed it was their duty to spread Christianity to the world. • Christian missionaries established churches, and in doing so, they spread Western culture values as well. • Typically, missionaries spread the imperial nation's language through education and religious interactions. 4. Political • Patriotism and Nationalism helped spur our imperial growth, thus creating competition against other supremacies. • It was a matter of national pride, respect, and security. • Furthermore, European rivalry spurred nations for imperial conquest. Since land equaled power, the more land a country could acquire the more prestige they could wield across the globe. • Empires wanted strategic territory to ensure access for their navies and armies around the world. • The empire believed they must expand, thus they needed to be defended. 5. Economic • With the Industrial Revolution taking place during the same time, governments and private companies contributed to find ways to maximize profits. • Imperialized countries provided European factories and markets with natural resources (old and new) to manufacture products. • Trading posts were strategically placed around imperialized countries to maximize and increase profits. o Such places as the Suez Canal in Egypt which was controlled by the British provided strategic choke hold over many European powers. o Imperial powers competed over the best potential locations for resources, markets, and trade. History of Imperialism • Ancient Imperialism 600 BCE-500 CE o Roman Empire, Ancient China, Greek Empire, Persian Empire, Babylonian Empire. • Middle Age Imperialism (Age of Colonialism-1400-1800s) o Great Britain, Spain, Portugal, France, Netherlands (Dutch), Russia. • Age of Imperialism 1870-1914 o Great Britain, Spain, Portugal, France, Germany, Belgium, Italy, Japan, United States, Ottoman Empire, Russia. • Current Imperialism...? o U.S. Military intervention (i.e. Middle East) o Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine. Imperialism Colonialism • Refers to political or economic control, either legally or illegally. • Refers to where one nation assumes control over the other. • Creating an empire, expanding into neighboring regions and expanding the dominance far outside its borders. • Where a country conquers and rules over other regions for exploiting resources from the conquered country for the conqueror's benefit. • Foreign government controls/governs a territory without significant settlement. • Foreign government controls/governs the territory from within the land being colonized. • Little to no new settlement established on fresh territory. • Movement to settle to fresh territory. Age of Colonialism WHEN? • Started around the late 1400s and ended around the late 1700s/early 1800s. WHY? • Primary Reason: European countries, wished to find a direct trade route to Asia (China & India) and the East Indies. o Quicker and relatively more effective than land routes over Asia. • Secondary Reason: Empire expansion (land power) WHO? • Countries involved: Great Britain, France, Spain, the Dutch & Portugal. • Individuals’ knowns as Mercantilists believed that maintaining imperialized territory and colonizing the region could serve as a source of wealth, while personal motives by rulers, explorers, and missionaries could therefore promote their own agenda. o This agenda being “Glory, God and Gold”. Mercantilism • Mercantilism was a popular and main economic system for many European nations during the 16th to 18th centuries. • The main goal was to increase a nation’s wealth by promoting government rule of a nation’s economy for the purpose of enhancing state power at the expense of rival national power. • It was the economic counterpart of political absolutism. Why did mercantilists want colonies? • Mercantilists believed that a country must have an excess of exports over imports. • By colonizing territory, it provided the nation with indispensable wealth of precious raw materials. • Therefore, the claimed territory served as a market and supplier of raw materials for the mother country. Which, in time, provided an excess of exports for the nation and thus created wealth. o Development of Trading Companies to support this economic system. Hudson Bay Company – (1670). Controlled primarily North America. o Dutch East Indie Trading Company (1682) o East Indian Trading Company (1600) o Royal African Trade Company (1672) WHERE? • European nations begun to colonize the America, India and the East Indies to create a direct trade route. • Great Britain was the leading power in India, Australia and North America, South Africa. • Spain colonized central and South America. • French held Louisiana, coastal land of Africa and French Guinea. • The Dutch built an empire in the East Indies. • The Portuguese was able to take control of present-day Brazil and the southern tip of South America and Japan. Age of Colonialism • As countries started to imperialize these regions, eventually the concept of colonization took hold: • This is what makes the Age of Colonialism extremely different! End of Colonialism • By 1800, colonialism became less popular • Why? o Revolutions (Spain, France & American) o The Napoleonic Wars o Struggle for nationalism and democracy. o Exhausted all money and energy to supervise their colonies. Waiting to wake again • Imperialism would stay quiet for close to 50 years before Great Britain and France’s economies revitalized. • The outbreak of the Industrial Revolution only encouraged and revitalized European nations to begin their conquest for new territory and resources. Age of Imperialism THE SCRAMBLE FOR AFRICA 1870-1914 Conditions Prior to Imperialism of Africa  European interest in exploiting Africa was minimal.  Their economic interests & profit in Africa primarily came through coastal trade that took place during the 1500-1700s.  The slave trade became the main source of European profit.  Furthermore, disease, political instability, lack of transportation and unpredictable climate all discouraged Europeans from seeking territory. Slave Trade & the Trans-Atlantic Slave Voyages  Forced labor was not uncommon during the 13-17th Centuries. Africans and Europeans had been trading goods and people across the Mediteranea for centuries.  This all changed from 1526 to 1867, as a new system of slavery was introduced that became highly “commercialized, racialized and inherited”  By 1690, the America and West Indies saw approximately 30,000 African people shipped from Africa. A century later, that number grew to 85,000 people per year.  By 1867, approximately 12.5 million people (about twice the population of Arizona) left Africa in a slave ship. What Changed? 1. End of the Slave Trade- Left a need for trade between Europe and Africa. 2. Innovation in technology- The steam engine and iron hulled boats allowed Europe 3. Discovery of new raw materials- Explorers located vast raw materials and resources and this only spurred imperialism with Europe in the wake of the Industrial Revolution. 4. Politics- Unification of Germany and Italy left little room to expand in Europe. Germany and Italy both needed raw materials to “catch up” with Britain and France so they looked to Africa. The Scramble for Africa  The scramble started in 1870.  Although some coastal land had previously been acquired before 1870, the need for territory quickly accelerated as European countries looked t get deeper into Africa.  Within 20 years, nearly all continents were placed under imperialistic rule. Who was Involved?  Great Britain  France  Germany  Italy  Portugal  Belgium  Spain (kind) Violent Affairs  Violence broke out multiple times when European nations looked to claim the same territory.  Germ Chancellor. Otto van Bismarck. Attempted to avert the possibility of violence against the European powers.  In 1884, Bismarck organized a conference in Berlin for the European nations. The Berlin Conference (1884-85)  The conference looked to set ground rules for future annexation of African territory by European Nations.  Annexation is the forcible acquisition and assertion of legal title over one state’s territory by another state, usually following military occupation of the territory.  From a distant perspective, it looked like it would reduce tensions among European nations and avert war.  At the heart of the meeting, these European countries negotiated their claims to African territory, made it official and then mapped their regions.  Furthermore, the leaders agreed to allow free trade among imperialized territory and some homework for negotiating future European claims in Africa was established. Further Path  After the conference, european powers continued to expand their claims in Africa so that by 1900. 90% of the African territory had been claimed. A Turn towards Colonization?  Upon the imperialization of African territory, European nations and little interest in African land unless it produced economic wealth.  Therefore, European governments put little effort and expertise into these imperialized regions.  In most cases, this emat a form of indirect rule. Thus, governing the natin without sufficient settlement and government from within the mother country. Some Exceptions  There were some exemptions through in Africa as colonization was a necessary for some regions i n Africa.  Some regions where diamonds and gold were present. Government looked to protectorate the regions and establish rule and settlement in the regions.  Protectorates: A state controlled and protected by another state for defense against aggression and other law violations. Would  Some examples include South Africa, Botswana, Zimbabwe and Congo. Conclusion  Although it may appear that the Berlin Conference averted war amid the African Scramble, imperialism eventually brought the world into worldwide conflict.  With the continued desire to create an empire by European nations. World War 1 would break out which can be linked to this quest at imperialism.
noteNote
studied byStudied by 11 people
4.5(2)
FH

Notes on The Role of Domestic Violence in Fatal Mass Shootings in the United States, 2014–2019

Background

  • Fatal mass shootings, where four or more people are killed by gunfire (excluding the perpetrator), represent a small fraction (1%) of all firearm homicide fatalities in the United States.
  • These events receive significant media attention and can heavily influence political discussions surrounding gun violence.
  • Following mass shootings, there's a strong desire to understand the causes and prevent future occurrences.
  • While risk factors for general gun violence (community gun violence, suicide) are well-known, the specific factors leading to mass shootings are less understood due to their rarity.
  • Recent studies indicate that domestic violence (DV) is a significant factor in many mass shootings.
  • An intimate partner is defined as someone with a close personal relationship, including current or former spouses, boyfriends/girlfriends, dating partners, or sexual partners. Relationships can be heterosexual or same-sex and do not require sexual intimacy, according to the CDC.
  • The definition of DV includes intimate partners, cohabitants, those sharing a child, and family members, as defined by the United States Department of Justice.
  • This study defines a fatal mass shooting as an event where four or more people are killed by gunfire, excluding the perpetrator.
  • Federal law (Gun Control Act of 1968) prohibits firearm purchase and possession for individuals convicted of a misdemeanor crime of DV.
  • State laws regarding misdemeanor crimes vary, and some states have weak measures to prevent DV perpetrators from acquiring firearms or removing guns from those legally prohibited.
  • The link between DV and firearm violence is well-established.
    • Over half of all intimate partner homicides (IPH) involve firearms.
    • Firearms are used for threats and intimidation in intimate relationships.
    • Approximately 4.5 million women in the U.S. have been threatened with a firearm, and nearly 1 million have been shot or shot at by an intimate partner.
    • Access to firearms by abusers increases the risk of femicide by 400% (Campbell et al. 2003).
    • The risk of homicide is elevated when a woman attempts to leave an abusive partner.
  • Limited research exists on the role of DV in mass shootings and multiple victim homicides.

Prior Research

  • Zeoli and Paruk (2019) analyzed mass shooters from 2014 to 2017, assessing:
    • Whether offenders had known histories of DV or were suspected to have committed DV.
    • Whether they were legal firearm purchasers.
    • Whether they had prior involvement in the criminal justice system that should have restricted firearm purchase/possession.
    • They found that 31.5% of mass shooters had histories of DV perpetration.
    • They suggested that mass shootings could be prevented with better enforcement of DV-related firearm restrictions, such as domestic violence protective orders (DVPOs).
    • Zeoli and Paruk (2019) found more fatal victims when DV was mentioned (average 7.1 killed) versus when it was not (average 6.2 killed).
    • Their work highlights systemic gaps that allow potential mass shooters with DV histories to acquire firearms due to poorly implemented laws.
  • Kivisto and Porter (2020) found that firearm use in domestic homicides increases the risk of multiple fatalities, unlike non-domestic homicides.
    • Male perpetrators using firearms in domestic homicides were almost twice as likely to kill at least one other person compared to those not using firearms.
    • 4.6% of domestic homicides had multiple victims, compared to 3.3% of non-domestic homicides.
  • IPH events frequently result in multiple victims, including perpetrator suicide and the deaths of family, friends, new dating partners, coworkers, children, strangers, or police officers.
  • About 40% of male-perpetrated IPHs result in multiple fatalities, either through perpetrator suicide or additional homicides (Kivisto 2015).
  • A study of IPH events in 16 states (2003-2009) found that nearly 30% of IPV-related incidents resulted in multiple deaths, with a median of 2 deaths per incident (range 2-7 deaths) (Smith et al. 2014).
    • Almost 50% of the additional deaths were children or other family of the abused intimate partner, 27% were new intimate partners of the targeted partner, 20% were friends and acquaintances, 3% were strangers, and 1% were law enforcement officers (Smith et al. 2014).
  • Reeping et al. (2019), using FBI Supplementary Homicide Report (SHR) data (1999-2014), found that 23.5% of mass shootings were DV-related.
    • Florida data was excluded due to nonparticipation in the FBI’s reporting system.
    • The FBI's definition is limited as it relies on the relationship between the offender and the first victim, which can misclassify shootings if the intimate partner was not the first victim.
  • Limited research has specifically focused on the role of DV in mass shootings or on the differences in case fatality rates (CFR) between DV-related, history of DV, and non-DV-related mass shootings.

Current Study

  • This study explores the correlation between DV and mass shootings and whether there are differences in the average number of injuries and fatalities for mass shootings that were DV, history of DV, or non-DV-related using data from the Gun Violence Archive (GVA).

Methods

Definition of Mass Shooting

  • There is no legal definition of "mass shooting" in the United States, leading to disagreements on how to define it.
  • Scholarly literature commonly defines mass shootings as those resulting in four or more deaths by gunfire, excluding the perpetrator (Booty et al. 2019; Zeoli and Paruk 2019).
  • This study adopts this definition for fatal mass shootings.
  • Different definitions across databases lead to varying numbers of mass shootings being captured, potentially affecting study results.
  • A 2019 analysis of five mass shooting databases found little overlap in the number of shootings due to definitional differences (Booty et al. 2019).
  • While recent work has called for an expanded definition to include both fatal and non-fatal injuries, this study focuses on mass shootings with four or more fatalities by gunfire, excluding the perpetrator.

Data and Measures

  • This analysis uses GVA data on mass shootings from 2014 to 2019.
  • The GVA tracks the date, city, state, address, number killed, and number injured for each incident.
  • The GVA defines a mass shooting as “[Four] or more shot and/or killed in a single event [incident], at the same general time and location not including the shooter” (Gun Violence Archive n.d.-a, n.d.-b).
  • This study applies its definition (four or more fatalities by gunfire, excluding the perpetrator) to the GVA data.
  • This resulted in a sample size of 128 mass shootings across the study period, with an average of 21.5 mass shootings per year (Gun Violence Archive n.d.-a).
  • Data was indexed by year and mass shooting, and the number of deaths and injuries was collected.
  • Two authors independently reviewed news articles on each mass shooting and categorized them as:
    • DV-related: At least one victim was a dating partner or family member of the perpetrator.
    • History of DV: The perpetrator had a history of DV, but the mass shooting was not directed toward partners or family members.
    • Non-DV-related: The victims were not partners or family members, and there was no mention of the perpetrator having a history of DV.
  • Discrepancies between coders were discussed with the PI until a consensus was reached.
  • 94.0% of incidents were coded the same way by both coders.
  • The 3/22/2017 shooting was coded as DV-related because the perpetrator specifically targeted his wife, even though the victims did not include family or partners.
  • A similar methodology to Zeoli and Paruk’s (2019) paper was used.
  • Definitions:
    • An "intimate partner" is a current or former spouse, dating partner, or someone whom the offender had a child in common or lived with.
    • A "family member" is someone related to the offender (either by blood or through the intimate partner) but who does not fall under the "intimate partner" category.
  • If at least one news article mentioned that the offender had a known history of domestic violence (violence or threats of violence against a current or former intimate partner or family member), but the victims were not intimate partners or family members, the cases were coded as "history of DV" shootings.
  • When neither DV nor a history of DV was mentioned in any news stories, the shooting was classified as “non-DV related.”
  • Following Zeoli and Paruk (2019), if any victims of shootings with multiple perpetrators were family and/or intimate partners of the perpetrator, the mass shooting was classified as DV-related.
  • If at least one of the perpetrators for shootings with multiple perpetrators had a history of DV, it was classified as a history of DV shooting.
  • All other shootings were classified as non-DV related.
  • Cases where the perpetrator was unknown (17 cases) were removed from the main analysis.
  • The Las Vegas shooting (2017) was identified as an outlier and excluded from the main analysis because there were 471 total victims which was greater than three standard deviations from the mean (139 total victims).

Analytic Methods

  • Descriptive analyses were conducted to summarize the percent of mass shootings that were DV-related, history of DV, or non-DV-related.
  • One-way ANOVA was used to examine whether there were differences in the average number of injuries or fatalities or the CFR between DV, history of DV, and non-DV-related mass shootings.
  • CFRs were calculated by category to reflect the total number killed over the total number injured and killed.
  • 95% confidence intervals were calculated for each CFR; category CFRs were determined to be significantly different at the p = 0.05 level if the 95% confidence intervals did not overlap.
  • The number of perpetrators who died during the mass shootings and whether they died by suicide or were killed by police was analyzed.
  • A “hybrid” category combined DV-related shootings with history of DV shootings.
  • A two-sample t-test was then conducted to determine whether this new hybrid DV-category had significantly different average victim fatalities and injuries from the non-DV-related shootings.
  • Analyses were conducted using Stata version 16.1 (StataCorp 2019).
  • Institutional Review Board approval was not required for this non-human subjects review of publicly available data.

Results

  • There were 128 mass shootings between January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2019.
  • After removing shootings where the perpetrator was unknown and excluding the Las Vegas shooting as an outlier, 110 mass shootings were included in the study.
  • These shootings resulted in 651 deaths (excluding perpetrators) and 283 non-fatal injuries.
  • 65 of the 110 shootings (59.1%) analyzed, at least one fatal or non-fatal victim was a partner or family member.
  • 10 of the 110 shootings (9.1%), the perpetrator had a history of DV, but none of the victims were partners or family members.
  • The remaining 35 mass shootings (31.8%) were non-DV-related.
  • Twelve of the mass shootings had multiple perpetrators.
    • Of those 12 incidents, seven were non-DV-related, three were history of DV mass shootings, and two were DV-related mass shootings.
  • Eight of the mass shootings involved female perpetrators, with one of the eight shootings having two female perpetrators.
    • Of those eight incidents, five were DV-related mass shootings, two were non-DV-related, and one was a history of DV mass shooting (although it involved two shooters and it was the male counterpart who had the history of DV, with the female having no known history of DV herself).
  • Fifty-five perpetrators of 53 mass shootings died during the incident;
    • 39 (70.9%) died by firearm suicide,
    • 15 (27.3%) were killed by police,
    • one (1.8%) died from an intentional overdose.
  • Of the 39 mass shooting perpetrators who died by firearm suicide, 36 (92.3%) were perpetrators of DV-related mass shootings and three (7.7%) were perpetrators of non-DV mass shootings.
  • 42 of the 65 perpetrators of DV-related mass shootings (64.6%) died during the incident, with 36 of the 42 perpetrators (85.7%) dying by firearm suicide.
  • Of the 15 perpetrators who were killed by police, five (33.3%) were perpetrators of DV-related mass shootings, four (26.7%) were mass shooting perpetrators with histories of DV, and six (40.0%) were perpetrators of non-DV mass shootings.
  • The remaining perpetrator who intentionally overdosed in the aftermath of the mass shooting was a perpetrator of a DV-related mass shooting.
  • On average:
    • DV-related shootings: 5.0 fatal injuries and 1.0 non-fatal injury
    • History of DV shootings: 10.5 individuals killed and 9.0 people non-fatally injured
    • Non-DV-related mass shootings: 6.3 fatalities and 3.7 non-fatal injuries
  • There were statistically significant differences between the average number of fatalities, non-fatal firearm injuries, and total (fatal and non-fatal) injuries for DV-related and history of DV mass shootings.
  • The difference between the average number of fatalities, non-fatal firearm injuries, and total injuries for history and non-DV related mass shootings approached significance.
  • Case Fatality Rates:
    • DV mass shootings: 83.7%
    • History of DV: 53.8%
    • Non-DV-related mass shootings: 63.1%
  • The CFR for DV-related mass shootings was significantly different from both history of DV and non-DV-related mass shootings.
  • In 75 of the 110 (68.2%) shootings analyzed, at least one fatal or non-fatal victim was a partner or family member of the perpetrator or the perpetrator had a history of DV.

Hybrid DV Category Results

  • Perpetrators of either DV or history of DV mass shootings killed an average of 5.7 people and non-fatally injured an average of 2.0 individuals.
  • The CFR for this hybrid DV category was 73.7% compared to 63.1% for non-DV-related mass shootings.

Discussion

  • Between 2014 and 2019, 68.2% of mass shootings involved a perpetrator who shot/killed a partner/family member or had a history of DV.
  • DV-related mass shootings had a CFR of 83.7%, meaning only 16.3% of victims survived, compared to 46.2% for history of DV and 36.9% for non-DV related shootings.
  • The hybrid DV category had a CFR of 73.7%.
  • DV-related mass shootings saw a 32.6% increase in CFR compared to non-DV related.
  • The hybrid DV category resulted in a 16.8% increase in CFR compared to non-DV related mass shootings.

Potential Explanations for Higher CFR in DV-Related Mass Shootings:

  • The intent of the perpetrator may differ, with a greater intent to ensure all victims are killed in DV-related shootings (Zeoli 2018).
  • Motives for DV-related mass shootings may include revenge, jealousy, power/controlAssertion, divorce, financial problems, or suicidality (Auchter 2010; Kelley 2009; Zeoli 2018).
  • DV-related mass shootings may be more targeted than non-DV-related shootings.
  • Non-DV-related mass shootings may have less clear motives and indiscriminate shooting.
  • For the deadliest mass shootings, the driving motive was likely related to religion or race/ethnicity.
  • Potentially unclear motive and/or indiscriminate shooting may be one explanation for why, on average, fewer victims of non-DV-related mass shootings died from their wounds.
  • There are likely a number of factors that could explain this that were not controlled for in the current study, including type of firearm used, location and density of the mass shooting venue, location of wounds, and emergency services and law enforcement response time.

Implications

  • This paper highlights the importance of including both “public” and “private” mass shootings in discussions around preventing these incidents.
  • By only focusing on “public” mass shootings, many DV-related mass shootings may be left out of the discussion and missed opportunities for intervention.
  • The results of this paper, that most mass shootings are related to domestic violence, highlights the need to focus on mass shootings more broadly.
  • Restricting access to guns by perpetrators of DV reduces IPH.
  • Civil domestic violence protective orders (DVPOs) that cover dating partners (13%), prohibit firearm possession for temporary orders (13%), or require firearm relinquishment (12%) are all associated with reductions in IPH (Zeoli et al. 2018).
  • Effective enforcement of these laws is key to ensure that those prohibited because of a DVPO cannot obtain guns.
  • Extreme risk protection orders (ERPOs), an evidence-based mechanism to temporarily remove firearms from individuals who are a threat to themselves or others.
  • This study shows that most perpetrators of DV-related mass shootings died by suicide, highlighting that DV-related mass shooting perpetrators may be at an elevated risk for suicide.

Comparison to Prior Research

  • Zeoli and Paruk (2019) found that the average number of fatal victims was higher for cases where there was a mention of DV, while this study found the opposite.
  • Zeoli and Paruk (2019) found that 31.5% of the shooters in their study had histories of domestic violence. By creating a hybrid category that included both DV-related and history of DV cases, this study found that in 68.2% of mass shootings between 2014 and 2019, the perpetrator either killed a family member or intimate partner in the mass shooting incident or had a history of DV.
  • The current paper’s findings show that the vast majority of mass shootings in the United States are related to domestic violence and while, on average, DV-related mass shootings result in fewer fatalities, fewer victims of DV-related mass shootings survive compared to victims of non-DV related mass shootings.

Limitations

  • Cross-sectional study, which examines associations and cannot be used to assess causality.
  • The GVA relies primarily on news reports to build its database, which is likely to result in an undercounting of the true incidence of mass shootings in the U.S.
  • The relationship between the perpetrator of a mass shooting and the victims was not always known which could have introduced misclassification into our data.
  • There is potential for measurement error that could have biased our findings.
  • GVA updates data in real time and, as a result, there may be victims of mass shootings who did not die immediately and therefore were not recorded in the original death count of the shooting.
  • Changes in the number of mass shooting deaths could affect how a mass shooting was classified for the purposes of this study.
  • Future work should focus on differences in the location of shootings that are DV-related versus those that are not DV-related.
  • The CFRs should be interpreted with caution because the definition of a mass shooting was restricted toward those where four or more people were killed, potentially inflating the CFRs.
  • Future research should explore differences in CFRs across categories using an expanded definition of mass shootings.
  • Future research should continue to examine the role that policies that disarm or otherwise restrict access to guns by perpetrators of intimate partner violence (IPV) or DV have in reducing or preventing mass shootings.

Conclusion

  • DV, whether directly related or through a perpetrator’s history, plays an important role in mass shootings in the United States.
  • DV-related mass shootings were associated with fewer casualties but a higher CFR, highlighting the lethality of these events.
  • Increased focus should be placed on disarming and restricting access to guns by perpetrators of IPV and DV.
Note
0.0(0)
study
Chat with Kai
Explore Top Notes
Teres Major Syndrome
noteNote
studied byStudied by 8 people
5.0(1)
Classic Literature
noteNote
studied byStudied by 21 people
4.0(1)
Chapter 10: Non-Essential & Essential Clause
noteNote
studied byStudied by 158 people
5.0(1)
Unit 1 Test
noteNote
studied byStudied by 3 people
5.0(1)
week 11
noteNote
studied byStudied by 1 person
5.0(1)
Imperialism Rise in Nationalism • During the French and Industrial Revolution, nationalism continued to inspire nations to increase their political and economic power. • Nationalism became the ideal force in the political, economic, and cultural life in the world, becoming the first universal ideology-organizing all people into a nation state. Nationalism Defined • The strong belief that the interest of a particular nation-state is of primary importance. o Nation-State – a state where the vast majority shares the same culture and is conscious of it. It is an ideal in which cultural boundaries match up with political ones. • As an ideology, it is based on the idea that the individual’s loyalty and devotion to the nation-state surpass other individual/group interests. • Exalting one nation’s belief above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests, excluding the interests of others. Changing the World through a Nationalistic Vision • The French Revolution significantly changed the political world and how countries govern. • The Industrial Revolution significantly changed the economic world. • The Age of Imperialism (1870-1914) dramatically changed the political, economic, and social world. What is Imperialism? • Imperialism- The policy of extending the rule of authority of an empire or nation over foreign countries, or of acquiring and holding colonies and dependencies. Power and influence are done through diplomacy or military force. Reasons for Imperialism • There are 5 main motives for empires to seek to expand their rule over other countries or territories: 1. Exploratory • Imperial nations wanted to explore territory unknown to them. • The main purpose for this exploration of new lands was for resource acquisition, medical or scientific research. o Charles Darwin • Other reasons: o Cartography (map making) o Adventure 2. Ethnocentric • Europeans acted on the concept of ethnocentrism o Ethnocentrism- the belief that one race or nation is superior to others. • Ethnocentrism developed out of Charles Darwin’s “survival of the fittest” theory. Philosophers used the theory to explain why there were superior races and inferior races. o This became known as Social Darwinism. • Most imperial nations believed that their cultural values or beliefs were superior to other nations or groups. • Believed imperial conquest would bring successful culture to inferior people. 3. Religious • Imperial expansion promoted a religious movement of people setting out to convert new members of conquered territories. • With the belief that Christianity was superior, missionaries believed it was their duty to spread Christianity to the world. • Christian missionaries established churches, and in doing so, they spread Western culture values as well. • Typically, missionaries spread the imperial nation's language through education and religious interactions. 4. Political • Patriotism and Nationalism helped spur our imperial growth, thus creating competition against other supremacies. • It was a matter of national pride, respect, and security. • Furthermore, European rivalry spurred nations for imperial conquest. Since land equaled power, the more land a country could acquire the more prestige they could wield across the globe. • Empires wanted strategic territory to ensure access for their navies and armies around the world. • The empire believed they must expand, thus they needed to be defended. 5. Economic • With the Industrial Revolution taking place during the same time, governments and private companies contributed to find ways to maximize profits. • Imperialized countries provided European factories and markets with natural resources (old and new) to manufacture products. • Trading posts were strategically placed around imperialized countries to maximize and increase profits. o Such places as the Suez Canal in Egypt which was controlled by the British provided strategic choke hold over many European powers. o Imperial powers competed over the best potential locations for resources, markets, and trade. History of Imperialism • Ancient Imperialism 600 BCE-500 CE o Roman Empire, Ancient China, Greek Empire, Persian Empire, Babylonian Empire. • Middle Age Imperialism (Age of Colonialism-1400-1800s) o Great Britain, Spain, Portugal, France, Netherlands (Dutch), Russia. • Age of Imperialism 1870-1914 o Great Britain, Spain, Portugal, France, Germany, Belgium, Italy, Japan, United States, Ottoman Empire, Russia. • Current Imperialism...? o U.S. Military intervention (i.e. Middle East) o Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine. Imperialism Colonialism • Refers to political or economic control, either legally or illegally. • Refers to where one nation assumes control over the other. • Creating an empire, expanding into neighboring regions and expanding the dominance far outside its borders. • Where a country conquers and rules over other regions for exploiting resources from the conquered country for the conqueror's benefit. • Foreign government controls/governs a territory without significant settlement. • Foreign government controls/governs the territory from within the land being colonized. • Little to no new settlement established on fresh territory. • Movement to settle to fresh territory. Age of Colonialism WHEN? • Started around the late 1400s and ended around the late 1700s/early 1800s. WHY? • Primary Reason: European countries, wished to find a direct trade route to Asia (China & India) and the East Indies. o Quicker and relatively more effective than land routes over Asia. • Secondary Reason: Empire expansion (land power) WHO? • Countries involved: Great Britain, France, Spain, the Dutch & Portugal. • Individuals’ knowns as Mercantilists believed that maintaining imperialized territory and colonizing the region could serve as a source of wealth, while personal motives by rulers, explorers, and missionaries could therefore promote their own agenda. o This agenda being “Glory, God and Gold”. Mercantilism • Mercantilism was a popular and main economic system for many European nations during the 16th to 18th centuries. • The main goal was to increase a nation’s wealth by promoting government rule of a nation’s economy for the purpose of enhancing state power at the expense of rival national power. • It was the economic counterpart of political absolutism. Why did mercantilists want colonies? • Mercantilists believed that a country must have an excess of exports over imports. • By colonizing territory, it provided the nation with indispensable wealth of precious raw materials. • Therefore, the claimed territory served as a market and supplier of raw materials for the mother country. Which, in time, provided an excess of exports for the nation and thus created wealth. o Development of Trading Companies to support this economic system. Hudson Bay Company – (1670). Controlled primarily North America. o Dutch East Indie Trading Company (1682) o East Indian Trading Company (1600) o Royal African Trade Company (1672) WHERE? • European nations begun to colonize the America, India and the East Indies to create a direct trade route. • Great Britain was the leading power in India, Australia and North America, South Africa. • Spain colonized central and South America. • French held Louisiana, coastal land of Africa and French Guinea. • The Dutch built an empire in the East Indies. • The Portuguese was able to take control of present-day Brazil and the southern tip of South America and Japan. Age of Colonialism • As countries started to imperialize these regions, eventually the concept of colonization took hold: • This is what makes the Age of Colonialism extremely different! End of Colonialism • By 1800, colonialism became less popular • Why? o Revolutions (Spain, France & American) o The Napoleonic Wars o Struggle for nationalism and democracy. o Exhausted all money and energy to supervise their colonies. Waiting to wake again • Imperialism would stay quiet for close to 50 years before Great Britain and France’s economies revitalized. • The outbreak of the Industrial Revolution only encouraged and revitalized European nations to begin their conquest for new territory and resources. Age of Imperialism THE SCRAMBLE FOR AFRICA 1870-1914 Conditions Prior to Imperialism of Africa  European interest in exploiting Africa was minimal.  Their economic interests & profit in Africa primarily came through coastal trade that took place during the 1500-1700s.  The slave trade became the main source of European profit.  Furthermore, disease, political instability, lack of transportation and unpredictable climate all discouraged Europeans from seeking territory. Slave Trade & the Trans-Atlantic Slave Voyages  Forced labor was not uncommon during the 13-17th Centuries. Africans and Europeans had been trading goods and people across the Mediteranea for centuries.  This all changed from 1526 to 1867, as a new system of slavery was introduced that became highly “commercialized, racialized and inherited”  By 1690, the America and West Indies saw approximately 30,000 African people shipped from Africa. A century later, that number grew to 85,000 people per year.  By 1867, approximately 12.5 million people (about twice the population of Arizona) left Africa in a slave ship. What Changed? 1. End of the Slave Trade- Left a need for trade between Europe and Africa. 2. Innovation in technology- The steam engine and iron hulled boats allowed Europe 3. Discovery of new raw materials- Explorers located vast raw materials and resources and this only spurred imperialism with Europe in the wake of the Industrial Revolution. 4. Politics- Unification of Germany and Italy left little room to expand in Europe. Germany and Italy both needed raw materials to “catch up” with Britain and France so they looked to Africa. The Scramble for Africa  The scramble started in 1870.  Although some coastal land had previously been acquired before 1870, the need for territory quickly accelerated as European countries looked t get deeper into Africa.  Within 20 years, nearly all continents were placed under imperialistic rule. Who was Involved?  Great Britain  France  Germany  Italy  Portugal  Belgium  Spain (kind) Violent Affairs  Violence broke out multiple times when European nations looked to claim the same territory.  Germ Chancellor. Otto van Bismarck. Attempted to avert the possibility of violence against the European powers.  In 1884, Bismarck organized a conference in Berlin for the European nations. The Berlin Conference (1884-85)  The conference looked to set ground rules for future annexation of African territory by European Nations.  Annexation is the forcible acquisition and assertion of legal title over one state’s territory by another state, usually following military occupation of the territory.  From a distant perspective, it looked like it would reduce tensions among European nations and avert war.  At the heart of the meeting, these European countries negotiated their claims to African territory, made it official and then mapped their regions.  Furthermore, the leaders agreed to allow free trade among imperialized territory and some homework for negotiating future European claims in Africa was established. Further Path  After the conference, european powers continued to expand their claims in Africa so that by 1900. 90% of the African territory had been claimed. A Turn towards Colonization?  Upon the imperialization of African territory, European nations and little interest in African land unless it produced economic wealth.  Therefore, European governments put little effort and expertise into these imperialized regions.  In most cases, this emat a form of indirect rule. Thus, governing the natin without sufficient settlement and government from within the mother country. Some Exceptions  There were some exemptions through in Africa as colonization was a necessary for some regions i n Africa.  Some regions where diamonds and gold were present. Government looked to protectorate the regions and establish rule and settlement in the regions.  Protectorates: A state controlled and protected by another state for defense against aggression and other law violations. Would  Some examples include South Africa, Botswana, Zimbabwe and Congo. Conclusion  Although it may appear that the Berlin Conference averted war amid the African Scramble, imperialism eventually brought the world into worldwide conflict.  With the continued desire to create an empire by European nations. World War 1 would break out which can be linked to this quest at imperialism.
noteNote
studied byStudied by 11 people
4.5(2)