Well yes and no. When they define mass shootings as an incident with 4 or more victims then yes. However what they don't say is that the vast majority of these incidents are gang related, and in high crime areas. In fact when those incidents occur they rarely if ever make the news. They only roll out those numbers after an incident occurs at a school or mall. Places that make the general public feel threatened. Then suddenly it's newsworthy. They have no interest in controlling the crime or gangs that are responsible for the violence. If they did the media would have stories about it. Like we did in the 90s. Law enforcement would be arresting them and the courts would lock them up. The reality is cops in those areas are being told to ignore some crimes like car theft. And the thugs that are brought in the DAs ignore crimes like felony gun possession. That's right. Most of those shootings are committed by guys that are already breaking the law by owning a firearm. If the DA's do choose to prosecute. We have judges letting guys out with minimal sentencing or bail. All so that they can go back out on the streets and drive those statistics up. So that the next time some nut job snaps his cap and goes after a bunch of Suburbanites the media can convince the public that the real danger are the suburban and rural recreational shooters.

The truth is this is all political gun control theater. I wouldn't be surprised if every politico screaming for gun control owns stock in those companies.