Fact check: Is political violence and active shooters more on the left?

1. Summary of the results

The claim that political violence and active shooters are more on the left is not supported by the majority of the analyses provided. According to ^[1], radical acts perpetrated by individuals associated with left-wing causes are less likely to be violent, which contradicts the claim ^[1]. Additionally, ^[2] suggests that political violence is a feature of both the left and right, and that the availability of guns, mental health issues, and polarized rhetoric contribute to the problem, which does not support the claim that political violence and active shooters are more on the left ^[2]. The polling data in ^[3] shows that Americans overall are split about whether left-wing violence or right-wing violence is a bigger problem, with liberals and conservatives having opposite views on the issue, which does not provide clear evidence to support or refute the claim ^[3]. Other analyses, such as ^[4], discuss the characteristics of ideologically motivated mass shooters, but do not provide direct evidence to support or refute the claim ^[4]. ^[5] notes that the far right has not been this strong for many decades and that inequality and disillusionment with democracy are contributing factors to the violence, but does not explicitly state that political violence and active shooters are more prevalent on the left ^[5].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

Some key context missing from the original statement is the historical context of political violence in the United States, which ^[5] provides, noting that the roots of violence in American politics run deep, with a history of ethnic cleansing, lynching, and massacres ^[5]. Another missing context is the complexity of identifying the motivations and ideologies behind active shooter incidents, as highlighted by ^[6], which reports on false calls about active school shooters and the possibility of overseas involvement ^[6]. Alternative viewpoints are also presented by ^[7], which suggests that media coverage may be influenced by various factors, including the shooter's identity and the location of the incident, which could impact public perceptions of political violence and active shooters ^[7]. Furthermore, ^[2] provides expert opinions on the recent surge in political violence, suggesting that it is a feature of both the left and right, and that the availability of guns, mental health issues, and polarized rhetoric contribute to the problem ^[2].

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original statement may be influenced by bias, as it presents a simplistic and binary view of political violence and active shooters, which is not supported by the majority of the analyses provided. The statement may benefit those who wish to perpetuate a narrative that political violence is primarily a problem of the left, which could be used to further polarize the political landscape. However, as ^[1] and ^[2] suggest, radical acts perpetrated by individuals associated with left-wing causes are less likely to be violent, and political violence is a feature of both the left and right ^{[1] [2]}. Therefore, it is essential to consider multiple viewpoints and to approach this topic with nuance, recognizing that political violence is a complex issue that cannot be reduced to simple binary categories. The lack of clear evidence to support the claim, as noted by ^[3], and the complexity of identifying the motivations and ideologies behind active shooter incidents, as highlighted by ^[6], further underscore the need for a more nuanced understanding of this issue ^{[3] [6]}.