America Sees Rise in Female Shooters—FBI Data
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
The number of female shooters in "active shooter" incidents increased in the United States, even as the total number of incidents fell in 2024, according to new data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation. One criminologist told Newsweek it's difficult to know if the increase is a new trend or "statistical noise."
Newsweek reached out to the FBI for comment via email.
Why It Matters
Gun violence remains a major issue faced by Americans, and there were 24 active shooter incidents resulting in 106 casualties last year. The FBI defines an active shooter as "one or more individuals actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a populated area," so this report does not account for other forms of gun violence.
In total, there were at least 16,725 gun-related deaths across the country in 2024, and already been 6,075 gun-related deaths so far in 2025, according to data from the Gun Violence Archive.
What To Know
The vast majority of shooters in these "active shooter" incidents were still male, though the percentage of female shooters did increase from 2023 to 2024, according to the new FBI report. Of the 24 active shooter incidents that occurred last year, three shooters were female and 21 were male.
There was only one female shooter each year from 2021 to 2023, though there were three female shooters in these incidents in 2020, according to previous FBI reports.
The change coincided with a significant decline in overall active shooter incidents, which decreased by approximately 50 percent from 2023 to 2024, according to the FBI report. There were 48 active shooter incidents in 2023, 50 in 2022, 61 in 2021 and 40 in 2020.
Jillian Peterson, co-founder of the Violence Protection Project, told Newsweek it is difficult to know "statistical noise or the start of a new trend."
"The number of female active shooters went from one to three (while the overall number of incidents went down). This could simply be a blip in the data," she said. "It could also be the start of a trend, because we know that mass shootings are socially contagious and active shooters tend to see themselves in the shooters that came before them."
File photo: A police officer secures an area following a shooting in Linden, New Jersey, on September 19, 2016.
File photo: A police officer secures an area following a shooting in Linden, New Jersey, on September 19, 2016.
JEWEL SAMAD/AFP via Getty Images
The December 2024 shooting at Abundant Life Christian School in Madison, Wisconsin, highlighted a rare instance of a female shooter when a 15-year-old girl opened fire, resulting in the deaths of two individuals and injuries to six others.
Another instance last year was a shooting at Lakewood Church in Houston, Texas, when a 36-year-old woman opened fire on February 11, resulting in two injuries.
Peterson noted that each of these cases is "incredibly different."
"The fact these cases are so different make it unlikely that these shooters are being influenced by each other," she said.
The FBI did not speculate as to what the increase may be caused by. The agency did not indicate whether it views the increase as a statistical anomaly or the start of a new trend.
What People Are Saying
Violence Protection Project co-founder Jillian Peterson told Newsweek: "Historically, men are more likely to participate in gun violence than women for many reasons that are difficult to untangle—some would argue biology (hormones, evolution, brain chemistry), some argue socialization (media, role models, toys, normalization of violence for boys, culture of masculinity) and some would argue a combination.
"Generally, men are more likely to externalize stress and frustration through violence and women are more likely to internalize stress and frustration (higher rates of depression, anxiety, eating disorders, etc.)."
The FBI wrote in a press release: "In 2024, the FBI designated 24 shootings as active shooter incidents. Incidents decreased by 50% from 2023 (48 incidents). The 24 active shooter incidents in 2024 occurred in 19 states and represent five location categories, including open space, commerce, education, government, and houses of worship."
What Happens Next
It remains to be seen whether this increase will continue into the coming years or whether it represents an anomaly. Future data reports will be viewed closely to determine whether this change becomes a pattern.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
41 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Michigan anti-discrimination law would explicitly ban antisemitism under new proposal
A Democratic lawmaker in the Michigan House of Representatives introduced legislation June 4 to amend the state's civil rights law to include an updated definition of antisemitism, saying recent attacks on Jewish communities in the U.S. have created a crisis. Rep. Noah Arbit, D-West Bloomfield, said during a June 3 news conference the Michigan Antisemitism Protection Act would create a 'gold standard definition of antisemitism' within the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act, the state law that bans discrimination in housing, employment, education and public accommodations on the basis of certain protected classes, including, religion, age, race, sex and sexual orientation. 'If adopted, these standards would assist relevant state institutions, agencies and authorities identify and elevate potential instances of illegal discrimination against Jews in Michigan,' Arbit said. He added the bill, HB 4548, would not affect constitutionally protected free speech, but would add protections for ethnicity in arenas already covered by the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act. Specifically, the bill would add ethnicity as a protected class and adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's working definition of antisemitism. The IHRA states: 'Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.' Arbit, who is Jewish, said a June 1 attack at a Colorado event drawing attention to Israeli hostages held by Hamas and the fatal shootings of two Israeli embassy workers in May outside the Capital Jewish Museum in Washington are the latest instances of targeted violence against Jews in the U.S. Mohamed Sabry Soliman, the alleged perpetrator of the Boulder, Colorado, attack, was charged with a federal hate crime after telling investigators he wanted to kill all Zionist people, according to an FBI affidavit. The attacks, however, aren't isolated instances of targeted violence, Arbit said. 'Over the last decade and a half, American Jews have watched our vibrant synagogues congeal into fortresses. The anxiety that our sanctuaries or Sunday schools could be the next target for a gunman or terrorist pervades Jewish communities across Michigan,' he said. Arbit was joined by Michigan's two other Jewish lawmakers, Sen. Jeremy Moss, D-Southfield, and Rep. Samantha Steckloff, D-Farmington Hills. Steckloff said all three lawmakers have received calls from the FBI about credible threats against them, adding she had a police detail on her home. Steckloff said it's important to push back against antisemitic tropes, including the idea that Jews control societal institutions. She also said American Jews should not be blamed for what the government of Israel has done, referencing the ongoing war in Gaza. 'We cannot continue to hate American Jews because of what is going on overseas,' Steckloff said. HB 4548 would bar discrimination on the basis of accusing Jews of being more loyal to Israel or the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide than in the U.S. While the IHRA states that manifestations of antisemitism may include targeting the state of Israel, the group also states that criticism of Israel similar to criticism of another country cannot be considered antisemitism. The bill states discrimination "does not include criticism of the State of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country, nation, state, or government." Holding Jewish people collectively accountable for Israel's actions, however, is considered antisemitism under the bill and under the IHRA's working definition. The definition was adopted in 2016. Contact Arpan Lobo: alobo@ This article originally appeared on Detroit Free Press: New Michigan bill would adopt definition of antisemitism in state law
Newsweek
41 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Donald Trump Suffers Quadruple Legal Blow Within Hours
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. President Donald Trump suffered a series of legal setbacks on Wednesday in the form of four separate court rulings. Why It Matters Trump came into office on the pledge that he would carry out mass deportations on "day one," impose sweeping tariffs on countries he claims have taken advantage of the U.S, implement hiring freezes and mass layoffs to downsize the government in the name of efficiency, eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies and more. But the administration has run up against judicial pushback on virtually every major agenda item that Trump championed on the campaign trail and since he took office. In May, according to one analysis, the Trump administration suffered more than two dozen defeats at the district court level from judges appointed by Democrats and Republicans, including Trump. What To Know The four legal setbacks on Wednesday were announced within hours of each other. President Donald Trump speaks during a summer soiree on the South Lawn of the White House, Wednesday, June 4, 2025, in Washington. President Donald Trump speaks during a summer soiree on the South Lawn of the White House, Wednesday, June 4, 2025, in Washington. Alex Brandon/AP Judge Blocks Effort to Dismantle Jobs Corps A U.S. judge on Wednesday temporarily stopped the Trump administration from moving ahead with an effort to eliminate Job Corps, the largest U.S. job training program for low-income youth. U.S. District Judge Andrew Carter issued a restraining order preventing the Labor Department from terminating contracts or halting operations until further review. The plaintiffs argue the department is overstepping its authority by trying to dismantle a federally mandated program without congressional approval. Job Corps, established in 1964, provides education and vocational training to disadvantaged youth but has been criticized by the Labor Department for poor outcomes and safety issues. A court hearing is scheduled for June 17. Block on Dismantling of Education Department Stays A federal appeals court has rejected the Trump administration's bid to lift a lower court's injunction blocking the president's executive order to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education. The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the ruling, which requires the department to reinstate over 1,300 employees who were terminated as part of a mass layoff aimed at shutting down the agency. The lawsuit was brought by Democratic-led states, school districts, and teachers' unions, who argued that the firings—announced just before Trump signed the executive order to eliminate the department—violated the law by attempting to bypass Congress, which created the department in 1979. The Trump administration maintained that the cuts were lawful and part of a broader effort to reduce government size. U.S. District Judge Myong Joun previously ruled that the layoffs were effectively an attempt to dismantle the department without congressional approval. The appeals court agreed, noting the agency would be unable to perform its core functions if the firings proceeded. Trump has proposed transferring the department's responsibilities to other agencies. The administration is expected to appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court. Due Process for Over 100 Men Sent to El Salvador A federal judge has ruled that the Trump administration illegally deported nearly 140 Venezuelan men to El Salvador under a rarely used wartime law, the Alien Enemies Act, but stopped short of ordering their return to the United States. In a 69-page decision issued Wednesday, Chief U.S. District Judge James Boasberg found the men—who were flown out of the U.S. just hours after Trump invoked the 1798 law on March 15—were denied due process and unlawfully sent to El Salvador's notorious CECOT megaprison. Trump said the men were members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua, but Boasberg wrote that evidence suggests many had no gang ties at all. "Significant evidence has come to light indicating that many of those entombed in CECOT have no connection to the gang and thus languish in a foreign prison on flimsy, even frivolous, accusations," Boasberg wrote. Boasberg gave the administration one week to propose how the detainees might pursue legal challenges in U.S. courts but said he would not yet order any specific government action, citing national security concerns. The judge had previously tried to block the deportation as the planes were in the air, but they did not turn back, prompting contempt-of-court proceedings—now paused by an appeals court. The Supreme Court later said that individuals deported under the Alien Enemies Act must be given enough time to seek legal relief, though it ruled 5–4 that Boasberg's court was not the correct venue for the original case. Legal experts and civil rights groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), hailed Boasberg's latest ruling as a critical rebuke of Trump's handling of mass deportations. "The Trump administration must fix its blatant constitutional violations and cannot simply choose to leave these individuals in a foreign gulag-type prison," said ACLU attorney Lee Gelernt, Politico reported. Deportation of Boulder Attack Suspect's Family Halted A federal judge has ordered the Trump administration to halt deportation proceedings against the wife and five children of Mohamed Sabry Soliman, the Egyptian national charged with firebombing a pro-Israeli demonstration in Boulder, Colorado. U.S. District Judge Gordon P. Gallagher issued the ruling to ensure the family's constitutional rights are protected, after they were taken into custody by immigration officials earlier this week. None of the family members have been charged with any crime. Soliman, who authorities say confessed to the attack, faces federal hate crime and attempted murder charges after allegedly throwing Molotov cocktails at demonstrators while shouting "Free Palestine." Fifteen people were injured in the attack, which authorities say was motivated by antisemitism. Soliman had a pending asylum application. His wife, a network engineer, has a pending EB-2 visa application and is listed with their children as dependents on his asylum application. The Department of Homeland Security defended the family's detention, arguing their immigration status warranted removal. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem also stated that federal authorities were investigating whether the family had any prior knowledge of the planned assault. Soliman and his wife have both said the family was unaware of his actions, according to authorities. "The punishment of a 4-year-old child for something their parent allegedly outrage Americans, regardless of their citizenship status," one of the family's attorneys, Eric Lee, told The Associated Press. Soliman remains in custody on a $10 million bond and is due in state court on Thursday. What Happens Next Trump is appealing the Department of Education case, and new court dates have been set for the Boulder attack deportation and the Jobs Corp cases.
Scientific American
42 minutes ago
- Scientific American
Inside the Collapse of the America's Overdose Prevention Program
At an addiction conference in Nashville, Tenn., in late April, U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., spoke about his own experience with drug use. 'Addiction is a source of misery. It's also a symptom of misery,' he said. Kennedy's very personal speech, however, ignored recent federal budget cuts and staffing reductions that could undo national drug programs' recent progress in reversing overdoses and treating substance use. Several experts in the crowd, including Caleb Banta-Green, a research professor at the University of Washington, who studies addiction, furiously spoke up during Kennedy's speech. Banta-Green interrupted, shouting 'Believe science!' before being removed from the venue. (The Department of Health and Human Services did not respond to a request for comment for this article.) 'I had to stand up and say something,' says Banta-Green, who has spent his career working with people who use drugs and was a senior science adviser at the Office of National Drug Control Policy during the Obama administration. 'The general public needs to understand what is being dismantled and the very real impact it's going to have on them and their loved ones.' On supporting science journalism If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today. The Trump administration has defunded public health programs and made plans to consolidate or eliminate the systems that track their outcomes, making it difficult to monitor the deadly consequences of substance use, Banta-Green says. For instance, staff cuts to the Overdose Data to Action program and the Opioid Overdose Prevention and Surveillance program will hamper former tracking efforts at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and at local and state health departments' prevention programs. A recently fired policy analyst at the overdose prevention division at the CDC's National Center for Injury Prevention and Control— who wishes to remain anonymous, citing fear of retaliation—tells Scientific American that she used to provide policy support to teams at health departments in 49 states and shared public overdose data and information to Congress. She is a veteran who should have had protected employment status, but she lost her job during federal cuts in February. 'No one else is doing surveillance and data collection and prevention like the CDC was,' she says. 'There's so much that's been cut.' (When approached for an interview by Scientific American, a CDC spokesperson said, 'Honestly, the new administration has changed how things normally work' and did not make anyone available for questions.) What Gets Measured Gets Managed Provisional data suggest that deaths from drug use declined by almost 25 percent in 2024, though overdoses remain the leading cause of death for Americans aged 18 to 44. Cuts to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health will make it difficult to measure similar statistics in the future. Because substance use is highly stigmatized, Banta-Green says it's important to have diverse, localized and timely data from multiple agencies to accurately capture the need for services—and the ways they're actually used. 'You can't design public health or policy responses if you don't know the scale of the need,' he says. Overdose trends vary by region—for example, usage of the synthetic opioid fentanyl appeared earlier on the East Coast than the West—so national averages can obscure critical local patterns. These regional differences can offer important insights into which interventions might be working, Banta-Green says. For instance, important medications such as naloxone rapidly reverse opioid overdoses in emergency situations. But getting people onto long-term medications, including methadone and buprenorphine, which reduce cravings and withdrawal symptoms, can more effectively prevent mortality in both the short and long term. Declining deaths may also mask tragic underlying dynamics. Successful interventions may not be the only cause of a drop in overdoses; it could also be that the people who are most vulnerable to overdose have recently perished and that there are simply fewer remaining at risk. 'It's like a forest fire burning itself out,' Banta-Green says. This underscores the need for the large-scale data collection threatened by the proposed budget and staff cuts at the CDC and National Institutes of Health, says Regina LaBelle, an addiction policy expert at Georgetown University. 'What [the administration is] doing is shortsighted' and doesn't appear to be based 'on the effectiveness or the outcomes of the programs that [it's] cutting,' she says. For example, despite promising to expand naloxone access, the Trump administration's latest budget proposal cuts funding for a critical program that distributes the lifesaving medication to first aid responders. 'A Chance at Redemption' When LaBelle was acting director of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy during the Biden administration, she led efforts to expand evidence-based programs that provided clean syringes and tested users' drugs for harmful substances. These strategies are often referred to as 'harm reduction,' which LaBelle describes as 'a way you can meet people where they are and give them the services they need to keep them from dying.' José Martínez, a substance use counselor based in Buffalo, N.Y., says harm-reduction practices helped save his life. When Martínez got his first job as a peer advocate for people using drugs, he was still in a chaotic part of his own addiction and had been sleeping on the street and the subway—and regularly getting into fights—for a decade. The day after he was hired to help provide counseling on hepatitis C, he got into a New York City shelter. As his bruises healed, he learned life skills he was never taught at home. 'For a lot of people, drug use is a coping tool,' he says. 'The drug is rarely the problem. Drug use is really a symptom.' Working with others who understood that many people need help minimizing risks gave Martínez a chance to make progress toward recovery in a way that he says abstinence-only treatment programs couldn't. 'I don't agree that somebody should be sober in order for them to do things different,' he says. Over the past six years working for the National Harm Reduction Coalition, Martínez started a national support network for other peer program workers and community members—people who share their experiences and are a trusted source of education and support for others using drugs. 'There's never no time limit,' he says. 'Everybody works on their own pace.' Though Martínez's program doesn't take federal funding, the Trump administration is cutting similar kinds of peer programs. Martínez says doing this peer work gives many users a sense of purpose and stability—and helps them avoid previous behaviors. The proposed 2026 federal budget will slash the CDC's opioid surveillance programs by $30 million. It also creates a new subdivision called the Administration for a Healthy America that will consolidate the agency's prevention work, along with existing programs at the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Agency (SAMHSA), which often coordinates grants for treatment programs. The programs formerly conducted through SAMHSA are also facing cuts of more than $1 billion. Advocates fear this will include a shift toward funding abstinence-only priorities, which, Martínez says, 'will definitely mean that we're going to have more overdoses.' (Some research suggests abstinence-based treatment actually puts people at a higher risk of fatal overdose than those who receive no treatment at all.) 'The general public needs to understand what is being dismantled and the very real impact it's going to have on them and their loved ones.' —Caleb Banta-Green, addiction research professor These cuts could disproportionately affect communities already facing higher overdose rates: Martínez, who is Puerto Rican, notes that U.S. Black, Latino and Indigenous communities have experienced drug overdose death increases in recent years. In many states, overdose deaths in Black and brown communities remain high while white overdose death rates are declining. Looming cuts to Medicaid programs, LaBelle warns, are likely to worsen inequalities in health care access, which tends to make communities of color more vulnerable. In Kentucky, where Governor Andy Beshear recently celebrated a 30 percent decline in overdose deaths, Shreeta Waldon, executive director of the Kentucky Harm Reduction Coalition, says the reality is more nuanced. While national overdose deaths declined in white populations from 2021 to 2023, for example, they continued to rise among people of color. Black and Latino communities often face barriers when accessing health services, many of which have been shaped by predominantly white institutions. Waldon says it's essential for people from diverse backgrounds to participate in policy decisions and necessary to ensure that opioid abatement funds —legal funds used toward treatment and prevention—are distributed fairly. Without adequate federal funding, Waldon predicts treatment programs in Kentucky will become backlogged—potentially pushing more people into crisis situations that lead to emergency services or incarceration rather than to recovery. These financial and political pressures are not only making it harder to find support for people in crisis; they also reduce opportunities to discuss community needs. Waldon says she knows some social workers who now avoid terms such as 'Black woman' or 'marginalized' in grants and public talks out of fear of losing funding. But people currently needing treatment for substance-use disorder are not necessarily aware of the federal funding news—or 'what's about to hit them when they try to go get treatment and they're hit with barriers,' Waldon says. 'That's way more important to me than trying to tailor the way I talk.' Funding and staffing cuts don't just limit resources for the people most in need. They limit the ability to understand where someone is coming from, which undermines efforts to provide meaningful care, Martínez says. Harm reduction is more than the services and physical tools given to community members, he says. It's about the approach. 'When you look at a whole person, you plant the seed of health and dignity,' he says. 'If everybody deserves a chance at redemption, then we've got to rethink how we're approaching things.'
