The relationship you're proposing (more gun owners means more mass shootings) doesn't seem to hold within the US.
I do still believe that having more guns around does tend to lead to more mass shootings, along with other forms of gun related homicide.
[0] - https://www.thoughtco.com/gun-owners-percentage-of-state-pop... [1] - https://www.statista.com/statistics/811541/mass-shootings-in...
And you're right that these things should be counted per capita, but that still doesn't explain how Texas has a far higher gun ownership rate, 30% less population than California.... And HALF the mass shootings.
Quick maths: 21 guns p/capita divided by 1,000 people = 0.021 * 28 million (pop of Texas) = ~588,000 guns.
Your observation about Texas is very interesting, and I don't have an answer for that. Texas might have, historically, a better gun culture? In any case, having half the mass shootings as another state is still a number greater than zero, which remains the ultimate goal.
Ahhh, registered guns per 1000 people. That makes a bit more sense, but is still probably not all that useful, as the vast majority of guns in the US are unregistered. AFAICT this is just counting NFA-registered weapons, such as fully automatic guns, destructive devices, short-barreled rifles, suppressors, etc.
> In any case, having half the mass shootings as another state is still a number greater than zero, which remains the ultimate goal.
Ah, but it does provide a hint that the number of guns might not be the primary determining factor.
> Texas might have, historically, a better gun culture?
My guess would also involve "Texas's gun culture hasn't been killed off by state laws", as in California.