Gun violence is down — can Trump take credit? 

An active shooter at Florida State University on April 17 created chaos across the entire campus, resulting in two people killed and five injured. Despite the tragedy of this event, it stood out because the first four months of 2025 have seen the number of high-profile firearm events plummet. 

The Gun Violence Archive defines as "mass murder" firearm shootings resulting in four or more people killed, excluding the shooter. "Mass shootings" are defined as firearm shootings with four or more people killed or injured, also excluding the shooter.  

From Jan. 1 through April 30, 2025, just three mass murders occurred, resulting in a total of 12 people killed. There were also 92 mass shootings (including the 12 mass murders), resulting in a total of 92 people killed. To put these numbers into perspective, for all of 2024, there were 30 mass murders (killing 130) and 502 mass shootings (killing 509).

As a further point of comparison, during the first nine months of 2024, around 106 people were killed on average per day in traffic-related accidents. 

If these mass murder and mass shooting trends continue, 2025 will go on record as the safest year in more than a decade with respect to high-profile firearm events.

Most agree that even one mass murder or mass shooting is one too many. Such a misuse of firearms unjustifiably gives all responsible firearm owners a bad name, with most saying they own a firearm for personal protection. The recent drop in high-profile firearm events has likely quieted firearm naysayers and suppressed gun-control political banter. This has not, however, kept some states from acting to limit or restrict some types of firearm purchases.  

The Supreme Court also recently upheld a ban on unregistered and untraceable "ghost guns," providing sensible policies without being unnecessarily restrictive to or burdensome on responsible gun owners.

There is no way to know for certain the exact cause of this newfound calm, but it is worth asking whether it has to do with Trump's election. For comparison, the last three months of 2024 saw seven mass murders and 92 mass shootings. Clearly, something is different, and it happens to coincide with the new administration, which has been mostly quiet about firearm policies except to show strong support for the Second Amendment.

One change that occurred well before the current administration took office is a larger investment in mental health services. The COVID pandemic created mental health angst that is, finally, slowly calming. The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act in 2022 provided funding to support and strengthen mental health services, with provisions to reduce access to firearms for those whose condition makes them a risk.

An examination of 50 years of firearm data suggest that the people who use firearms in mass shootings and mass killings are highly varied. Research has shown that such events are random and unpredictable, making it difficult to forecast when and where they will occur. This means that law enforcement in all communities must be ready at any time to respond to such events. Indeed, law enforcement response is the critical factor to minimize the harm inflicted on those present.  

Given that there are around 400 million firearms in the nation, the downward trend of high-profile firearm events suggests that although firearms are a convenient and efficient weapon of choice in such events, the people who execute them are where the root problem lies. 

This is best illustrated by suicide data reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In 2022, there were 49,476 suicides, with over one-half of them (27,032 involving firearms. It is conceivable that some of these suicides would not have occurred if the person did not have access to a firearm. This supports stronger education for safe storage and handling of firearms.

The Florida State shooting is a jolt to what has been a remarkably quiet year for high-profile firearm events. The data on mass shootings and mass killings for the rest of 2025 will be critical markers for capturing whether the first four months of 2025 were an aberration or represent a new trend.

As with any data, it is easy to see what has occurred, but more challenging to know where we are heading. All such information and insights may put to rest debates on firearm access, focusing on firearm safety for all — something that everyone can support. 

Sheldon H. Jacobson, Ph.D., is a computer science professor in the Grainger College of Engineering at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. As a data scientist, he uses his expertise in risk-based analytics to address problems in public policy.