Transgender individuals committed active shooting attacks at a rate at least 12 times their share of the general population in 2024, and possibly more than 16 times their share, according to a report from the Crime Prevention Research Center.
The CPRC studied data spanning 2018 to 2024 and found that even using the most conservative methodology available, the disproportion is impossible to ignore.
Using only FBI data over the entire period, transgender individuals committed mass public and active shooting attacks at 3.4 times their share of the population, Breitbart News reported. If one applies the higher Census estimate that transgender individuals constitute roughly one percent of the population, that figure is 2.5 times. Either way, the overrepresentation is stark.
And the bloodshed that followed the study's timeframe has only sharpened the pattern.
On August 27, 2025, a transgender shooter opened fire on a Minneapolis Catholic school, killing two children and wounding 14 others, along with three adults. The shooter left behind a rambling video message that included the words "F*ck those kids." Two children were dead in a Catholic school, and the killer recorded a farewell dripping with contempt for the victims.
On September 10, 2025, Turning Point USA's Charlie Kirk was shot and killed. His alleged assassin had a transgender partner at the time. FOX News' Brooke Singman reported that Robinson "lived with his transgender partner."
On February 10, 2026, a biological male whom police referenced as "they" opened fire at a residence and in a British Columbia school, killing numerous innocents and leaving 25 wounded.
Six days later, on February 16, 2026, a transgender shooter opened fire on his family at a high school hockey game, killing his ex-wife and one of his sons, and then took his own life.
The list goes on. And so does the silence from the institutions whose job it is to tell the public the truth.
In February 2024, Politifact published a report claiming there was "No evidence of rising LGBTQ+ violent extremism or 'trans terrorism.'" By September 2025, after a Catholic school massacre and the assassination of one of the most prominent young conservative voices in America, Politifact's follow-up concluded that data "shows a different picture" when asked whether trans people are "statistically" more prone to commit gun violence.
Note what happened there. The first report said there was no evidence. The second report, published after the evidence became unavoidable, didn't retract the first. It simply reframed the question. This is what institutional fact-checking looks like when its purpose is narrative management rather than truth-seeking. You don't correct the record. You just change the subject.
The CPRC data existed. The shootings were public. The identities of the shooters were known. Politifact had access to all of it. They chose to look away, and when they couldn't look away any longer, they chose to squint.
Nobody serious is arguing that being transgender makes someone a killer. That is not the point, and pretending it is the point is itself a deflection. The point is simpler and more uncomfortable: a statistically significant pattern exists, and the mainstream media, the fact-checking industry, and much of the political establishment have actively suppressed public awareness of it.
Consider the reverse scenario. If any other identifiable demographic group was committing mass shootings at 12 to 16 times their population share, every major newsroom in America would treat it as a crisis. There would be congressional hearings. There would be presidential addresses. There would be wall-to-wall cable coverage demanding answers, funding, and accountability.
Instead, we get Politifact articles that age like milk and a media class that treats the CPRC's findings as something to be debunked rather than investigated.
The ideological infrastructure around gender identity has created a protected category so insulated from scrutiny that even basic pattern recognition becomes taboo. When police in British Columbia refer to a mass shooter as "they," the priority structure is visible. When newsrooms bury the transgender identity of shooters while amplifying every other demographic detail of every other perpetrator, the editorial choice speaks for itself.
This is not compassion. Compassion would mean caring enough about the next school, the next church, the next hockey rink full of families to follow the data wherever it leads. What we have instead is a system that ranks the feelings of activist groups above the safety of children.
Two children died in Minneapolis. A father killed his ex-wife and son at a hockey game. Charlie Kirk is dead. Twenty-five people were wounded in British Columbia.
Every one of those victims deserved a society willing to ask hard questions before the bullets flew, not after. The data was there. The pattern was there. The institutions whose job was to see it chose blindness instead.