If the government is so calculating and callous that they continually go around orchestrating fake shootings, why wouldn't they just actually kill people?
Let's say some of these mass shootings are actually false flag events meant to sway public opinion (guns, ISIS, etc)
Why would you risk all of those potential leaks?
Americans have proven themselves quite capable of violence all on their own and the FBI even has a long and storied history of preying on vulnerable, alienated men and pushing them towards acts of violence, entrapping them under the guise of "homegrown terrorism." (See: The Newburgh Sting)
If they wanted a mass shooting or bombing they could easily provide actual material support to a would be terrorist and simply allow them to execute their plan.
Usually the shooter is killed either by police or self-inflicted gunshot. Even if they do happen to survive who is going to believe a mass murderer?
The operation would be lean, compartmentalized mitigating risk of leaks or exposure throughout other departments of the intelligence agency guiding the attack.
What benefit is there to hiring literally hundreds of people to participate in a sham media event? You increase the risk of leaks, exposure, etc exponentially.
I am very open to entrapment by authorities, grooming, etc. There are so many instances of clear malpractice on behalf of the federal government on the ongoing "war on terror."
I'm genuinely open and curious to understanding better how crisis actors and staged events are more beneficial than simply executing or assisting an actual shooting or false flag.
**TL;DR** Actual shootings and mass murders are more cost effective, secretive and controllable. Why would you ever hire a crisis actor?
