
Nearly all mass shooters have four things in common - ilamont
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2019-08-04/el-paso-dayton-gilroy-mass-shooters-data
======
overthemoon
I'm finding the mental health angle less and less convincing. People are
capable of doing these things in their right mind. Is the manifesto a part of
the "social contagion"? Treating this as solely a product of mental illness
minimizes it. Plenty of people experience abuse and trauma at a young age and
don't murder dozens.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think it's irrelevant, not at all. But the
ideology can't be ignored, it can't be separated from the act as if it's
interchangeable.

~~~
fkdo
Someone can be sane but still have poor mental health.

Healthy people don't kill innocent civilians.

~~~
overthemoon
What makes you say that? People choose bad things all the time. I don't think
it's wise to pathologize bad behavior in every case.

------
itronitron
Two of the main points...

>> practically every mass shooter we studied had reached an identifiable
crisis point in the weeks or months leading up to the shooting. Such crises
were, in many cases, communicated to others through a marked change in
behavior, an expression of suicidal thoughts or plans, or specific threats of
violence.

>> most of the shooters had studied the actions of other shooters and sought
validation for their motives.

In other words, they talk to other people about their plans and grievances
beforehand, so there is an opportunity for intervention.

------
cpr
And not a peep about the almost inevitable involvement with SSRI drugs, most
of which warn about side effects like "suicidal, murderous ideations".

~~~
brownbat
I was curious about this, but the only research I could find points the other
way. For example:

[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3395354/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3395354/)

------
shusson
I understand it's just an essay, but if their goal is "to find new, data-
driven pathways for preventing such shootings" they need to add more
data/evidence.

------
varjag
These may be the common things, but none of them is particularly discoverable,
predictive and actionable. And indeed, the advice the article presents later
amounts to more policing.

------
open-paren
TL;DR;

1\. > ...experienced early childhood trauma and exposure to violence at a
young age... often a precursor to mental health concerns

2\. > ...practically every mass shooter we studied had reached an identifiable
crisis point in the weeks or months leading up to the shooting.

3\. > ...most of the shooters had studied the actions of other shooters and
sought validation for their motives.

4\. > ...the shooters all had the means to carry out their plans.

------
netsharc
Sadly the main site is gone, but here's a talk (transcript, and you can also
open the YouTube video:
[https://web.archive.org/web/20160113163745/http://blogs.plos...](https://web.archive.org/web/20160113163745/http://blogs.plos.org/neuroanthropology/2015/04/25/scott-
atran-on-youth-violent-extremism-and-promoting-peace/)

The gist of it is that people without future/community think jihad can be
their community and their life work... Guess what, it also applies to people
thinking you need to be a warrior for the "suppressed white race"..

~~~
bilbo0s
I don't know man?

I'll preface the following statement by saying that I'm not being racist, I'm
just stating a fact. But it's clear that blacks and native americans have been
"suppressed" and impoverished, and "people without futures" or whatever for a
long, long time. Again, not a knock against native americans or blacks, just
outlining reality.

Here's the thing though, to my recollection, I don't recall either group
engaging in mass shootings of everyone else with the frequency we're seeing
nowadays. There's something else going on here. Some added dimension that
we're not considering.

------
DanBC
They've missed out male and white.

~~~
kbutler
Because that would be inaccurate.

[https://www.statista.com/statistics/476456/mass-shootings-
in...](https://www.statista.com/statistics/476456/mass-shootings-in-the-us-by-
shooter-s-race/)

Number of mass shootings in the United States between 1982 and August 2019, by
shooter's race and ethnicity

White 64 Black 19 Latino 10 ...

Comparisons to population percentage, etc.

Female shooters are rare, but exist. " Women accounted for nine of 251 active
shootings in the United States — or roughly 3.6 percent — between 2000 and
2017, according to the FBI."

[https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/crime/bs-fe-female-
shooter...](https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/crime/bs-fe-female-shooters-
trans-men-aberdeen-20180920-story.html)

~~~
DanBC
The title is "nearly all", not "all".

Women experience these same things but, as you've said, tend not to go on
murder rampages.

~~~
kbutler
Yes.

Female is 3.6% according to article I linked above, so some may consider male
"nearly all".

White is 57% according to the statistics link I posted above, so white is
inaccurate even with "nearly all".

Thus, "nearly all" "male and white" would be wrong and misleading.

The more important question would be, does either of those help identify
potential risks? So you should turn the statistics around:

What percentage of males become mass shooters? (0%)

What percentage of whites become mass shooters? (0%)

So, yes, males and whites "tend not to go on murder rampages".

Not particularly helpful.

Of course, the same can probably also be said about their other "things in
common", but maybe we can identify something that will help.

------
vdm
guns

~~~
kube-system
Guns have existed for hundreds of years.

Why is this just becoming a problem recently?

~~~
deathlocke
The sheer amount of guns owned by American civilians compared with the rest of
the world is staggering, and, maybe not so coincidentally, so is the amount of
gun related homicide. [0] The fact remains that even you in your comment
called it a problem. Guns and gun ownership are the common denominator when it
comes to mass shootings, and very little, if anything, is being done about it.

[0] - [https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-
canada-41488081](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41488081)

~~~
DuskStar
Why does California - a state with one of the lowest gun ownership rates, and
extremely restrictive gun laws - have so many mass shootings, then?

The relationship you're proposing (more gun owners means more mass shootings)
doesn't seem to hold within the US.

~~~
deathlocke
That's true when you're looking at a statistic like guns per capita [0]. When
you're talking about number of _registered_ guns, however, the only state with
more guns than California is Texas, which falls at number 3 on the list of
states with the most mass shootings [1].

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...](https://www.thoughtco.com/gun-owners-percentage-of-state-
populations-3325153) [1] - [https://www.statista.com/statistics/811541/mass-
shootings-in...](https://www.statista.com/statistics/811541/mass-shootings-in-
the-us-by-state/)

~~~
DuskStar
Your link 0 is absolutely ludicrous. That 21 guns per capita in Texas would
mean ~600 million guns in Texas _ALONE_ out of the ~400 million _total_ in the
US.

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.

~~~
deathlocke
Just to clarify because my link 0 "guns per capita" was a bit misleading. It's
actually per 1,000 people, not 1. Link to more original source [0].

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.

[0] - [https://huntingmark.com/gun-ownership-
stats/#_ftn1%20](https://huntingmark.com/gun-ownership-stats/#_ftn1%20)

~~~
DuskStar
> Just to clarify because my link 0 "guns per capita" was a bit misleading.
> It's actually per 1,000 people, not 1. Link to more original source [0].

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.

------
staplers
Paywall

~~~
vectorEQ
let me lift the curtain. "they all shot people, and are all nuts" :D

------
candiodari
So mass shooters have

1) experienced violence before, often early

2) sometimes experienced psychological problems, maybe as a result of 1)

3) sometimes had some reason to become angry (before the mass-shooting, such
as getting fired)

4) sometimes explore/study other mass-shootings before committing one
themselves

5) had the means to carry out this crime

Ok, with a bit of flexibility (other than point 5) that could describe every
last one of my coworkers, for none of which there is any chance whatsoever
they'll ever commit a mass-shooting. The idea is ludicrous.

Typical psychological social-science "insight".

~~~
drewbug01
> that could describe every last one of my coworkers, for none of which there
> is any chance whatsoever they'll ever commit a mass-shooting.

Something I've noticed after mass shootings: newspapers will interview the
friends and family of the shooters. And they'll frequently say things like
(paraphrased) "I never could have imagined <shooter> doing this thing, they
were always such a <nice person|quiet boy|sweetiepie|etc>."

You're saying something similar - just in advance. The truth is that while
there are often red flags, at our core we don't consider each other to be
capable of cold-blooded murder. Until it happens.

~~~
candiodari
My point is that the described "warning signs" are not red flags, unless you
think that 30% of the population is just waiting to commit mass murder next
time they get cut off at a red light.

~~~
drewbug01
I’m not sure where 30% came from.

But - given the data we have available - the only conclusion left is yes. Yes,
there are more people than we’d like to admit that are capable of these
horrible acts. Given the frequency of gun violence here, it’s very difficult
to draw another conclusion.

------
lawnchair_larry
They’re all male, too.

~~~
commandlinefan
Actually, no: [https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/03/us/youtube-hq-
shooting/index....](https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/03/us/youtube-hq-
shooting/index.html)

~~~
williamstein
That woman doesn't satisfy the definition in the article of mass shooter.

------
webwielder2
5\. They live in the US.

The suggestion of metal detectors is laughable. You’d need to put one at the
entrance of everyone’s home for that to be remotely effective. The solution is
to ban guns, full stop. And then slowly start to address the rotten national
psyche that has led to where we are today.

~~~
tombert
I'm actually ok with banning guns, but I very much dislike this reductionist
mentality "these problems only affect Americans". As other commenters have
pointed out, mass shootings happen everywhere, and acting like Americans are
somehow special really bypasses a lot of problems.

~~~
drewbug01
> As other commenters have pointed out, mass shootings happen everywhere, and
> acting like Americans are somehow special really bypasses a lot of problems.

Not at this frequency! Truthfully - do you believe that mass shootings happen
nearly _every day_ in other countries? No statistic I have ever read has
supported that conclusion.

~~~
tombert
The US has a pretty large population, about 4x the population of Germany, 5x
the population of England, 12x the population of Australia, and about 50x the
population of Ireland, etc. By that virtue alone we are going to have more
mass shootings. I don't have the statistics for China or India's mass
shootings, but those would be more fair to compare in the shear numbers
department.

I definitely think our gun laws are stupid, I would support legislation to
curtail or completely eliminate guns, but it's not like the US just has one
generic kind of person; a big and diverse population is going to bring a lot
of really cool and awesome people (many of whom move to big cities like NY or
Chicago, which is why I like the US), but also a bunch of xenophobic idiots
that also really like guns.

------
haunter
Don't worry msm will blame it on video games, like they do it already

