If the roots of mass-killings/active shooter incidents are biological, and/or psychological then to prevent such events we need to work at the micro-level, dealing with the individual – either testing and/or assessing them for warning signs — however if such incidents are the result of factors within the (potential) killer’s environment, then to address mass-killings, we need to affect societal change. Much is often made of mental illness, and the underlying biological causes, behind the motivation to kill e.g. the “holes” in Kip Kinkel’s brain which reduced his cognitive abilities and were a pre-indicator of Schizophrenia, or Charles Whitman’s brain tumor etc. or of psychological causes, such as depression and anxiety as in the case of Adam Lanza (whose DNA is being studied/analyzed to see if genetics – biology – provides an answer for mass killing, despite there being no direct relationship between genes and behaviors). However, most people who have mental illnesses such as schizophrenia, or suffer from depression don’t commit rampage killings, and whilst those who do are certainly not mentally healthy, not every killer has suffered from a diagnosable and identifiable mental illness, or psychological condition. Whilst, in individual cases, such factors have invariably played a part, they cannot fully explain the phenomena of mass-killings, and so if we are to look at the reasons behind these events, we must also take a look at the social and environmental factors that play a part, and consider how these might be addressed – and ask the difficult question of why this is a distinctly US problem; just as we must look at knife attacks in the UK, as that country’s particular problem etc. Yes, other countries have experienced rampage killings, but not to the same degree or commonality, as in the U.S., and it is too simplistic to reduce this reason to one of access to firearms: Switzerland has a relatively high rate of gun ownership, yet has not experienced mass shootings to the same extent as the U.S. It is also worth noting that school shootings are markedly different to workplace shootings, in the demographics of those who commit them; rampage killings in educational settings are largely committed by the young, whilst those in the workplace are predominantly carried out by middle-aged men, etc. And so, whilst there may be factors that are common and shared, there may also be critical and distinct factors that need to be examined. The purpose of this article is to put aside the possible psychological and biological reasons, and look at some of the social factors that may be behind, or contribute to, mass shootings/killings.

Actions are ultimately born out of fantasy, and few fantasies are truly original. The 1999 Columbine Massacre was originally intended to be a replication of the 1995 Oklahoma City Bombing; Klebold and Harris’s initial plan was to blow up the school canteen, and it was only when their bombs failed to detonate, that they engaged in a shooting spree. Their desire to replicate the event meant that they tried to schedule their bombing to be on the same date as McVeigh’s. In the 15 years after Columbine, estimates suggest that the massacre inspired, 21 copycat shootings, along with 53 plots that were thwarted (usually due to somebody being told about the killer’s plans and reporting them); in 14 cases, the shooters planned their massacres to take place on the anniversary of the Columbine Shootings – with 3 different shooters having made pilgrimages to the school, where Klebold and Harris committed their killing spree. For many, such as Alvaro Castillo, who convinced his mother to take him on a road trip to visit the site, and bought a black trench coat in Columbine, like the one that Harris wore, Klebold and Harris were heroes, to be admired. Their confused “message” and reasoning, was one that these copycat shooters and other disaffected individuals, were able to personalize, and apply to their own narratives; the social influence that the Columbine shooters – and other rampage killers have – shouldn’t be underestimated. Such contagion, requires transmission, to make such imitation possible, and Columbine occurred in the heyday of the 24-hour rolling News Network, making it a widely and repeatedly reported event/news story within the U.S. and demonstrated how two social outcasts could come to national – and global – prominence; unremarkable, and unknown in their own locale, they quickly became widely known outside of it. There is some debate about short-term, versus long-term contagion — some studies suggest that for the 13 days after a shooting, each event creates 0.33 further events – there is little doubt that each incident creates the inspiration, and the education, for future ones. There may also be a weaker link, surrounding prominent suicides, and mass killings, as around 30% of such incidents end in the killer(s) taking their own lives, or committing suicide/death by cop; and we know that the suicide rates go up when a prominent individual takes their own life.

There is a type of ecological evolution, concerning active killer incidents, where shooters/killers learn from each other, and the responses of the security services; and may even change their tactics and plans based on the way they believe the media may report on them – this may be one reason why in many active killer scenarios an individual has their life spared e.g. Columbine, Standard Gravure, Virginia Tech etc. so that there is somebody who came face-to-face with the killer(s) and can report on the incident. A mass/rampage killing is not a private expression of rage, but a very public one, where the killer wants as many people as possible to know about their killing spree; entitlement is an emotion common to many killers. Mass killers see other mass killers as celebrities, whose actions should be emulated and taken to new heights. One of the changes since Columbine, which has been occurring steadily (with a few outliers), is the phenomena, known as the stopwatch of death. Whereas Klebold and Harris were leisurely in their killing, taking their time, and interacting with their victims (this can be heard on the 911 call made by Patty Nielsen who was hiding in the library), shooters since have been much more about getting on with the business of killing, and trying to get the highest death toll they can, in the shortest possible time. This, coupled with a change in first responder tactics, which by and large, involves the first person on the scene looking to engage with the killer, has meant that active shooters are killing more people in ever shorter time periods. They have also learnt about new responses that are taught to protect individuals, such as barricading themselves in rooms, rather than hiding under desks (Klebold and Harris knew the “traditional” lockdown response taught in their school, and knew exactly where to find their victims, when they entered the library), and may use tactics such as knocking on the door, and pretending to be somebody in need of help; or as in the Parkland Florida shooting, setting off the fire alarm, to get people out of classrooms, which could be barricaded, and into the corridors.

Whilst there may be genetics, which cause character traits, that influence behaviors, and psychological conditions such as depression, which motivate people to kill, we must also look at the social factors, and the environment(s) in which such killers grow up and exist, as well as the way active shooters/killers are presented and reported on in the media; and look at whether we are inadvertently equating firearms with power and control, and sending out a message that could be wrongly interpreted, etc. There is not one single factor which has created the active shooter/killer phenomena in the U.S., and we should be looking at both the psychological and sociological reasons that bring someone to the point where they feel the need to kill en masse.