Shooting Alone: The Pre‐Attack Experiences and Behaviors of U.S. Solo Mass Murderers

Abstract

This paper outlines the sociodemographic, developmental, antecedent attack, attack preparation, and commission properties of 115 mass murderers between 1990 and 2014. The results indicate that mass murderer attacks are usually the culmination of a complex mix of personal, political, and social drivers that crystalize at the same time to drive the individual down the path of violent action. We specifically focus upon areas related to prior criminal engagement, leakage, and attack location familiarity. Whether the violence comes to fruition is usually a combination of the availability and vulnerability of suitable targets that suit the heady mix of personal and political grievances and the individual's capability to engage in an attack from both a psychological and technical capability standpoint. Many individual cases share a mixture of unfortunate personal life circumstances coupled with an intensification of beliefs/grievances that later developed into the idea to engage in violence.

Lone Actor Terrorist Attack Planning and Preparation: A Data‐Driven Analysis,

“…Data-driven studies have provided substantive insights into the background and characteristics of lone actor extremists (16)(17)(18)(19). Some recent publications have focused specifically on lone actors' target selection preferences (20)(21)(22)(23). But, "[t]here is not yet a distinct theme within the literature on lone actor terrorism that focuses specifically on attack preparation" (21).…”

Investigating the applicability of situational crime prevention to the public mass violence context

“…Criminologists have mostly ignored public mass violence until recently, and important gaps in our knowledge base remain (Fox & DeLateur, ; see also Bowers, Holmes, & Rhom, ; DeLisi & Scherer, ; Gill, Silver, Horgan, & Corner, ; Huff‐Corzine et al., ; Liwerant, ). The recent increased attention to this issue is partially a result of rising levels of public concern that coincide with a growing number of high‐profile incidents (Duwe, , , ; Goode & Ben‐Yehuda, ).…”

“…This debate about the actual scope of the problem is partially a result of definitional issues (discussed in more detail later). Public mass violence events, however, receive celebrated publicity (Bjelopera et al., ; Chermak, ; Duwe, , ; Gill et al., ; Meloy et al., ; Silva, ), and their impact on victims, communities, and the public policy debates over mental illness, gun control, and other proposed interventions is significant. Although policy makers, law enforcement personnel, and other officials have proposed solutions and recommendations on how best to respond to this seemingly growing social problem, the existing research findings have revealed little in terms of evidence‐based solutions.…”

Space between concern and crime

“…The idea that most public mass casualty events are the result of understandable and often discoverable thoughts and behaviors has been widely confirmed in studies of diverse offender types, including public mass murderers and shooters (Fridel, ; Gill, Silver, Horgan, & Corner, ; Krouse & Richardson, ; Lankford, ), adolescent mass murderers (Meloy et al., ), school shooters (Bonanno & Levenson, ; Langman, ; Levin & Madfis, ; Modzeleski & Randazzo, ; National Threat Assessment Center, ; Vossekuil, Fein, Reddy, Borum, & Modzeleski, ), attackers of public figures (Fein & Vossekuil, ), active shooters (Osborne & Capellan, ; Silver, Simons, & Craun, ), higher education campus attackers (Drysdale, Modzeleski, & Simons, ; Fox & Savage, ), and lone actor terrorists (Horgan, Gill, Bouhana, Silver, & Corner, ; Schuurman, Bakker, Gill, & Bouhana, ).…”