Prevention Research

Willful Ignorance in Action: Leveraging Fear to Legitimize Hate

The day Rahmanullah Lakanwal allegedly shot two members of the National Guard in Washington D.C., President Trump labeled the purported incident as an “act of terror” and the following evening, as he announced the death of one of the victims, he stated twice that it was a “terrorist attack.” [1] Earlier that Thanksgiving day Kash Patel, as FBI Director, provided an update on the case stressing that it was an “ongoing investigation of terrorism. Make no mistake about it.” [2] Meanwhile, a press release from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), referring to Lakanwal as “the suspect,” described him as a “terrorist.” [3]

Terrorism vs. Indiscriminate Mass Assaults: What’s the Difference? And Does It matter?

Many terrorist activities include mass murder but the majority of mass murders are not terrorist acts. Simple as this fact may seem, it eludes many laypersons and some law enforcement personnel as well, including the current Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (see the September 2025 essay on terrorism versus rampage framing ). The difference is important, though, in order to determine appropriate interventions before the fact and determining retribution after the fact. For applied firearm context in active attacks, see the quick reference on firearms in mass shootings .

Innuendo and the Legacy of Charlie Kirk

Just before Charlie Kirk was struck in the neck with a fatal bullet he had the following dialogue with Hunter Kozak, a Utah Valley University undergraduate.

After checking to see if the microphone was working, Kozak opened by saying, “Hey Charlie, hopefully we are going to have a little bit more disagreement,” then proceeded. “Alright. A few weeks ago there was a transgender mass shooter. And ever since then – about three weeks later, the Trump DOJ said that we should start talking about revoking gun rights for transgender Americans. I think you are in support of this. Is it yes, is that fair to say?”

Terrorism, Rampaging, and Pronouncements: Why Expertise Matters When Framing Public Policy

A sudden mass assault and a terrorist attack are both subsumed under the category of performative violence, but they are not the same crime and conflating them jeopardizes prevention efforts by obfuscating a thorough appreciation of the myriad forces underlying extreme violence. Yet, Kash Patel, the current director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), in an early tweet on the recent shooting at the Annunciation Catholic School in Minnesota displayed confusion about the distinction between those types of violent episodes. As such his announcement hampers understanding by the lay public and, concomitantly, the development of responsive public policy.

Finally, a Proactive Legal Move that May Reduce Rampage Causalities

The state of Georgia is doing something in the wake of a school shooting that is rare and can provide guidance for other states and municipalities. It is putting aside rhetoric and absolutist positions on gun possession to develop realistic bipartisan legislation that concentrates on preventative measures to advance safety.

Carnage and Culpability: Affixing Blame Versus Assessing a Threat

If it is true that the sins of the parents are visited on successive generations, is the reverse also the case? Our society cherishes the notion of individual accountability and so it is rare that we hold persons liable for acts committed by relatives or acquaintances. Justice William O. Douglas asserted in a 1945 Supreme Court decision: “The doctrine of personal guilt is one of the most fundamental principles of our jurisprudence. It partakes of the very essence of the concept of freedom and due process of law.”[1]

Continuing Object Lessons in Extreme Violence: Maybe It’s Time to Pay Attention

Two recent news items should be of concern to anyone who has a desire to keep our daily lives a little less dreadful and our modern existence just a little more civilized. They call for consideration by anyone who is in a position to protect others from harm - school personnel, law enforcement, health professionals, even parents or, more accurately, especially parents. The pair of events that demand attention are the mass shooting by Robert Card in Maine and a hearing in the Supreme Court regarding the allowance of firearm possession by people served with restraining orders. Both are relevant to curtailing violence that is preventable.

Quick Reference on Firearm Use in Mass Shootings

“A record of active shooters occurrences (defined as situation where an individual is actively attempting to kill in a populated space) via an FBI data base and media reports from 2000 through 2017 shows 248 occurrences in America with 76 involving a rifle. … In those incidents a semiautomatic rifle was involved in slightly less than one quarter (24.6%) with just barely over three quarters (75.4%) involving handguns, shotguns, and non-semiautomatic rifles. When perpetrators utilized multiple types of firearms, they used semiautomatics in 60.7 percent of the cases. … Semiautomatics are relatively easy to use, have large magazines thereby allowing for more shots, and carry high velocity bullets that inflict greater harm. … The greater rate of usage when multiple rifles were employed suggests that when lethality factored into the killers’ decision-making then murderous efficiency was a primary consideration.” - How Rampage Killers Emerge by S. Lee Funk, Ed.D., to be released by Palgrave Macmillan © 2022