How grievance turns to violence in a mass shooter's mind

On an otherwise ordinary Thursday, a 14-year-old entered a middle school in the southern city of Kahramanmaras, opening fire on two classrooms, killing eight students and a teacher.

The shocking attack followed another school shooting two days earlier in Siverek in Turkey’s Sanliurfa province, in which the gunman wounded 16 people before killing himself in a showdown with police. 

While it often seems that such attacks come out of the blue, they are rarely spontaneous. Instead, mass shootings generally follow a narrative that regularly includes escalating grievances and missed opportunities to intervene.

What do we get wrong about mass shooters?

A shocking act of violence like the one in Turkey can appear to come out of nowhere. But experts say that impression is misleading.

John Horgan, who directs the Violent Extremism Research Group at Georgia State University in the US, says the idea that attackers simply "snap" is one of the most persistent myths.

"That doesn't happen," he emphasized. "There's always a long history of trauma, grievances that escalate over time, and major stressors like rejection, or humiliation, that are the final straws in a turbulent life of pain, suffering and hopelessness."

Mental illness not a primary factor

Another common misconception is that mental illness is the primary driver behind committing these atrocities. Forensic psychologist J. Reid Meloy, an FBI consultant and faculty member of the San Diego Psychoanalytic Center says this explanation is often too simplistic.

"Only a minority will have a diagnosed mental illness at the time of the attack," he told DW. "In general, most targeted attacks are driven by personal grievance — composed of the elements of loss, humiliation, anger, and blame — or personal grievance joined with extremist ideologies."

According to James Densley, a criminology professor at Minnesota's Metro State University in the US, it's less a case of mental illness, and more a lack of "mental wellness" that leads to personal crisis.

"Crisis is not the same thing as illness, and confusing the two stigmatizes millions of people who have nothing to do with this."

When a personal grievance explodes into public violence

For most people, feelings of rejection, failure or humiliation fade at some point. But in some cases, they can become central to a person's identity.

"It starts with a wound, real or perceived," Densley told DW. "Most people absorb that feeling and eventually move on. But some people get stuck. They ruminate until that wound becomes their identity. At some point, that grievance externalizes so it's not just that life hurt me, it's that specific people did this to me, or that society did this to me, and somebody has to pay."

Horgan describes a similar trajectory — which generally goes hand-in-hand with meticulous planning.

"Mass shooters do their homework," he said. "They research their targets, they plan their tactics, and sometimes solicit feedback online from fellow travelers. The research also involves seeking out how to acquire weapons or materials to be used in the attack."

From violent fantasy to reality

Even at this stage, most people would never actually act on their violent thoughts. The key question is why a small minority do.

Horgan notes that violent fantasies themselves are not unusual — and can even serve as a way of coping. What matters is the decision to act on them.

"What distinguishes those who engage in acts of public violence is a commitment to the fantasy,” he said. "A commitment to making it real."

Densley highlights a further shift that can occur in moments of crisis. "The catalyst is when someone, often suicidal, starts identifying with prior attackers," he said. "If they have access to a firearm, it's that connection with others 'just like them' that crosses a psychological threshold — where dying and killing feel like the same act — that matters."

Is it possible to prevent mass shootings?

The chain of events charted points to a possible way to stop such attacks, said Densley.

"In almost every case we've studied, somebody noticed something, a change in normal behavior. Whether it was a withdrawal from work or social life, or an odd social media post, or a fascination with guns that was new and intense. The warning signs were there."

Horgan refers to such clues as "leakage"— the way attackers communicate their intentions in advance through various warning behaviors.

"They might make jokes, or threats, and peers are ideally placed to see that behavior," he said. "The issue isn't that people don't see it. It's that they fail to act on it.  Some threats are literally word for word messages describing what attackers are going to do, but onlookers often just don't believe that the threats are real or credible."

Meloy points to one key distinction: "Targeted violence cannot be predicted due to the very low base rate of such violence," he said. "However, it can be prevented."

What makes people kill strangers?

Not all acts of mass violence follow the same pattern. While many attacks target strangers, others are directed at people known to the killer.

"Most targets of all violence are people known to the perpetrator," Meloy said. "Targeted attacks toward strangers do occur, but in a significant portion there will be a psychological or historical connection between the perpetrator and the people or location targeted."

And there is another key difference between private and public violence, Densley says.

"When someone kills their own family, the victims are chosen because of who they are," he said. "Mass public violence often flips that. The victims are interchangeable."

That shift also changes the meaning of the act. "It is performative," Densley said. "It's meant to send a message, to be seen and remembered. The psychology is closer to terrorism than to domestic homicide, even when no formal ideology is involved."

Edited by Derrick Williams