America has a problem. A deadly one. Mass killings—especially in schools and churches—have become an epidemic. More recently, assassinations have joined the list. This overlooked crisis claims hundreds of innocent lives every year. Unlike bank robbers demanding “a million dollars and a fueled-up plane,” these perpetrators have no demands, no escape plan. They usually expect to die. Mass killings are often a theatrical form of suicide—designed to seize attention in their final moments.

Over 500 Americans have died in these tragedies. Yet for decades, politicians have refused to act, paralyzed by the political fallout of addressing America’s obsession with guns, the Second Amendment, the NRA, and increasingly deadly weapons. “Thoughts and prayers” have become an empty ritual. Meanwhile, the killing continues.

It’s time to move forward. Sorry, gun control advocates—I’m with you. Truly. But the most Washington will give you is silence or sympathy cards. That road is blocked.

Instead, let’s build on what both sides finally agree on: mental health. Conservatives have started to say, “This isn’t a gun problem, it’s a mental health problem.” Democrats have been calling attention to the mental health crisis for decades. At last, there’s common ground: when someone kills strangers in large numbers, mental illness is involved.

Trump calls them “sick, sick people.” Robert F. Kennedy Jr. warns of rising illness and death among the young. Measured by lives lost to mass shootings, suicides, “accidents,” and deadly family grudges, this is one of America’s most urgent health crises. For every person consumed by suicidal or violent thinking, many others may die with them. Few diseases are this infectious—or this deadly.

How did we get here? Before 1966, mass killings looked different—mob lynchings, strike-breaker massacres, Mafia shootouts. But that year, Charles Whitman climbed the University of Texas tower and shot 17 strangers. A Marine veteran and student unraveling mentally, he left a suicide note, killed his parents, and carried out a public shooting. An autopsy later revealed a brain tumor. Stress, warning signs, suicidal intent, and public violence—patterns we’d see again and again.

In the 1980s, we learned the phrase “going postal.” Under crushing productivity demands and mass layoffs, postal workers snapped. One killed 14 colleagues before turning the gun on himself. Again: stress, warning signs, violence, suicide.

Compare that to recent mass layoffs at the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE): 300,000 jobs terminated in weeks. If history is a guide, shouldn’t we expect another wave of workplace violence? Is anyone preparing for it?

In the 1990s came Columbine—and an era of school shootings. Since then, there have been over 400 school-based mass killings. More recently, churches have become targets. And the same familiar pattern repeats.

Profile of a Perpetrator: Nearly 100% are male, and most are ages 16–30. They post disturbing content online, and 65% have criminal records. They are often obsessed with trauma, suicide, isolation, and violent fantasies. Not just in what they post on social media, but also in what they choose to read on social media. And finally, they either have guns or they have access to guns… often because their families own guns (which they may steal).

In an age of AI and hyper-targeted advertising, all of our internet usage and activities are harvested, packaged, and sold to advertisers. Surely, we can use the same technology to identify potential mass killers BEFORE they kill. This wouldn’t even be an invasion of privacy, since it’s all publicly posted on social media sites. Each social media site would report anonymous data to a central database, which would only then identify the ID owners of individuals with high perpetrator potential, and intervene before the next tragedy.

Profile of a Perpetrator: Nearly 100% are male, and most are ages 16–30. They post disturbing content online, and 65% have criminal records. They are often obsessed with trauma, suicide, isolation, and violent fantasies. Not just in what they post on social media, but also in what they choose to read on social media.

Yes, there will be false positives. Some young men will be flagged who never would have killed. But if some young man is not a killer, but exhibits all of these red flags, intervention may still prevent self-harm or other violence. We’ve seen from other examples that the signs are often there, but families and schools often lack the tools and training to address mental illness.

The tools exist. The data is public. Privacy isn’t the issue. Political will is.

What’s your opinion? Is there a better way to address the mass killings? Let us know what you think!