Despite their almost aberrational rarity, rampage school shootings have gained national attention to an extent that would make it seem that such events are a common occurrence. Many schools—along with hospitals, businesses, and other institutions—have adopted policies, implemented training, and conducted drills for responding to such incidents. In some cases, concern over school rampage shootings has led to bad policy implementations, particularly adoption of “zero tolerance” policies that punish the slightest infractions in hopes of thwarting potential attackers, but, rather than achieving their intended goal, result in massive false positive rates with few, if any, successes and a potential for fostering violence rather than abating it. For their part, law enforcement trainers and administrators have been caught in the rampage school shooter turmoil to such an extent that, starting with the aftermath of the 1999 Columbine High School massacre, significant paradigm shifts in policing methodology have taken effect. In order to promote more informed policy-making and training decisions by law enforcement managers, this dissertation seeks to determine through empirical study of the crime scene behaviors of rampage school shooters the extent to which law enforcement planning and training can be informed by the study of prior incidents. Policy, training protocols, and institutional response plans have been shaped, in many cases, by a world of perception rather than reason and sound empirical evidence. This research seeks to bring clarity to the decision-making processes and provide sound empirical evidence on which to base those decisions and develop strategies for on-site protocols to help mitigate casualties, establish police response protocols, and develop post-incident investigative models.

The United States has experienced several mass shootings in the past few years. It has been averaging one shooting every week in 2015, and something must be done about it. This problem appears to be limited to the United States since several other nations have been able to minimize, and almost eliminate the number of mass shootings. By taking an analysis of the gun laws of the United States with those of Australia and Canada it can be concluded that some aspects of strict gun control can reduce the number of mass shootings. Further, the United States should look at what other common law nations have done to reduce the number of mass shootings. The United States is also the only nation that recognizes a fundamental right to keep and bear arms, and any legislation must address that right. Some ways to address strict gun control in the United States is to strengthen the background check system, add a liability insurance requirement, and strictly enforce culpable negligent statutes. Adding some elements of strict gun control will help minimize the amount, and impact of the shootings. Canada, and Australia both have active hunting communities that require the need for some legal firearms. A night at the movies, a day at school, or attending a church event should not bring about worry that an individual may get shot and killed by a deranged individual. Other similar nations have shown that rampage shootings do not have to be a side effect of living in a free society.