What is the value in learning a dead gunman&#39;s motives?
<p>Last night a gunman shot and killed 12 people in a California tavern. The gunman was also killed. Interviews with law enforcement have stressed that they will work very hard to understand the gunman's motives.</p>

<p>As the gunman is dead (hence unable to be prosecuted), what is the value in understanding his motives? </p>

<p>It is reasonable the LE would want to determine that the gunman "acted alone", but why is it important to understand a dead gunman's motives. </p>

<p>( not your typical Law/se board question, but it surely doesn't belong in Politics/se)</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>As the gunman is dead (hence unable to be prosecuted), what is the
  value in understanding his motives?</p>
  
  <p>It is reasonable the LE would want to determine that the gunman "acted
  alone", but why is it important to understand a dead gunman's motives.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Your point on ascertaining whether he acted alone is one good reason. Other reasons are to identify:</p>

<ul>
<li>whether the crime involved enticement or <em>undue influence</em> by others who ought to be prosecuted;</li>
<li>patterns of action or of context, upon which intelligence agencies and Law Enforcement can be more effective in preventing similar tragedies;</li>
<li>if gunman was mentally ill, whether an entity acted negligently or
wantonly in allowing the release of this person;</li>
<li>further statistical evidence for the legislator to improve the relevant statutes (or enact new ones if necessary) pursuant to the punishment and prevention of similar conduct.</li>
</ul>

<p>There might be other law-related reasons, but these are the ones I can think of right now.</p>

united-states