although they still may be too early while funeral rites are still ongoing.

In any event, these points seem valid to me:

from Carl

1. These guys know about the previous mass murderers and they study what they did. The CT. killer, the guy in Oregon and the criminal in Aurora all dressed more or less in costume.

2. They are aware of how what they do will play. The Oregon guy announced that "I am the shooter." That could have come right out of a news report.

3. These guys plan the deed. One of the things they plan is where they can do it with small possibility of effective opposition. They like so called "gun free zones." "Gun free zones" are really statements of moral rectitude by a part of the popular culture.

4. They want to kill, not fight. If they run into opposition or are about to, they surrender or kill themselves.
So, are these folks "Not Guilty By Reason Of Insanity" ? No !

They are guilty, even though they may be mentally ill in any number of ways. The young man who committed these CT killings saved us a good deal of turmoil by taking his own life. That turmoil was exemplified in the trials of the CT duo of home invaders, murderers and rapists recently sentenced to death. The patterns of both these CT incidents were as laid out above.

Right now (see first sentence of this post), I don't feel like discussing Carl's two conclusionary points - both are valid areas of discussion, BTW. They parallel discussion areas suggested by Carrie Cordero ("In November 2011, Carrie Cordero joined Georgetown Law as its first Director of National Security Studies. Previously, Professor Cordero served in national security related policy and operational positions with the Department of Justice from 2000-2010, most recently as Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General for National Security."), in these two blog posts, Carrie Cordero on the Lone Shooter (Lawfare, 17 Aug 2012); Carrie Cordero on Physical Security at Schools (Lawfare, 18 Dec 2012). From the last article:

Which leaves us with physical security. Many of us go to work in places far more secure than those in which our kids go to school each day. Following 9/11, federal, state and local authorities effectively hardened potential targets of terrorist attack. We turned soft targets into hard targets. When I worked in the federal government, I had to swipe a badge and walk past several guards. Visitors to federal buildings go through scanners and show ID. Purses and bags go through security machines. It works. Congress is protected along these lines when its members and staff go to work each day. Same for local government officials. Now, when I go to work at a university, I still walk past a guard who requires me to show an ID. Universities have campus police and uniformed guard forces. Dorms in large cities are guarded. Private companies all over the country have guards at the front desk.

We protect ourselves. Why aren’t we protecting our kids? Our babies.
Regards

Mike