Different levels of risk are associated with different types of threats. When threats to return for "payback" are vague, implausible, inconsistent, or indirect, with no specific targets mentioned, this is considered low-risk. The risk level rises with specific details and with evidence of actual planning. A medium-level risk threat would be one that could be carried out, but indicators of the place and time remain vague or general. When preparatory steps are clear and the threatener has access to weapons, the threat now becomes high risk.

Those messages that are direct, specific, credible, and show planning are the ones to take most seriously. For example, Charles Whitman, with access to weapons, indicated he had recurring fantasies of climbing up the Texas tower and shooting people from it. He had access to weapons, he had anger issues, and he was depressed.
While not all mass killers signal their intent via threats, many do, and when they do, their words should be evaluated for the likelihood that they are ready to do what they are threatening.
For medium to high threat level, among the specific traits or behaviors that we should watch for — not just one but several together - are:
While no country, company, school, or person can ever be entirely free of threat from someone who intends them harm, and while there will always be violence motivated by some irrational impulse, there are ways to diminish the danger.




