The writer writes of “senseless murders.” That’s a phrase that always gives me the chuckles. Does it contrast with “murders that make sense”?
I believe it does. Killing 20 little kids (and 6 adults) after killing his mom makes no sense, and gains him no benefit. Killing his mom clearly changed his life, and at the moment he believed it would be in a positive way.
Stalin having his generals murdered to solidify control over his military... Chinese rolling tanks into Tiannanmen Square and firing on students to stall the Freedom movement... Native Americans butchering those of neighboring tribes as they compete for space and resources... those murders have a purpose, and gain the killer(s) an advantage of some kind.
While we may not agree with the logic of the murderer, most often, killings are done with some end in mind that gains the killer a substantive advantage of some kind. Those who kill, and then kill themselves, clearly are not doing it to gain any advantage for themselves.
Anyway, I can see a substantive differentiation... but for the most part, your point is well-taken. The vast majority of the time, issues could have been resolved without killing, thus making just about all of them "senseless"