Most people

An appeal to general consensus and definition by crowdsourcing is inherently anti-scientific.

kill a bunch of random people and then themselves for no good reason is mentally ill

I mean, clearly the scientist is who study these things didn’t draw that conclusion.

Being in a bad mental state is not, by any definition, an equivalent to being mentally ill. Mental illnesses are particular things, not a general blanket attribute for that person being “different from us” and non-standard.

And in this specific case, she was not a particularity stable individual.

Alright? I already said that some cases certainly involve mental illness. Your anecdotal pointing out won’t change the statistics and studies, though: those a minority if cases and generally incidental.

But you have demonstrated for all of us scapegoating in action: your entire comment disregards science and evidence-based assessment for an anecdotal definition based on a sense of normalcy that allows us to say, “Fundamentally, those people are just different from us. Normal people wouldn’t do that.”

It isn’t helpful, though.