Shane Tamura, a 27-year-old from Las Vegas, is the prime suspect in a shooting that resulted in the deaths of four people in a Manhattan office building on July 28, including a police officer on security duty. After committing the heinous act, Tamura took his own life. Authorities revealed that Tamura had a documented history of mental health issues, which raises concerns about how he was able to obtain firearms.
Police confirmed that Tamura used an M4 rifle during the shooting, which occurred in the building housing the NFL headquarters. It’s reported that he had a note stating he was diagnosed with chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE), a neurodegenerative condition often associated with repeated head injuries and concussions, such as those sustained during contact sports.
New York City Police Commissioner Jessica Tisch announced on the same day that police had been made aware of Tamura’s mental health background from officials in Las Vegas, although she refrained from disclosing additional information.
Further investigations revealed that Tamura had undergone two involuntary mental health crisis holds in Nevada in the years 2022 and 2024. These holds allowed for evaluations and treatment for up to 72 hours but did not necessarily prevent him from obtaining firearms.
Despite holding a Nevada gun license, Tamura accessed an AR-15 style assault rifle and legally purchased a revolver in June using a concealed carry permit. Photographs from news sources, including CBS and CNN, showcased Tamura’s gun permit issued by Las Vegas police in 2022.
The case spotlights the effectiveness of ‘red flag’ laws, which are designed to restrict firearm access for individuals deemed unstable before they can commit acts of violence. These laws, which vary by state in their naming and implementation, aim to remove weapons from individuals who show signs of posing a threat to themselves or others.
However, the Nevada attorney general’s office does not classify mental health crisis holds as a valid reason to initiate a high-risk protection order, which is needed to alter or revoke an individual’s firearm access. While Nevada law allows law enforcement or family members to petition a court for such orders, the utilization of these laws remains low since their inception in 2020.
Experts note that this slow adoption is not unique to Nevada; many states have experienced delays in the implementation of red flag laws. For instance, Florida issued around 2,500 orders during the first 18 months after its red flag law was enacted.
To date, 21 states and Washington D.C. have established some form of red flag law, many receiving support from Republicans.
Each state’s legislation delineates who has the authority to initiate a civil petition process for firearm restrictions. Depending on the outcomes of specific laws, only law enforcement may request a removal order in some states, while others permit petitions from family members, close contacts, or even acquaintances such as teachers.
Most petitions for high-risk protection orders are filed by law enforcement and are predominantly granted during court hearings.
In Nevada, for example, the application form provided to law enforcement inquiries about the presence of firearms and requires detailed descriptions of behaviors deemed high-risk.
The Nevada law encompasses both temporary and extended orders, with initial weeklong orders granted after only one party’s argument is presented in court.
Despite the slow uptake of these protection orders, usage has increased in Nevada, with records indicating 28 high-risk orders in 2024 and 20 in 2023, along with six orders filed thus far in 2025.
The effectiveness of these red flag laws remains a topic of debate. A review conducted by the Rand Corporation in July 2024 found inconclusive evidence regarding the laws’ impacts on mass shootings and violent crime, mainly due to their recent establishment and variable usage across states.
Some findings suggest positive correlations between these laws and reductions in crime or suicide rates. A study from Columbia University published in August 2024 attributed an 11 percent reduction in firearm homicide rates in Florida to the state’s implementation of a red flag law post the 2018 Parkland shooting.
However, this same study did not detect a significant reduction in suicides, prompting a call for further research to evaluate the laws’ comprehensive effectiveness in different contexts.
Experts, like Veronica Pear from the University of California, Davis, assert that while extreme risk protection orders are pivotal, they form just one element within a broader network of laws aimed at preventing individuals perceived as at risk from obtaining firearms. Other critical laws include regulations prohibiting gun possession after violent misdemeanors, mandated waiting periods, and firearms licensing regulations.
With issues surrounding mental health and firearm access continually surfacing, especially in high-profile violent incidents, the grieving families and the public have raised questions about what measures can be taken to prevent similar tragedies from occurring in the future.
Research consistently shows that individuals suffering from severe mental illnesses are statistically more likely to be victims of violence rather than perpetrators. Data indicates that only about 3 to 5 percent of violent acts are committed by those with serious mental health issues like schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, or major depression.
Despite the complexities surrounding mental illness and violence, there continues to be a pressing need for effective legislation and law enforcement training regarding red flag laws and other preventative measures.
This shooting incident, with its tragic loss of life and underlying issues related to mental health and gun access, underscores the necessity for a more robust approach to understanding and improving gun safety and mental health interventions in society.
image source from：aljazeera
