In the past month, there have been three mass shootings in California, leaving dozens injured and at least 19 dead. California has the tightest gun control laws in the U.S. — so why is this happening?

The fact that the first two shootings occurred within a few days of each other, both committed by aged Asian men during a time of celebration and good spirits in their communities, is an important clue.

Almost every one of the mass shooters in the past 10 years has been, in one way or another, styled as a “loner” — an odd personality without close or warm family ties, a group of friends, or a normal social life.

The pain of loneliness is likely to be particularly severe, especially when others in their communities are enjoying a celebration. That was the case in California this week. The two elderly men involved in the first two shootings likely saw themselves as discarded or shunned, which builds grievance against all those who seem to be enjoying the company of others. A mass shooting brings attention to the shooter, who usually struggles to fit in and find purpose within a community. In other words, it is a form of revenge.

Although they usually kill people they do not know, these random killings are a way to achieve retribution against those innumerable and faceless people who have scorned them over the years.

This motive also explains why many of them kill themselves after engaging in mass murder. They know that their names will be published and the media will describe their lonely lives in detail. In short, they will finally become known, even famous. This suggests that one solution to the problem of mass shootings is not restricting access to guns but rolling back the widespread media coverage the perpetrators receive. More than anything else, that’s what these shooters crave, and as long as it routinely occurs after a mass shooting, these events will continue.

Media coverage of these tragedies shouldn’t stop completely, of course. But there is no reason to publish the names or photos of the shooters. This only breeds more potential shooters, and serves no useful purpose.

There is no need for legislation to achieve this, which might encounter constitutional objections anyway, but members of the media should voluntarily agree that when these events occur the names of the shooters will be withheld. That will eliminate the principal incentive that is driving these horrific events.

Peter J. Wallison is a senior fellow emeritus at the American Enterprise Institute. His most recent book is Judicial Fortitude, the Last chance to Rein in the Administrative State.