Beyond guilt or innocence, remember public safety

THE shooting rampage in Skagit County raises basic issues of public safety. The tragedy is a blatant challenge to assumptions of how well civil society can protect its citizens, and isolate those who are a danger to themselves and others.

As murder suspect Isaac Zamora begins his journey through the criminal-justice system, a parallel proceeding should be initiated by lawmakers in Olympia to examine the failings of laws and institutions intended to protect the public.

Legislative hearings are necessary to acquaint legislators with the seeming disconnect between mental health laws and law enforcement.

The grisly details of the horrific day in the small community of Alger in rural Skagit County will be examined in court. The tragedy unfolded around seven different houses, and claimed five lives. Among them was Skagit County sheriff's deputy Anne Jackson. Two others were injured. A subsequent car chase resulted in the shooting death of a motorist on Interstate 5 and the wounding of two others.

In the aftermath of this bloody spree, the suspect will be ably and dutifully represented. Trials sort out legal guilt or innocence for specific acts.

The role of the Legislature is to determine how rules, regulations and procedures failed to protect a half dozen innocent lives. Zamora had dozens of previous run-ins with the law. For years his erratic moods and volcanic anger scared the daylights out of the residents of Alger. He obviously needed help that he did not receive. An equally compelling need existed to protect his family, friends and neighbors from his dangerous behavior.

The Legislature has a duty, however belated, for the six deceased and their loved ones, to look at the state's mental-health system and civil-commitment laws and procedures. Zamora's record put him into the orbit of state Department of Corrections supervision. How credible and useful was the monitoring of this multiple-slaying suspect?

Is the current threshold for involuntary treatment too high? If the standard is imminent danger, does that ignore the menace who is a persistent threat and always just beyond the reach of a satisfactory outcome for those threatened? Does failure to have treatment available speak to the strictness of the law, or inadequate options and a lack of available residential space and professional help?

As a matter of fiscal policy, one can easily imagine that early and adequate mental-health care would have been infinitely less expensive than investigation, criminal proceedings and potential long-term incarceration of a multiple-murder suspect. Explain that to grieving survivors.

Legislative hearings into the circumstances that shaped this tragedy, and legal fixes to reduce the chances of another, are a basic, remedial task for Olympia.