As Christmas lights are lit throughout Honolulu, and with the annual World War II memorial ceremonies just completed nearby, these are dark days for families of the victims in Wednesday’s tragic shooting at the Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard.

Investigators were still poring over the evidence gathered at the scene: Dry Dock 2, where two civilian employees were killed and one was hospitalized with serious injuries.

The gunman — Gabriel Romero, 22, a submariner — shot the victims and then turned his own service handgun on himself and ended his life as well. All of that lasted a mere 23 seconds. Romero was a machinist’s mate auxiliary fireman.

The same week, another installation, Naval Station Pensacola, suffered a mass attack in which three were killed before Florida sheriff’s deputies killed the shooter. Even at this early stage, the dissimilarities between the two cases became quickly evident. The Florida shooter was a Saudi Arabian military pilot training in the U.S. A possible terror link was added to the list of elements for inquiry.

That apparently was not the case in Pearl Harbor. Still, two explosions of gun violence at Navy bases in a few days justifiably has shaken the wider community, and signals the need for a wide review of how protocols on armed personnel are being followed.

That community includes many civilians who work on base, and who never enlisted in the level of risk that active-duty military members accept as part of the landscape.

Getting the full story of what happened at the shipyard’s Dry Dock 2, specifically, is clearly going to take time. Reports about Romero were raised at a Friday media briefing — in particular reports that he had been referred to an anger management program — but were not officially confirmed by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service, the lead agency. Officials would say only that they will be looking at “all angles” of the incident.

When NCIS finishes its fact-gathering, the public is owed a full explanation, covering whether Romero rightly had access to his weapons or was appropriately assigned to duty at the dry dock.

Those in the military service are trained to have — and most expect to have — routine access to weaponry. Disarming a soldier or sailor who is so trained would not be done casually.

However, it also would be logical for those assigned to serve in areas frequented by military personnel as well as civilians to have distinct security screening. Public- facing members of the armed forces must have the temperament suited to that assignment. That aspect, too, needs to come under review.

The monitoring of Romero’s health, encompassing both his mental and physical well-being, should be part of the post-mortem of the case. Last year, the U.S. marked the highest suicide rate for military members since the armed forces began tracking that in 2001, according to the U.S. Department of Defense 2018 Annual Suicide Report.

Across the service branches, suicide rates ranged from 18.5 to 31.4 per 100,000 active-duty members. The majority were male and under the age of 30; suicide is disproportionately more common in that demographic group, which is larger in the military than in the general population. Firearms were the instrument in nearly 70% of the cases.

Suicide rates among service members as well as veterans have been a concern for years, and solutions have been elusive. So have safeguards against violence on military installations, with the 2009 massacre on Fort Hood, Texas, among the most deadly mass shootings.

But it’s a complex problem. Firearms on base are generally tightly controlled, although that issue has been hotly debated by those arguing that freer access to personal firearms would enable attacks such as the one in Pensacola be put down more quickly. A Pentagon directive in 2016 gave base commanders ability to grant permission to carry personal weapons, but it hasn’t been widely applied.

However, the Pearl Harbor case demonstrates that an external threat isn’t always the cause, and that the safety of military bases will require a more comprehensive approach.

The most immediate concern, both on Oahu and in Pensacola, is for the loved ones of the victims. Hawaii’s mourning feels especially acute for the two kamaaina who lost their lives, the lives of their grieving families also shattered in the midst of a holiday season.

Roldan A. Agustin, 49, from Ewa Beach, was a Navy veteran and metals inspector who was “a loving son, brother, uncle and friend to many,” who “enjoyed working on cars with his friends.”

Vincent J. Kapoi Jr., 30, of Honolulu was a metals inspector apprentice, newly married, his career just beginning. He also left behind parents, sisters, a brother and a wide extended family.

While their ohana awaits word of how this all happened, and why, island residents can do nothing more than extend their heartfelt sympathies and help. Now is the time to do so, and in generous measure.