School shooting du jour
 

The story

How long do you figure it will be until the cries for tougher gun control laws will be using this story? 20 hours and counting at this point.

I've never understood the whole school shooting thing. ok, you don't like yourself, your family sucks, and you get picked on at school. welcome to your teens. how do you go from that to dropping your schoolmates?

and how do the guardians and others not see this coming?

Check out the other thread where people are bitching that his grandmother read his journal and turned him in to the cops, and he got arrested.

When that doesn't happen, school shootings do.

Since when is it a bad thing to PARENT your child?

Teenagers don't think with the right part of their brains. The hippocampus part of the brain isn't fully developed until the age of 25. It has a lot to do with social and emotional behavior, and I think it effects your understanding of the consequences of your actions.

This is not to say that someone shouldn't have seen this coming - but then, reasonable thoughts on a troubled teenager would be to expect either drugs or hanging with the wrong crowd or *some* violence or general illegal behavior . . .

I don't think anyone would expect a kid to take up a gun and go shoot people.

<small> I just got around to reading my March issue of National Geographic and they had a big article on the brain and how it works. . . forgive me if I'm putting my facts together wrong - but it makes sense to me </small>

Ok--my sweet, adorable son was suspended with possibility for expulsion when he was in the SECOND grade for bringing his grandfather's swiss army knife to school (his father and I had no idea that he had put this treasure in his backpack; and he brought it solely to show off, not harm anyone).
We pleaded his case and he was given a 10 day Out of School suspension.
Now. We've all these damn rules and regulations but it seems that if a kid is determined to shoot up his classmates he will find a way.

I call bullshit.

It is not possible that someone intelligent enough to drive a computer can be dumb enough to believe that "when kids don't get arrested for writing in their journals, then school shootings happen". There is absolutely no overlap. You are clearly talking out your ass just to troll for attention, or some other ulterior motive. What you said is so utterly beyond the pale that I have to attribute it to some bizzare sad message-board-tourette's-variant. Nasty to witness, but completely devoid of content.

Because the order of things is really more like 'you get harassed constantly at school, kids throw things at you, you are physically intimidated if not actually hit or kicked on a frequent basis, and the school officials blame it all on you because you clearly are just not making an effort to fit in.'

In junior high school, there were two boys in a particular class who took it upon themselves to write grafitti about me all over the inside of a supplies cabinet. Quite graphic things, actually, very creative. At the time it didn't really bother me because I had it on good authority from a friend of theirs that they had a crush on me and were just flirting in their sad, adolescent way. But the point of the story is, the teacher didn't know this. All she knew was that extremely personal, hurtful, and threatening grafitti full of my name had suddenly appeared all over her cabinet. She didn't know who did it--so I was punished, because clearly I must have done something to provoke this and 'maybe it would encourage me to reach out and establish a truce with these people.'

There is still not a widespread recognition among school administrators that bullying is the cause of this kind of thing and if they would just stop the bullies they wouldn't have to worry about whether the kids are just having fantasies about killing other students or really contemplating doing it.

Totally Agree.

All three of my kids, who are each special needs in one way or another (brain-injured, huge geek and schizophrenic, in order from oldest to youngest), were/are mercilessly taunted, bullied, threatened and physically attacked by their schoolmates. The middle son has been accused of sexual harassment (accuser later admitted it was BS), spit on while walking home, chased down by four kids in a car right in front of his own home and countless other outrages. A large part of it is racial in nature, but we couldn't do anything about that since it is not possible to discriminate against Caucasians.

Each and every time, it has been the same old drill...go to the school, meet with the principal, wait for them to somehow blame it on the victim, threaten them with legal proceedings, problem solved. Until the next time.

I'm surprised *more* kids don't kill at school. It is a vicious place, utterly bereft of education or elevation of people's spirits. Our kids have changed.

Here is a link to the Guardian's story about the kid's claim to have been a Nazi.

Some old school techniques should be reinstated.

Time under the stairs, sans weapons, was a good way to resolve a lot of issues. No knives, guns, cars, tazers, etc were used.

I's that last part, that unreasoning escalation that differentiates what is happening now from then.

I call bullshit back. When parents do not "stay in touch" with their kids, the signs leading up to events such as this go unnoticed. In many if not most instances, the desire, intent, planning and preparation for these killings is patently obvious in retrospect.

OC's point is that when obvious signs are ignored or overlooked then a preventable incident can occur.

I guess you are saying that if little johhny's parents find a graphic description in his room of little Johnny levelling a shotgun and blowing off his classmate's heads with rivers of blood running down the hall, they should just have a chuckle and say: "that's my boy!" Gotcha.

An aquaintance was just telling me about her kindergartener getting beat up (actually hit, punched in the head) on the bus several times before they were able to have the bully's seat moved. Outrageous. Also, he has a lazy eye, and his teacher employed his classmates to tattle on him whenever he "cheated" (lifted the patch covering his good eye). Now he's the freak.
I don't think school administrators are able/willing to stop the bullying for the most part. They cultivate an adversarial relationship between themselves and parents, themselves and students, and among students.

You got squat.

The two different stories share some details, are both sad but for very different reasons. The previous story was about an 18 year old high school student who wrote in his journal and was arrested on TERRORISM CHARGES as a result. This is sad because writing in your journal is not illegal. I mean, damn. How much of the incindiary dialogue on this forum should qualify as reasonable cause to have the police come knocking at your door and arrest the author? Thinking, writing talking is waaaay different than acting. Big, big difference.

This story is sad for other reasons that are obvious.

But the two of them together demonstrate the saddest fact of all, that despite our best intentions, a determined kid can carry out this kind of horrible rampage. Did the earlier case prevent a tragedy? Impossible to say. Did the other case itself represent a tragedy. Most certainly.

These sad, terrible events can NOT be prevented. Reduced, minimized, isolated, ok, I'll buy that. But if the price is to arrest every student or child author who puts pen to paper, and says something threatening, I vote no. If the price is to squash expressions of independent thought, what would be taught in schools? Why is dissent so dangerous? I am no anarchist, but I say too much conformity is even more dangerous, more insidious. Witness the slowly boiled frog.

I have no quarrel with this. But it is misleadingly shallow. The shooter's father killed himself four years ago. His mother has been in a nursing home for some time after suffering a brain injury as the result of a car accident. Who was in loco parentis? The grandfather. The first victim. The former chief of police, someone you could reasonably expect to "stay in touch" with his "kid". He was killed first, and then the guns and the bulletproof vest went with the kid in the squad car to the school where more death followed. Where is the blame here Beestie?

OC's point in the earlier thread was that she felt there was a right for her to be aware of all that happens in her home, despite the fact that her kid was 18 or older. And on that point we agree.

What OC said in this post, however, was way past that. Go read it. I paraphrase: Parents read journals and cops arrest kids or people die in schools. Whoa... not just disturbing, but so freakin wrong, factually wrong that I called bullshit. It seemed like a knee jerk reaction--"That shooter, damn shame his parents didn't have him arrested and save us all this tragedy." Sure. Arrest them all, and then the schools will be free of death. It will have moved to the prisons.

Riiiiiight.

More non-seriousness, non-funnyness, non-helpfulness. I strain to imagine any parent behaving that way. Maybe on tv... Do you seriously contend that this example reflects any kind of reality, or desired reality? Get back to me on that, willya?

Sad story jinx. I have heard of similar stories myself. Indeed I lived through my share of being bullied.

Now that I am a parent myself, I would only offer one particle of advice, in a grammatical vein. When you say:

"I don't think school administrators are able/willing to stop the bullying for the most part. They cultivate an adversarial relationship between themselves and parents, themselves and students, and among students."

I would make one small change. I would insert the word IF between "...most part" and "They cultivate..."

Being united in our common cause, the welfare and education of the student and child, is of inestimable value, and is to be diligently sought. When I must I will be the teachers' and administrators' adversary. I have done so and will continue to do so where necessary. But much much more can be accomplished in an atmosphere of cooperation. [/voice of experience]

I won't. I have zero interest in playing that game.



Yes. I know [/voice of experience]

Just curious, would you be willing to say why? Are you a teacher? A parent? Both?

Your school? Kids school?

I decline is a perfectly fine answer. Not trying to be nosy, but kids and schools is a big part of my life. I like to learn about other's experiences too.

Parent, and because I don't see the point. I agree with elspode in that most of what goes on in [most public] schools has nothing whatsoever to do with education. I see [most public] schools as being glorified daycare centers, more concerned with crowd control than anything else. As a parent, what's the point in fighting with administrators? What is the reward? If I make the calls, and go to the meetings, and they eventually move the bully's seat - what have I won?
Kid's school.

That's a joke, right? Gotta be. If the "Former Chief" did stay in touch with the kid then he was probably bullied by more than schoolmates. Cops don't "stay in touch" with kids in a way that makes them feel warm and fuzzy.
C'mon now, who's knee jerking here? OC described the highlights of the other story so people would know which one she was referring to. The point was guardians taking an active roll in monitoring the kids activities to try to head off violence.
Your personal attack and charges of trolling for attention are ridiculous and way out of line.
If there's one thing OC get's around here is plenty of attention. :haha:

I call bullshit on your call of bullshit.

If parents aren't monitoring their children's behavior, and they are exhibiting signs (depressed, antisocial behavior over and beyond what a normal teenager exhibits, writing violent and other harmful thoughts in a journal or on the internet) of impending violence, and the parents aren't doing their job parenting, then this shit happens. Period.

This child was 16 (or 17, I've seen both), a nazi, posting about doing violence to former schoolmates, and already in homeschooling. The child was kicked out of school (of course, the school can't discuss why, but the article I saw the principle didn't even know why). If the child was already kicked out of school once, that's a sign your child has problems.

Should you EXPECT your child to go kill 12 people? No. But if you're seeing red flags, and you do not parent your child, this type of thing happens.

I have a 17 year old male child, who exhibits loner, anti-social behavior and does not play well with others at school. His grades are average. I know where he is at all times. Period. He has a cell phone and keeps it with him. He's never been at trouble in school, other than his grades. His biological father is a murderer, and I am aware that this sort of behavior may be partly genetic in nature.

If I *wasn't* paying attention to his behavior, his mood, his whereabouts, where his friend lives, looking at the history on his IE, checking his pictures on the computer, monitoring his notebooks for dark or disturbing art, checking his backpack, things like that, then I would not be doing my job as a parent.

Parents who "gee, I didn't see this coming" weren't paying attention.

Indirectly, that's what I said, yes. But to clarify your paraphrase, Parents read journals and DO NOTHING ABOUT IT and people die in schools.

How they handle it depends on the parent, obviously, but dismissing it, attributing violent "stories" and "thoughts" clearly written down in such a way that the police feel the child is a danger to themselves or others simply to "independant thought", is potentially lethal.

Absolutely. The child was throwing off red flags all over the place, and nothing was done (at least as far as the media has reported). No therapy. No counseling. Loner. Anti-social. Nazi. Writing violent remarks regarding former schoolmates on a forum-type setting. Access to unlocked, unsafe, guns in the home and ammunition. Absent parents, one suicide and one mental. HELLO???? Where was the parenting??

Arrest them all with just cause. Not just BEcause.

Better a prison than my kids' school.


Mostly negative....

I wish to clarify my position
 

xoB:

You've been around the cellar a lot longer than I have, and I've had the pleasure of reading many posts by you. I laughed, I agreed, I laughed some more, I gave a point more thought, when I read your posts. This last post deserves the same treatment--after all, you're the same fella with the same wise friendly voice. Maybe I missed something in my response, or got my fingers tangled in the editor and posted something different from what I intended. So I did some more research, I reviewed all the posts. Here's what I found.

I could not find another reference to confirm my statement about the kid's grandfather being the chief of police. I thought for sure that's how I heard him described on the radio, and that he was the person who trained the unarmed security guard at the school, the first victim at the school. All I could find was that he was a tribal police officer, but no confirmation that he was the chief of police. I withdraw the overstatement.

It's clear he was a cop, though. My personal experience with cops in my family is that they are observant people. They do stay in touch with their children. They're aware of what's going on in their households. My personal experience represents a very small sample, to be sure. However, when you make your statement:

Quote:

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce Originally Posted by BigV The first victim. The former chief of police, someone you could reasonably expect to "stay in touch" with his "kid". That's a joke, right? Gotta be. If the "Former Chief" did stay in touch with the kid then he was probably bullied by more than schoolmates. Cops don't "stay in touch" with kids in a way that makes them feel warm and fuzzy.

I wonder what you base it on. At best it is an uncharitable generalization that cops make poor parents due to bad relations with their kids. You imply that the grandfather bullied the boy because he was a cop. I'm sure you don't know any more than I do about the situation in that household than I do, so we'll both have to just wonder for the time being, was the kid bullied by the grandfather or not. Perhaps further reports will reveal new facts about the situation. In the meantime, I will overlook your defamation of cops as parents.

Quote:

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce Originally Posted by BigV I paraphrase: Parents read journals and cops arrest kids or people die in schools. Whoa... not just disturbing, but so freakin wrong, factually wrong that I called bullshit. It seemed like a knee jerk reaction--"That shooter, damn shame his parents didn't have him arrested and save us all this tragedy." Sure. Arrest them all, and then the schools will be free of death. It will have moved to the prisons. C'mon now, who's knee jerking here? OC described the highlights of the other story so people would know which one she was referring to. The point was guardians taking an active roll in monitoring the kids activities to try to head off violence.

I was not knee jerking here. I tried to accurately paraphrase OC's comment. At this point I have been challenged twice on my reaction to OC's comments. What she meant is up to her to explain. You, Beestie, and I all have only her words to go on. I have already answered Beestie's interpretation of OC's remarks. Perhaps your interpretation is right. If it is right, then I am all for it. But that's not what she said. I tried hard to focus on what she said.

Which brings me to my next point.
I went back and re-re-read this part of the posts too. I did try to confine my remarks to OC's statements, with phrases like: ...You are talking..." and "...what you said...". My rebuke was very harsh, I agree. I apologise for any offense, OnyxCougar. I did not wish to insult you, but to strenuously refute your statements. I stand by my statements, but I do not normally rely on ad hominem attacks to support my arguments. Those instances I reserve for the truly deserving. And you do not deserve to be attacked that way.

OC, I have no quarrel with you personally, but I disagree with what you said in the strongest possible terms.

First Beestie, then xoB, now OC
 

Ok, I unilaterally stop bullshit.

I agree. And it is a JOB, no mistake. Real work, but a labor of love. The only minor quibble I have here is that sometimes this behavior is present and nobody dies. In fact, most of the time, the kids' emotional weather is incompletely known by the parents, and almost always the combination of an adolescent in the throes of teen angst and a parent only partly aware of the situation DOES NOT make the evening news. Most of these storms blow through, ruffling the curtains and ruining the crockery, but people don't die. I also agree that sometimes the situation calls for professional intervention, and 911 is their number. Been there, done that.

What I've found is that the insults, both real and imagined, I've visited on the young people in my life, are remembered ten times longer and more vividly than the loving care I give them. Their reaction is just that--theirs. And they gotta work it out. Writing is one way, drawing is another, music, IM, hangin wi' the homies, etc.

For sure, this kid was awash in a sea of red flags. Dad dead, mom in nursing home, Goth shaped target of peer ridicule, already kicked out of school at least once, to borrow a phrase, it must have sucked to be him.

Again, you're right on target here. Pay attention. Be present. Love'em, discipline (another form of love) 'em. Listen to them, on all frequencies. Be suspicious and be compassionate. Dang, I'm tired just writing about it. Or thinking about it with our two teens and one adolescent. Yah, wore out.

But on this one, I don't agree. Some parents are slack, granted. But even diligent ones, among whose number I count myself, are still human, fallible. I can be fooled. I can be misled. I can be deceived and lied to, successfully. I know it happens. I don't think my parents' omniscience lasted much into my teen years. But hopefully, by that time, I have planted enough seeds of.... what? goodness, self control, self awareness, conflict resolution skills, optimism, etc that when the storms of teen life roar, we'll all be shaken but unmoved.

I did try to represent your statement fairly. And when you ammend it with the BUT DO NOTHING ABOUT IT, qualifier, you remove the grounds for my objections. We agree again.

I don't know who knew what, certainly it's a crazy mess out there at this point. What a shame, a terrible, cryin shame.

I have read some early evidence that there were steps taken, but clearly not the right ones. Sad.

Hey, I will unhappily admit that WITH CAUSE, Officer Friendly should take him away. But this really is at the core of my objections. By the time the kid's arrested, you've practically conceded defeat as a parent. Certainly you've declared your surrender to any authority over the child. Maybe that's appropriate, and if so, *sigh*, sad. But ok.

On the other hand, when do you drop the dime on your kid? Not in retrospect, no fair. Each day is a damn mystery. I swear, parenting is the last great refuge of amateurs. Seriously, who knows if this time is the last time. I for one am glad for the mercy I received as a youngster, and that I wasn't treated so strictly that I got arrested for doing the bad things I did. Certainly no murderer, but, criminy, prison is not victory, it's a draw at best, and a delay of defeat most of the time.

This cannot be prevented. And the cost of the futile exercise of attempting to do so is far far greater than even the cost of what has happened today.

Hmm. Just read where the grandfather was in bedwith his "companion" when they were shot. Grandfather is 58, "companion" is 32. Wonder if that's why Grandfather couldn't be bothered to find out what Jeffy was up to..?

So people with kids shouldn't have sex? That's one way of reducing the population, I'll grant you.

This case seems tailor-made to stymie knee-jerk reactions. The gun control crowd has to go "doh!" when they find out the guns belonged to a cop, and the "blame the parents" crowd has a bit of a problem when they find out neither parent was in any position to do anything about it.

The hard core of the "gun control crowd" doesn't think that cops should have guns either.

And we see how well that works in England.

[quote=russotto]So people with kids shouldn't have sex? That's one way of reducing the population, I'll grant you.[quote]

dumbass. No. Obviously. People with kids should get their heads out of their asses and pay attention to their kids.

Particularly since they've not only disarmed the populace, as well having the courts decide that there is no right to self defense with any kind of weapon (including a sword or a cricket bat).

Australia too.

OK, my mistake. I missed that the cop you were talking about was the grandfather/guardian. :o
Cops as parents, although they tend to be alpha personalities that beget more alphas, I don't have a problem with.
Time and time again I've seen cops "take an interest" or "keep in touch" with kids that are not related to them and it ain't pretty.

And the other side of the coin is my buddy Allen who who has raised two adopted daughters, he adopted the daughter of his current wife as well as raising two of their mutual children.

The attachment most of his children is amazing. He works his ass of for his family and most of them know it.

That's family. :eyebrow:

The kid was sick, he lacked a net, he was living in isolation, he had access to weapons. I'm not quick to bag on the teachers 'cause they're in the firing range and most every teacher I know would tune in as close as possible and take a bullet for any kid in their care. The only thing I think that could have impacted this case positively would have been close psych treatment at a very young age. But he's moving from Mpls to living in a poor res community and easy to miss. I think its weird that he was a self described native nazi.

It's those damn Indian swastikas again.....led him astray. :3eye:

This school had everything going for it. They've had an emergency plan in place, since before the Columbine tragedy. Metal detectors. Security guards. Teachers trained to be first responders. Drills.

And still so many dead. The kid entered the building at 2:55, the police arrived at 2:57, and at 3:05, it was all over.

How can this be prevented? Who would want their children to pay the costs for certainty of preventing bad things from happening to them. Easy but expensive. Just dip them all in carbonite.

Prevented? Can't, It's always happened and always will.
The best we can do is slow 'em down by letting them all know they have someone who will listen to them NOW. Not when we have time...later....someday.
If you dip them in carbonite, how do you hold them...by the heel? :eyebrow:

Excuse me for being a bit of an inexperienced debater, but here goes.

Although I know tightening gun laws will not solve the school shooting problems in America completely, it will help. Gun laws are strict here in Britian, and the last big school shooting was 9 years ago in Dunblane, and before that it was practically unheard of. There are still bullies and school nutjobs (trust me, im still in secondary school, i KNOW), some are capable of real violence, (there used to be a 16 year old in one of my classes who was sent to jail for a while for hospitalising a stranger over some petty arguement), and this is a comparatively safe, decent school. There are a lot worse schools out there in Scotland, with pupils with less hope for the future and a lot more rage.

The thing is, their means of release is a lot more restricted. People still get bullied and beaten up, which is bad, but at least no-one gets shot.

We are by no means free from problems here though. 2 days ago an 11 year old girl commited suicide, Scotlands youngest suicide to date. A couple of weeks ago a young boy was shot dead by a man shooting at firefighters with an airgun, sparking a debate on stricter airgun laws. Banning guns will not solve the problems with todays youth, but it would partially reduce some of the risks involved in being young.

the problem is that stricter gun laws only keep guns out of the hands of people who follow the law. criminals aren't overly concerned about the laws. and as far as the number of school shooting you have? compare the number of kids you have in each schools times the number of schools you have to similar statistics in the US... see something a little obvious here? we have a lot more kids in a lot more schools so shootings will be more frequent here. but that is irrelevant, only comparing shootings per capita would be appropriate.

And driver's licenses only keep the good drivers off the road. Criminals don't bother with driver's licenses. They just keep driving. We should eliminate the driver's license for the exact same reason.

Considering in the UK there have been numerous incidents and drive-bys with AK-47s and MAC-10s not to mention police raids picking up plastique, grenades, assult rifles and semi-auto pistols I don't think banning guns solves the problem. The situation is so bad in nottingham now that police are armed on patrol for the first time in the UK. Fix the social stuff and the rest will fix itself.

What!?!? :eek: Interrupt a major revenue source? Not the licenses, the ticket revenue that licenses allow them to collect.
And without licenses they'd issue National ID cards.

Licenses are poised to become the national ID cards.

I often wish I could do without, but I've observed the problems a friend who steadfastly won't have one has had. I also like driving too much.

Not in Utah.

Oh no!

We can't put any restrictions on illegal aliens!

What would that do to our trade and political negotiations with Mexico?

The horror!

I'll get back to you on that once I figure out what they have that we want ...

Cheap whores ... weed ... brightly colored serapes and sombreros ...

I'll think of it at some point.

what's your point? I guess whores are kinda nasty, but as for the rest, viva mexico, baby.



tw, licenses are all fine and dandy, but when they start banning cars because of bad drivers, then you'll have your parallel correct.

no, no - let tw continue to live in his carefully crafted world of overreaction, oversimplification, and bad analogies. it is for his own good. can you imagine a day when he wakes up to find that the world doesn't fit into this nice little cubby holes he has designed?

Wolf will be getting a visit.

I don't know what you personally want from Mexico, but the US wants Mexico's cheap labor. Doesn't matter if that labor is on US soil or Mexican soil.

The willinginess to clean hot tubs and hotel rooms, to hang drywall and polish walmart floors for minimum wage or less.

and they want our medical care and education system, so when you look at the tax costs - the labor isn't really that cheap when they are on our soil.

that is NOT a positive.

But it IS cheap for the employer who sees the short term gain with no regard to the larger context.

What about the jerk that passes on the shoulder? All the cars are going in the same direction, all the cars contributed to the construction costs of the road, (and to the traffic) but because t works for the lawbreaker, but only because the lawbreakers are in the minority. If we all spread out the balance of the traffic jam onto the shoulder lane, then everyone would still be in the same slow traffic. And although the lawbreaker doesn't realize it, he's working against his own best interests, albeit, long term or low probility interests. For example, his travel in this breakdown lane could hinder emergency services traffic. What if a tow truck is trying to use the lane to remove the cause of the traffic jam?

Well, that's just a lot of blather. Anyway, I believe the lawbreakers take advantage of short term advantages at the cost of the greater good for all.