School shooting du jour

[BigV]

Originally Posted by Beestie

Gotcha.

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.

Originally Posted by Beestie

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.

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?

Originally Posted by Beestie

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

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.

Originally Posted by Beestie

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!"

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?

[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 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.
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.

[BigV]

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:

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.

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.

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

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.

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.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by BigV

xoB:

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: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.

OK, my mistake. I missed that the cop you were talking about was the grandfather/guardian.
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.

[Troubleshooter]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

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.

[xoxoxoBruce]

That's family.