Lancaster, PA Amish School shooting

[MageB420666]

NICKEL MINES, Pa. — Several people were shot and killed execution style when an armed truck driver entered a one-room Amish schoolhouse in Lancaster County Monday, Pennsylvania police said.

State Police Commissioner Jeffrey Miller said three students were found shot dead at the scene, along with the suspect. At least seven more — some critically injured with gunshot wounds — were transported to nearby hospitals, he said. One of the girls died in the arms of the police, Miller said. He could not confirm how many people died en route to the hospital. The county coroner earlier said six were killed.

The gunman brought in pieces of wood to board up the doors to the building when he entered the school, Miller said.

"It appears that the suspect entered school with the intention of taking hostages," he added.

The gunman also had wire ties and flex cuff, which he used to begin tying the hostages feet together. He let the male students, as well as one adult female who was pregnant, to leave. Three other non-student females with infants were also allowed to leave. One shotgun and one handgun was found next to the suspect when police entered the building.
"It seems as though he wanted to attack young, female victims," Miller said.

There were also notes left by the gunman, identified as Charles Carl Roberts IV, a 32-year-old milk delivery man from nearby Bart, Pa., Miller said. The notes, left for Roberts' wife, indicated that he was seeking revenge for something that happened decades ago.

Lancaster County Coroner G. Gary Kirchner earlier said six were killed from the school shooting. "So far, six confirmed dead, and the helicopters are pulling into [Lancaster General Hospital] like crazy,"
It was the nation's third deadly school shooting in less than a week, and one of the deadliest in U.S. history.

Kim Hatch, spokeswoman for the Lancaster General Hospital, said three victims ages six through 12 arrived there with gunshot wounds — some to the head — and are in critical condition. Two of those victims were sent to Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, while the third was sent to the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. One other patient has been sent to Reading Hospital of Pennsylvania.

John Line, also from Lancaster General, told FOX News that center doesn't expect to receive anymore patients.

The police told FOX News that it was a hostage situation and that the shooter is now dead. It's not yet known whether the shooter is counted among the six deaths reported by the coroner. There were at least 12 people injured, along with the deaths, police said. Not motive is yet known.

There is a news conference scheduled at the school sometime Monday afternoon.

The school is in Paradise Township on Mine Road — an Amish community within the township. There are a total of 27 students in grades 1 through 8 at Wolf Rock School, where the shooting took place.

Police late Monday morning surrounded the one-room schoolhouse, a tiny building surrounded by a white fence and farm fields in southeastern Lancaster County. The Lancaster County 911 Web site reported that dozens of emergency units were dispatched to a "medical emergency" at 10:45 a.m. Monday.

Hours after the attack, about three dozen people in traditional Amish clothing, broad-brimmed hats and bonnets stood nearby speaking to one another and authorities. Others gathered with a group of children at a nearby farm. Emergency responders were seen searching the school grounds for evidence.

The school is just outside Nickel Mines, a tiny village about 55 miles west of Philadelphia.

On Friday, a school principal was gunned down in Cazenovia, Wis. A 15-year-old student, described as upset over a reprimand, was charged with murder in the killing. Click here for the latest on the Cazenovia story.

Just two days earlier, an adult gunman held six girls hostage in a school at Bailey, Colo., before killing a 16-year-old girl and then himself. Click here to read the latest on that story.

Nationwide, the 1999 ColumbineHigh School massacre in Littleton, Colo., remains the deadliest school shooting, claiming the lives of 15 people, including the two teenage gunmen. Last year, a 16-year-old shot seven people to death at a school on Minnesota's Red Lake Indian Reservation, then killed himself.

link

This just happened this morning. I've been watching the news on television and it said on tv that there are only 3 confirmed student deaths instead of 6.

[feelgood]

This is like what? 5th school shooting in North America this month? Not Counting Mexico...

[kurty[B]]

Originally Posted by feelgood

This is like what? 5th school shooting in North America? Not Counting Mexico...

It's the third I know of in less than a week. People here are talking about home-schooling like crazy. I'm just speechless, don't know how to react, these incidents are seriously fucked up.

[Superbelt]

This is the 5th or so school shooting in the Pennsylvania Capital area in the past couple years.
And that doesn't count the two recent knife attacks in Red Lion High in York.

What the hell is with this area?

[Elphaba]

I'm finding it more disturbing that this is the second instance of an adult male, with no apparent connection to the school, taking young girls hostage.

[Lady Sage]

What is wrong with people these days?

Thank the gods that I can not have children!!!!!!!

[fresnelly]

I imagine one reason for the recent cluster of these types of crimes, is copy-cat syndrome. These guys are all angry and unstable and looking for an outlet. This sort of crime offers maximum carnage, a quick (if short) burst of power, and a national media spotlight. It must be irrisistible for someone so inclined.

[analog]

How does this count as a "school shooting"? I mean... it took place IN a school, but the shooter was not a student there, nor was he in any way affiliated with the school (like a teacher or something administrative).

This is just a shooting. This is just pure, simple, murder.

I fully believe that the intent on using the term "school shooting" is purely for ratings and to attract more attention. Stupid. Using the deaths of a half-dozen or more young girls to get ratings. Shameful.

Originally Posted by fresnelly

I imagine one reason for the recent cluster of these types of crimes, is copy-cat syndrome. These guys are all angry and unstable and looking for an outlet. This sort of crime offers maximum carnage, a quick (if short) burst of power, and a national media spotlight. It must be irrisistible for someone so inclined.

Damn straight. You kill a couple of kids, and suddenly everyone knows your story. Maximum impact, indeed.

[shakran]

Originally Posted by analog

How does this count as a "school shooting"?

It was a shooting. It happened in a school. Ergo. . .


I'm sorry that you have chosen to narrowly define school shooting as a shooting that happens in a school and which must be executed only by a member of that school.

We in the media define a school shooting as a shooting that happens in a school, no matter who carries it out.

Kind of like when we report on a highway shooting, it is not required that a highway department worker be the one pulling the trigger.

And why would you bring up the ratings crap? #1 it's not a ratings period - that's next month, so unless today's coverage will impress the viewer enough that he starts watching your station repeatedly, especially in November, February, May, and July . . . . #2 unless you are somehow implying that there is a vast media conspiracy to goad people into shooting up schools just so we can get ratings, your accusations are groundless. It happened, it's news, we report it. Period. Will the ratings go up? Maybe, but to be honest I can't see too many people watching the inane babble on the cablenets today. To be quite frank, many journalists have forgotten how to be journalists and instead spend their time breathlessly reporting every little rumor that crosses the desk whether its confirmed or not (6 dead! 7 dead! no wait 4 dead! OK now we're really sure this time, it's 3 dead!). I don't think the general public is stupid enough to be impressed by this, so I don't think it will translate into higher ratings come November.


With all the real problems the media, and especially the broadcast media, has, I would hope you would concentrate on them rather than inventing new ones.

Everything OK over there Analog? You've been somewhat unusually combative in the crime/death threads lately.

[analog]

Originally Posted by shakran

It was a shooting. It happened in a school. Ergo. . .


I'm sorry that you have chosen to narrowly define school shooting as a shooting that happens in a school and which must be executed only by a member of that school.

We in the media define a school shooting as a shooting that happens in a school, no matter who carries it out.

*snip*

No need to get defensive, it's just my opinion/belief on the subject at hand.

And I've never heard of a shooting in x location referred to an "x shooting" other than school. It's just called a shooting, every other time i've ever seen or heard about a shooting happening at any other kind of place. No highway shootings or mall shootings or home shootings or Mini-Golf shootings... just "school shooting".

Can you honestly tell me that media coverage of shootings that happen at schools aren't much more intensely covered and hyped up than any other normal shooting at any other location?

Six lives are six lives, no matter the age- but the media seems to love dead kids.

I've seen countless stories on "how safe are your kids at school" and "bullies in the classroom" aimed at covering every angle of the why and how's of school shootings and what little any person to can do help.

Have you ever seen a story on "how safe are you at the mall" or "on the highway" or "while getting some McDonalds", with regards to how easy it is to be the random victim of a shooting? Nope. Why? Media loves dead kids. It sells.

Tell me death doesn't sell. Tell me. I'd love to see someone try and tell me death doesn't sell- the deaths of children, even moreso. Go ahead, i'm getting ready to laugh right now, so I'll be prepared in case it happens.

[These messages have been brought to you by analog, in a steady and calm tone (despite what tone people invent for me and believe me to have because of the strong, purposeful wording), and by the letters x, and b, and the number 4.]

[lindalove]

I heard on the news this morning that 2 more girls passed last night.

They had problems identifying the girls because the Amish people do not have photographs. It was very late in the day before some parents knew if their daughter was dead or alive. Because the familes didn't want to fly in the helicopter they had to drive to several hospitals that are far apart to find their daughter. It is so very sad that they have to deal with such a tragedy and an invasion of their simple lives.

[shakran]

Originally Posted by analog

And I've never heard of a shooting in x location referred to an "x shooting" other than school. It's just called a shooting, every other time i've ever seen or heard about a shooting happening at any other kind of place. No highway shootings or mall shootings or home shootings or Mini-Golf shootings... just "school shooting".

Well I've never done a minigolf shooting, but I've covered mall shootings, highway shootings, bar shootings/stabbings. It's just a way of identifying the incident. It's not used all the time but especially when there's a lot of crime to cover that week, it helps to differentiate the various shootings.

Can you honestly tell me that media coverage of shootings that happen at schools aren't much more intensely covered and hyped up than any other normal shooting at any other location?

More intensely covered yes. Hyped up, sometimes, but not by everyone. You gotta realize though, people have been offing each other in bars pretty much since bars were invented.

Until Columbine, school violence on this level was practically unheard of. Even though it's getting way to often for anyone's taste, having someone shoot up a school is still unusual enough that it's going to get more coverage than the run-of-the-mill drunk bar shooting.

Add into the mix that kids are involved and therefore people are much more concerned about it, and you're certainly going to get a lot of coverage when something like this happens.

Six lives are six lives, no matter the age- but the media seems to love dead kids.

Sure, because PEOPLE love kids. This is a kid-centric society. If some guy started yelling and screaming while you were eating in a decent restaurant he'd be kicked out. A kid does it and everyone ignores it. It's all about the kids in the good old USA. So naturally if a bunch of kids get hurt in a shooting spree, the media's going to cover it more because people want that, and when you get right down to it the news media is, unfortunately, a business.

Personally I disagree with the kid-centric notion and I think you're correct that a kid's life is no more valuable than an adult (and if you wanna be a real asshole, from a logical standpoint it's less valuable because the adult is presumably contributing to society while the kid is not).

Now, in this incident, add in the Amish factor, and you have a guaranteed wall to wall coverage. They didn't do such an intense level of coverage of last week's Wisconsin school shooting which killed the principal.

I've seen countless stories on "how safe are your kids at school" and "bullies in the classroom" aimed at covering every angle of the why and how's of school shootings and what little any person to can do help.

Oh absolutely, the media loves to scare the shit out of people. Keeps 'em tuning in for more. But keep in mind that that's generally edicts coming down from the corporate bosses, and we trench animals despise it.

If the real journalists were allowed to run the journalism side you'd see a VERY different news product on the air every night. Unfortunately we have this evil entity in our profession called consultants, which is a fancy word for "people who don't know their ass from a hole in the ground" and they tell the bosses that scaring people attracts viewers. And they're right - it does, for awhile, until the viewer figures out that 3 day old "breaking news" and "will it kill you" pieces aren't as legit as you'd think, and then they start watching other things.

You might be interested to know that several local media outlets yesterday covered the Amish schooting from the angle of "is the media reporting this crap too much, is that causing people to do it more?" which I thought was a much better way to run it than the run-of-the-mill "hey local school kid, how do you feel about the school in PA" angle that's so typical and ridiculous. But I bet today those of us who covered it that way will get scathing emails from our consultants.

Have you ever seen a story on "how safe are you at the mall" or "on the highway" or "while getting some McDonalds", with regards to how easy it is to be the random victim of a shooting? Nope. Why? Media loves dead kids. It sells.

Well, actually, I've done the safe-at-the-mall story following a mall shooting. We looked into the security measures in place at the local mall (basically nothing except for a rent-a-cop that was too fat to catch anyone anyway) and showed people that anyone could get in any time with any weapon and not be caught. 2 months after our story, metal detectors popped up at all the mall entrances.

Tell me death doesn't sell. Tell me. I'd love to see someone try and tell me death doesn't sell- the deaths of children, even moreso. Go ahead, i'm getting ready to laugh right now, so I'll be prepared in case it happens.

Sure, death sells. Should we stop reporting on news stories simply because people might watch it? Health segments sell too - in fact they sell better than death. By your logic we should get rid of those too. (not that I'd have a particular problem with dropping that crap )

And here's another tidbit for ya - the cable nets that covered the shooting yesterday went wall to wall for at least an hour - some for longer than that. That means they didn't run any commercial breaks, so whether the death sold or not, they lost money off of it. You can get all the viewers you want but if you don't run advertisements you're not making any cash. Any time you see a special report break in or no-commercial coverage, you can book it that the organization doing it is losing a CRAPLOAD of money. Advertising costs tens of thousands of dollars per minute (during a guaranteed audience blockbuster such as the superbowl it can go upwards of a quarter million dollars for a 30 second spot). That's a lot of money to lose by tossing out the breaks.

[lindalove]

I think the second guy got the idea from the news reports of the first one who took girls hostage. Maybe we should start having Congressional Investigations and calls to ban TV, Radio and News Paper News.

One of the saddest things, is if this guy wasn't already dead, there would be people demanding his life be spared. If we executed more of our convicted murderers, we'd have less people willing to take other innocent lives.

[stevie667]

Originally Posted by feelgood

This is like what? 5th school shooting in North America this month? Not Counting Mexico...

All i have to say is bump to that.

Very sad incident indeed.

[dksuddeth]

I've said it before and it obviously needs to be said again.

THIS is an open invitation to unarmed and defenseless victims practically BEGGING anyone looking to get headlines with a high body count to come on in and start executing kids.

[The_Jazz]

dksuddeth, given that this was a one-room schoolhouse dedicated to the teaching of the Amish, who are recognized conscientious objectors, I think that you need to rethink your post. Saying that an Amish school should have a gun is like saying that babtists should wipe their asses with the Bible. Neither one is going to happen and both are disrespectful. Maybe you don't know much about the Old Order Amish, but you'll never see one in a fight. That would get them immediately excommunicated.

[dksuddeth]

Originally Posted by The_Jazz

dksuddeth, given that this was a one-room schoolhouse dedicated to the teaching of the Amish, who are recognized conscientious objectors, I think that you need to rethink your post. Saying that an Amish school should have a gun is like saying that babtists should wipe their asses with the Bible. Neither one is going to happen and both are disrespectful. Maybe you don't know much about the Old Order Amish, but you'll never see one in a fight. That would get them immediately excommunicated.

first, I wasn't referring to JUST the amish school shooting, this includes PA, WI, and CO as well as any others. I don't know what laws are on the books for Canada when it considers school zones, but they're draconian gun laws up there contributed to a defenseless student body as well. One should consider just how high the body count WOULD have been had there not been some officers in the immediate area on another call.
If the Amish refuse to see that there are some people out there with ill intentions that don't care about following laws against gun free school zones, rape, and murder then they are also contributing factors to the vulnerability of their children.
If we wish to see continuing stories of tragic school massacres, then by all means, keep the gun free school zone law, but if we'd like to be able to provide protection for the students while they are in a school, we need to be able to allow reasonable adults to carry in schools.

[The_Jazz]

Originally Posted by dksuddeth

first, I wasn't referring to JUST the amish school shooting, this includes PA, WI, and CO as well as any others. I don't know what laws are on the books for Canada when it considers school zones, but they're draconian gun laws up there contributed to a defenseless student body as well. One should consider just how high the body count WOULD have been had there not been some officers in the immediate area on another call.
If the Amish refuse to see that there are some people out there with ill intentions that don't care about following laws against gun free school zones, rape, and murder then they are also contributing factors to the vulnerability of their children.
If we wish to see continuing stories of tragic school massacres, then by all means, keep the gun free school zone law, but if we'd like to be able to provide protection for the students while they are in a school, we need to be able to allow reasonable adults to carry in schools.

So in other words, let's arm the Amish whether they like it not, whether they think it's a good idea or not or whether it will do a bit of difference or not. Obviously, it MIGHT have in this situation (there's no way that you, me or anyone else could know that), but generally speaking extremely rural schools like have virtually no chance of violent crime. The statistics back me up on this.

[paulskinback]

I didn't realise the TFP was a place to have an argument over petty things, *posters above*

I heard the news about this here in England, and there had been no mention previously of the other shootings so i'm surprised to read those. Its shocking to hear that this has happened and that it continues to. Reminds me of the shootings here (well Scotland) in Dunblanehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunblane_Massacre

Very, very sad indeed. There seems to be too much access to guns these days, and obviously more so in the States.

[Lady Sage]

Oh please people! Little girls are DEAD! Can we fight over something later?

It happened, it shouldnt have and to a culture of people who live a simple life.

I expect to see fighting in certain threads but this one? Shame!

[Elphaba]

President Bush has called a commission together to address the causes of the multiple school shootings. I don't know who the attendees will be, so I really can't say what potential change might occur, if any.

In my opinion, the massive media coverage of these murders encourages a copycat response of some kind among some people. Setting limits on this type of coverage is an infringement on the press and free spreech. Is there some other means of reducing the apparent connection between publicity and the attacks on schools?

[dksuddeth]

Originally Posted by The_Jazz

So in other words, let's arm the Amish whether they like it not, whether they think it's a good idea or not or whether it will do a bit of difference or not. Obviously, it MIGHT have in this situation (there's no way that you, me or anyone else could know that), but generally speaking extremely rural schools like have virtually no chance of violent crime. The statistics back me up on this.

Jazz, everything you know about me from what I've posted should tell you that I would NEVER force someone to carry a gun. I'm simply saying that by choosing to NEVER carry WILL leave you practically defenseless against someone that has ill intentions.

[Intense1]

This is a sad day and topic for me to finally end my TFP lurking career, but dang it all, hasn't it been universally accepted that schools where kids (from age 5 to 18) go and learn, socialize, learn how to get into mischief and begin to get a sense of where they're going in their newly emerging lives is supposed to be a place of safety? Where they don't have to fear being SHOT, for God's sake? Especially in an Amish community, where life is simpler and non-confrontational.

I mean, I'd almost feel a bit more "understanding" about this if the shooter had been an ex-communicated Amish man who was bitter about being cast out, but this was a milk-man who had nothing against the Amish community.

Makes me want to shout out to losers who are contemplating such a rampage to go and off themselves somewhere else. By themselves.

Nothing shouts "loser" more than someone who takes others down in their own descent.

Just my little rant. And I must say, from the other posters, it's quite a tame rant.

[Lady Sage]

Welcome into the light!!! Well met and well put!

[dksuddeth]

Originally Posted by Intense1

I mean, I'd almost feel a bit more "understanding" about this if the shooter had been an ex-communicated Amish man who was bitter about being cast out, but this was a milk-man who had nothing against the Amish community.

Nothing, and I mean nothing, could ever come close to justifying someone taking others lives because of a grudge.

Originally Posted by Intense1

Makes me want to shout out to losers who are contemplating such a rampage to go and off themselves somewhere else. By themselves.

Nothing shouts "loser" more than someone who takes others down in their own descent.

Just my little rant. And I must say, from the other posters, it's quite a tame rant.

We've been doing this for years.

[Superbelt]

Originally Posted by dksuddeth

first, I wasn't referring to JUST the amish school shooting, this includes PA, WI, and CO as well as any others. I don't know what laws are on the books for Canada when it considers school zones, but they're draconian gun laws up there contributed to a defenseless student body as well. One should consider just how high the body count WOULD have been had there not been some officers in the immediate area on another call.

Actually, the body count may have been only this asshole himself if the cops had taken longer to get there.

This guy didn't start shooting until police started moving in. He was planning on some protracted standoff. Even brought his own change of clothes and 'facilities' with him. He was still working on barring the door when the police were moving in. He gave them a ten count to back off, and didn't feel they were taking him seriously so started shooting before he even finished his count.

If they had gotten there later after he had already barricaded himself, a perimeter could have been formed and sharp shooters may have been able to take him out through a window (not many places to hide for long in a one room, natural lighted schoolhouse).

I was at the Hershey Medical Center when one of the girls was airlifted in. Hershey isn't more than a 45 minute drive for the parents. But one of the other girls was lifted to Philly. That's significantly longer.
Strange they wouldn't take the ride. They will ride in cars on 'necessity'.

[genuinegirly]

this is very sad. i do hope that the families of those involved are able to recover from such a shock.

[analog]

Originally Posted by Lady Sage

Oh please people! Little girls are DEAD! Can we fight over something later?

Well...

1. I know for a fact that none of the families of these Amish girls that unfortunately lost their lives is going to be logging on and happen across our community here online, having a discussion about the media in a thread that reveals the deaths of their children. Because they're Amish.

2. Are you saying "little girls are dead" with such determination because it's more important than if it were little boys? Or adult women? Or adult men?

3. Thousands of people die every day and, while this is tragic, we are having a conversation on the media's portrayal of such events. I don't think anyone is "disrespecting" the deaths of these people by having this conversation here.

And to shakran: I hope you didn't think I was trying to put sand in your bologna sandwich, I'm just having a conversation based on my time as a viewer of television and observer of the way media covers certain things.

[Lady Sage]

Take my comments how you wish.

It is bad enough that people had to die, worse that it was children.

People fighting in this thread is simply childish. People ought to have respect for the dead and grieving but oh well carry on, yell at eachother and take peoples words out of context. Its what its all about.

[Intense1]

Dear Analog.

Greetings - I have enjoyed reading your stuff in many threads, but I must (as a newbie does) respond to your latest on this one.

1. No, none of the families who lost their daughters will be reading or posting on this forum, but with every stinkin' school shooting where kids are killed, we all lose, because we're losing our future. When you think about it, if this was a one-room school house, and almost all the girls in school that day were shot - many of them are dead - it means that for this group of Amish families, a whole generation of future wives and mothers is dead, never to be resurrected. And for their community, this could be devastating.

2. The horror would be the same if it had been little boys killed, for sure. But you are equating the death of adults and that of children? Yes, both are heinous, but at least adults have the ability to fight back, and have lived a bit of their lives. Children are helpless, and because they are, they must be protected. Plus, there is something in every society that propels them to protect their young - it is so in humans, and it is so in animals, as well.

3. I'm sorry - I thought this was about discussing the event itself, not about the media's coverage of it. Hey, CNN, FOX and MSNBC will cover anything that is newsworthy, and this is indeed, newsworthy. When the killing of school children isn't newsworthy then the US will have become a truly heartless nation.

Shootings like this are horrible. It causes us to ask if we are really worthy of being called "human beings". But to see it unfold with children as the victims, it makes that answer so much harder.

[ShaniFaye]

Originally Posted by dksuddeth

Nothing, and I mean nothing, could ever come close to justifying someone taking others lives because of a grudge.

We've been doing this for years.

I dont think Intense1 was advocating justification....we are a society that longs to understand why things happen...we look for anything that our "brain" can say aha....it makes more sense now, not oh well...he was justified in what he did.

[The_Jazz]

Originally Posted by Lady Sage

Take my comments how you wish.

It is bad enough that people had to die, worse that it was children.

People fighting in this thread is simply childish. People ought to have respect for the dead and grieving but oh well carry on, yell at eachother and take peoples words out of context. Its what its all about.

Lady Sage, since I'm obviously one of the folks your comments are aimed at, I respectfully ask you what the point of this thread is if not discussion of the events and what can be done to prevent similar ones in the future, if anything. If this thread was simply for statements of grief and remorse, I apologize for my threadjack, but I think that's a pretty far departure from the foundations of TFP. Obviously this is a horrible event, but I believe that discussion is part of the healing process, and what was going on above is a discussion, not a fight.

dksuddeth, after all this time, I think that I'm pretty well versed in your stance on guns , but I think that we're running into some First Amendment issues when you're talking about arming the Amish, Quakers or other conscientious objector religious groups. What I don't understand is how you can justify legislating something like this.

[dksuddeth]

Originally Posted by The_Jazz

dksuddeth, after all this time, I think that I'm pretty well versed in your stance on guns , but I think that we're running into some First Amendment issues when you're talking about arming the Amish, Quakers or other conscientious objector religious groups. What I don't understand is how you can justify legislating something like this.

I'm not arguing for legislation to force teachers to be armed, I'm for repealing legislation that forces teachers and students to be vulnerable to any madman that decides to 'vent' in a school. This incident should be a wake up call to all, that nobody is sacrosanct and anyone that wants to, can kill at will in a school for the 5, 10, or 15 minutes it takes for police to show up and have the gunman kill himself.

[Leto]

Originally Posted by dksuddeth

.... I don't know what laws are on the books for Canada when it considers school zones, but they're draconian gun laws up there contributed to a defenseless student body as well. One should consider just how high the body count WOULD have been had there not been some officers in the immediate area on another call...

draconian???

Anybody can own a gun here. It's like driving a car. You have to pass tests.

The police in Montreal resplonded as they should have. There is no, absolutely no need to have armed personnel walking our schools. Or buildings.

Actually (as a side note) once, in the Eaton Centre McDonalds, I was eating my lunch, when a Brinks (armoured truck) delivery guy stood outside the kitchen door, put his foot on the chair opposite me, and pushed his hip out so that his gun was about 12 inches form my face. I told him to take it elsewhere, and when he didn't move, I went to the management and complained that there was no need to have guns brandished in my face while eating. net result: cash pickups at that McDonalds have been moved to off hours.

YOu can arm society like the lawless west of days of old, but these losers look for scenes that are convenient. the montreal shooting could have happened in a mall.

[dksuddeth]

Originally Posted by Leto

draconian???

Anybody can own a gun here. It's like driving a car. You have to pass tests.

Where is the logic in requiring 'tests' to provide for your own self defense?

Originally Posted by Leto

The police in Montreal resplonded as they should have. There is no, absolutely no need to have armed personnel walking our schools. Or buildings.

I'm blown away. One would think that the latest school shooting in canada would tell people differently.

Originally Posted by Leto

YOu can arm society like the lawless west of days of old, but these losers look for scenes that are convenient. the montreal shooting could have happened in a mall.

where people think guns shouldn't be 'brandished', or even carried and when they are, people call the management. Is there a no guns policy in your malls up there?

[Elphaba]

Originally Posted by Superbelt

Actually, the body count may have been only this asshole himself if the cops had taken longer to get there.

This guy didn't start shooting until police started moving in. He was planning on some protracted standoff. Even brought his own change of clothes and 'facilities' with him. He was still working on barring the door when the police were moving in. He gave them a ten count to back off, and didn't feel they were taking him seriously so started shooting before he even finished his count.

If they had gotten there later after he had already barricaded himself, a perimeter could have been formed and sharp shooters may have been able to take him out through a window (not many places to hide for long in a one room, natural lighted schoolhouse).

It was reported that this "person" had sexual assault in mind for the girls, before killing them. I didn't think this attack could be any worse until reading that.

[liquidlight]

This is attrocious and I feel for the families, things like this are why I believe that teachers and administrators should be armed. . . appropriately.

Make the program optional, require testing and certification with a level of at least expert marksman, and give them a pay increase for completing the certification. Wouldn't it be amazing to watch how quickly kids started behaving more respectfully when they have no idea whether or not the teacher is packing? And the first time a kid pulled a gun on a teacher and had one pulled back I'd be willing to bet that the number of gun incidents involving schools would drop to pretty much zero almost immediately.

Let the flaming commence.

[Carno]

I don't understand how this type of thing happens... don't these crazies know that guns are banned in schools!?

[analog]

Originally Posted by Intense1

Dear Analog.

Greetings - I have enjoyed reading your stuff in many threads, but I must (as a newbie does) respond to your latest on this one.

Awesome! Thanks for reading

...but with every stinkin' school shooting where kids are killed, we all lose, because we're losing our future. When you think about it, if this was a one-room school house, and almost all the girls in school that day were shot - many of them are dead - it means that for this group of Amish families, a whole generation of future wives and mothers is dead, never to be resurrected. And for their community, this could be devastating.

Right now, there are 6,561,366,423 people on this planet. I am not attempting to marginalize or downplay the horrible deaths of these people... but saying that one community suffers because of 6 deaths is thinking way too narrow about humans as a race (plus i'm pretty sure 6 people isn't that many even to the Amish). When we approach the killing numbers of Stalin, or Hitler, we can resume talks about making dents in generational losses.

...But you are equating the death of adults and that of children?

Yes. A human life is a human life. There is no difference.

Yes, both are heinous, but at least adults have the ability to fight back, and have lived a bit of their lives. Children are helpless, and because they are, they must be protected.

A room full of hostage-at-gunpoint adults are just as helpless as a room full of hostage-at-gunpoint children... and we're not talking about protecting live kids, we're talking about whether dead kids mean more than dead "adults".

I've said it many times before, but I find it absurd and horrid that people would weigh human life at all, let alone weigh one person against another and call one more important. Children are not more important.

If you really want to argue lineage and reproduction (which I think is completely besides the point), then I would point out that all the children in the world can't reproduce- it takes an adult. Hypothetically kill some children, you've still got plenty of adults to make more. If you kill adults, then you not only can't reproduce for many years, but there's no one to teach and raise the children. This has never been a factor in my argument, so don't pick it apart. I'm just countering the argument that you "lose a generation" of people when kids die, since that was put forth as a reason why children would be more important. I find that to be an illogical assertion.

Plus, there is something in every society that propels them to protect their young - it is so in humans, and it is so in animals, as well.

Again, this whole story and the dead children have nothing to do with protecting. They're already gone. We're talking about the story of their death, not how to protect them more. Incidentally, there's little or nothing that could have been done to prevent this totally random act of violence, short of every teacher in the country being armed with an Uzi. And yes, but many animals also eat their young, abandon their young, and kill their young if they feel threatened by them- or, in the case of lions, if they take over a pride of female lions, they will kill all the young who are not their offspring. Nature can be a bitch, too.

3. I'm sorry - I thought this was about discussing the event itself, not about the media's coverage of it. Hey, CNN, FOX and MSNBC will cover anything that is newsworthy, and this is indeed, newsworthy. When the killing of school children isn't newsworthy then the US will have become a truly heartless nation.

I never said it wasn't newsworthy, I said the deaths of children are hyped far more than that of anyone else. of course it's newsworthy.

Thanks for the responses, I'm enjoying this discussion!

[ngdawg]

It's a very simple two-tiered thought process.
1) children are not supposed to die before those older than they are-it's against the natural order of things.
2) children are innocents and when caught up in some psychopath's warped plan, become today's headline.
We 're angry when kids are abused by pedophiles, we're angry when kids are exploited for some adult's gain. Because they are defenseless, yes, but more because they are innocent and know nothing of the horrors that befall them until it's too late. There is HUGE difference between the death of a child and one of an adult, regardless of the why's and how's and when they're the result of senseless violence, the tragedy takes on an entirely different face.