5 Years After Columbine: Give it a Rest Already
 

LINK

Questions still torment Columbine parents

Tuesday, April 20, 2004 Posted: 11:22 AM EDT (1522 GMT)


LITTLETON, Colorado (AP) -- For nearly five years, unsettling details have trickled out from dusty file cabinets and evidence vaults about just how much authorities and others knew before Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold slaughtered 12 classmates and a teacher at Columbine High School.

Misplaced police reports, prophetic videos made by the killers at the school itself, a father's secret journal, a Web site and essay promising death -- families of the victims say the warning signs were clear.

"How many times have we heard this was everything, only for something else to come out?" asked Dawn Anna, mother of murdered student Lauren Townsend. "The first time we heard that was back in 1999."

Some 30,000 documents in the case have been released over the years and 10,418 pieces of evidence ranging from a tooth fragment to propane tanks were put on public display this year.

Local authorities, the school district, a state commission and the Colorado attorney general have all investigated, but the question remains: Why didn't someone -- a parent, a sheriff's deputy, a teacher, a fellow student -- step in before the suicidal gunmen went on their rampage?

Victims' families have tried to get answers: Some sued the sheriff's department, the school district and the parents of the killers. They won damages, but a federal judge sealed many records.

At the heart of most questions is the Jefferson County Sheriff's Office, which responded to the massacre and led the official investigation. Its track record is spotty at best.

Downplayed threats
After the shootings, sheriff's officials downplayed tips about Harris making death threats -- even though they relied on them to get a search warrant for his home hours after the bloodshed.

Randy and Judy Brown, whose sons were threatened by Harris, made several attempts to get the sheriff's department to investigate.

The tips started in 1997, when one of the Browns' two sons gave a deputy a printout of a Web site in which Harris boasted of going on nighttime missions with Klebold, firing weapons and vandalizing property.

The Web site later included boasts by Harris and Klebold about building pipe bombs and referred to "ground zero."

The tip was forwarded to former sheriff's investigator John Hicks. A warrant was drafted to search the Harris home, but it was never executed. A report by Hicks was found tucked inside a training manual just six months ago, a stunning revelation that prompted new Sheriff Ted Mink to ask Colorado Attorney General Ken Salazar to investigate.

Salazar said he found no negligence by the sheriff's department, though he found at least 15 instances of contact between law enforcement and one or both of the killers.

Warning signs
Other warning signs included violent videos made by Harris and Klebold for a class project and an essay by Klebold in another class describing a Columbine-like slaying of "preps." In one video project five months before the rampage, the two stalk through Columbine itself, offering hit man services to classmates tired of being bullied.

Harris and Klebold were arrested for a break-in a year before the attack, but parole officers were never told about the death threats tied to the teens. Both completed probation and were deemed to be likely candidates for success as adults.

"There was overwhelming evidence. Columbine should have been prevented," said Brian Rohrbough, whose son, Daniel, was one of the first to die. "We cannot turn back the hands of time, but we can put all this information out on the table. ... We can make this an example of what went wrong so that we can prevent it from happening again."

Secret information
Most excruciating for some of those seeking answers is the fact that some information is being kept secret. The Harris and Klebold families were forced to give depositions to settle a lawsuit, but what they said remains sealed.

Joe Kechter, whose son, Matt, died at Columbine, said the lawsuit was settled because families were running out of money to fight the insurance companies whose homeowners' policies covered the Klebolds and Harrises.

"I hope some day the Klebolds and Harrises agree to get this information out so it can save other kids lives in the future," Kechter said. "I am doing this in respect of my son. I feel the police and the whole system let him down that day. I am not going to let him down."

The school district's investigation also remains confidential because officials say its release would violate attorney-client privilege. Salazar's investigation remains open, though family members don't expect big news from the new U.S. Senate candidate.

"I really don't think we are going to get any more answers," said Al Velasquez, whose son, Kyle, was among those killed.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------


My thoughts:

The media in it's usual frenzy is making the parents of Columbine victims another set of perpetual victims for it's own profit.

Consider how many people die tragically every year and that the families have to eventually move on; but not Columbine.

No, we have to rehash rehash rehash, because some people cannot accept the fact that there are evils and tragedies that happen in the world.

Could Columbine have been prevented?

I honestly don't know.

But I do know that holding on to any thing like this for 5 years with this intensity is not healthy.

As a member of that "media in its usual frenzy", allow me to offer a little insight.

Five year anniversaries of any historic event are fairly common to observe - whether tragic or uplifting. In the case of Columbine, it's a particularly fitting time to look back at the events.

Many court documents, etc. related to the killings are just being released in this time frame, giving people a better insight into what happened and (possibly) how to prevent things like this from happening again. More importantly, though, this is a good time to follow-up and see what happened with the survivors to this tragedy - all of whom should have graduated by this point. Case in point: The kid who was hanging out of the window with a gunshot wound (the picture that made every newspaper in the country) had to teach himself to walk again, but went on to become valedictorian of the school and will graduate college this year and enter the business world.

Anniversaries don't have to be all about rehashing the past. They're a good - and natural - time to remember the fallen, try to figure out what lessons were learned and check in with the people who were there (that want to talk about it) to see how they've moved on with their lives.

hindsight is always 20/20 and one can always connect dots when they know the end picture.

I think my focus is that we are forcing the familys to continually re-live the tragedy without really healing.

So while I agree that retrospects can serve a good purpose, we have not STOPPED looking at Columbine, so how can there be a retrospective?

Well, I would argue that we did stop looking at Columbine for a few years when there was nothing new information-wise. For about six-months to (generously) a year after the shooting, it was very much in the news. Then, it faded to the background - certainly not disappearing from people's minds, but not pinging the radar of the national media, with the exception of the one year anniversary, when there were ceremonies. (And, it's worth noting, the date was marked in Littleton today by closing the school for a day.)

All that said, I've neither seen nor heard any complaints from anyone in the Columbine area. Most are happy their children haven't been forgotten - and are working hard to make sure this sort of thing doesn't happen again. If there's any family who would rather it not be mention, it's one of the two that claimed the shooters as their son.

thats what I was thinking while reading this article. that and the fact that you can have all the clues in the world but they have to all get into the right hands to do you any good. its the same problem our intelligence services face. the answers are there for anyone to see.......IF they know to look for it.

Yep, absolutely.

I can hardly understand the torture that "reliving" that nightmare is for the parents and other children involved in that tragedy. If we as parents, if the law enforcement agencys can learn something from this so that we are better equiped to prevent a similar tragedy in the future than the deaths of those young people will not be in vain.

What bother's me most is all the blaming that seems to be going on. There was a slip in many hands. All of the blame belongs to no single group. As a teacher I found that the students who excelled the most were not necessarily the smartest ones. The ones who excelled were the ones who's parents communicated with me regularly, who were more involved with the children, and the ones who know where their children were or what they were doing the most. Thing is they couldn't have helped their child as much without me the teacher, and without the school authorities. They were also the parents who greeted and talked to other parents when they would come to school meetings or pick up their kids. They were involved with their children, the classroom, the school, and their child's friends and parents. It takes a collective effort to help our children grow up healthy physically and emotionally.

Well just fyi, you have now.

I feel comfortable speaking for my friend as well, who has a Littleton address not far from Columbine.

Will you say the same thing on September 11, 2006?

Mr Mephisto

That's fair enough. I certainly see the frustration in having your area known for just one horrific event. It would be like Atlanta only being known for the Olympic Park bombing (though, admitedly, the ramifications of that were significantly lower than Columbine).

Might I ask if you were either a student in the school at the time of the shootings or a parent of a student at that time? [Edit: Looking at the birthdate in your profile, I'm guessing you definitely weren't a student. Perhaps a teacher?]

Another tragedy I wish they'd give a rest: Jon Benet Ramsey. PLEASE shut up about little Jon Benet. No one believes in letting the read 'rest in peace'...

Probably, considering I've already spoken out agains the "victim's fund".

Healing only occurs if you stop picking at the wound.

No, too old to be a student there and too young at the time to have a child there.

Just a Denver native who's had friends that went to Columbine.

i dont' feel that this so much making the parents out as victims, but as making the point that police didn't live up to their own mantra "to protect and to serve". Did they i[]protect[/i] the kids at the school? No. Did they serve the taxpaying citizens of Littleton? No.

they had all the signs and leads that something might happen, and yet, they did nothing.

A lot of the 'rehashing" is being done <u>by</u> the families.
In addition to wanting to know why the sheriff's department failed to act on numerous complaints regarding Harris, they also want to know why it took law enforcement officers <i>three hours</i> to enter a building when they knew wounded people were bleeding to death inside. Many people think that Dave Sanders (the teacher killed) died needlessly because of the reluctance of the police to enter the building.

I don't think it's time yet for "Let bygones be bygones." There's still too many unanswered questions.

Seeing as how you're from that area, though - I imagine it's more incessant coverage than the rest of the country gets - and I can see your point from that perspective.

Being from Colorado, too Lebell I know how you feel. My classes, at least philosophy and psychology classes use Columbine as a case study. Just the other day I went to the garden store to buy some columbine flowers (cause I thought they were beautiful flowers finding them in the wild as a kid), and while at the store someone told me "Remembering Columbine?" It probably came off wrong, but I set them down, and grabbed some tulips instead.

The 9/11 Commission is all about proving that we didn't do enough before the event ever really happened. I think, as a nation, we thrive on blaming others when hindsight is all we can count on.

Columbine? Nope, we didn't do enough. Parents, teachers, the police, or the sheriffs could not have seen what would have happened unless one source had all the information at the same time.

We certainly won't forget. Sometimes we wish we could, but the media will always be there to remind us.

i just get sick of having to see the same story all the time when i didnt even care the first time. (yes i am insensitive & yes i am comfortable with that.)

Fair enough!


Mr Mephisto

I think Lebell and I have a different view on this then the rest... We live in Colorado. I've had to live/relive this damn thing everyday since it happened. Not a day goes by that I don't see a bumper sticker on someone's car that says "We are all Columbine." What the fuck does that mean?

No matter where I go and no matter who I talk to the topic comes up. They all want to know if I knew anyone that died or if I knew the killers. My answer is always, "Yes."

I'm a Killer. I’m a Victim. I got picked on and wanted to kill fellow students. I picked on others that could have come back and blown my fuckin’ head off. Were there signs that this was gonna happen? Yes. Are there questions that have gone unanswered? Yes. Could this have been stopped? No. These are teenagers. These are kids that don’t belong to anyone or anything. Not a single teenager in the history of the modern world hasn’t wanted to beat the living shit outta something or someone. They acted out. They showed everyone that walked around blind everyday that this shit happens. And it’s your kids that are causing the problems. I dealt with the same shit they did everyday. They just got their hands on the weapons before I did. It’s that simple.

Welcome to Colorado. We Breed Killers.

That's interesting.

I'm still not tired of hearing about the whole 'Branch Dividian' thing. I think that when something traumatic happens to our society as a whole, it gets incorporated into the fabric of our culture. It's all part of our shared experience.


Just think about all of the other stuff we never stop talking about...

These sort of things are morbid, but ultimately prove what interesting creatures we are.

I think, in America at least, we have a morbid fascination with death. Especially the deaths concerning the "innocents and babes." We erect monuments to nearly every cause and every victim of tragic circumstance. We link every present tragedy with similiar events in the past, creating an endless cycle of misfortune and never ending grief.

I think there is a time for sorrow. There is a time for consolation. There comes a time, however, when we need to let the past be the past and move on to other things.

The wound that is Columbine has had 5 years to fester and rot; it's time to let that one go and move on to the kids who are still living.

Imagine theres no people.....it's easy if you try.


All I am saaaaying.....is give peace a chance.

*standing ovation*


oh...and no sarcasm intended or implied. /disclaimer.

But, if the ends justify the means, and we -do- happen to learn something from all the extended investigation, don't you think that people would be grateful if something like it could be prevented, even just once?
[sarcasm] Might as well forget 9-11, Hiroshima, The Holocaust, the Montreal Massacre, ... I could go on and on [/sarcasm]

oh, and ToK, it's not just you. The killers are everywhere. Wouldn't you like to think you could stop just one, instead of claiming "boys will be boys"?

Sorry.. got a little snarky there.

Can't agree.

With no intention to trade or compare, I'm from Liverpool. A Liverpool Football Club supporter.

In 1989 95 LFC fans lost their lives in a stadium disaster, largely because a section of the police regarded football fans - and people from liverpool in particular - as subhuman. Salt was rubbed into these wounds by national tabloids printing authority-inspired LIES concerning the behaviour and conduct of the fans on that day.

15 years on, the wound is still raw for everyone who watched the game live. Everyone who had a relative there and the families and friends of those who passed away.

Yes, there are those who are sick of the continual coverage. There are those who believe that 15 years on, everyone should just let it go and move on.

For the majority though, while the truth is still hidden, while those responsible are allowed to hide behind the establishment and avoid responsibility lessons _cannot_ be learned and healing and forgiveness can't even be _considered_, let alone begun.

The similarity, to me, is in the lies and/or cover-ups.

Hillsborough Disaster

If i'm being irrelevent in some people's eyes then fair enough, I see a parallel. Why should the injured forget their wounds when there is no full and frank disclosure of the facts, no blame fully accepted, no lessons openly learned and no honest forgiveness sought?

My $0.02

I don't like the idea of belaboring a point. However, in this case, I think the message is "what can we learn to make our schools safer?" As an educator, I have seen a shift in how we respond to bullying as a result of Columbine. It may be a little overboard -- at the same time it is necessary to learn from our mistakes. Not responding to the Columbine students the way we should have is a tragedy. Not learning from the situation would be even worse. We cannot pretend this didn't happen -- any more than we can pretend the concentration camps didn't exist. History gives us the chance to learn.

Well said, and before Columbine happened I'm sure everyone found it hard to believe 2 students would do something/go through with something this horrific, even with the warning signs.

Killers don't need to be stopped. They need to be taught.

In other news, new developments in the Jon-Benet Ramsey murder case.....

Actually (thought it wasn't articulated properly), I meant "prevent a killing", not "stop a killer"... point taken, though.

That was seriously profound.

I think it is more the victims and their families who keep these things going rather than the media.

I live in Oklahoma City, the bombing of the Murrah building happened 9 years ago April 19th. I still see the "We Will Never Forget..." bumper stickers, we have a marathon every year commemorating it, there is a whole huge memorial where the building used to stand and a museum dedicated to preserving the memories.

The media did not create all of these things. The media does not recruit people to come to the memorial and cry. I think guthmund is right- people just have a morbid fascination with tragedy. Maybe it's a way of feeling connected to others?

Good parallel and I think you're right on about that.

OKC bombing- same thing. OKC is trying a man already convicted in federal court of the bombing of the Murrah building. Victims weren't satisfied with that, they wanted to try him here so he can get the death penalty. It's all about getting closure so maybe those that can move on, will.

"I don't mean this in a disrespectful way/but Columbine happens in the ghetto everyday" - LL Cool J

I think the reason that people havent "gotten over" Columbine, is that none of the lessons seem to have been learned, the question to come out of it surely is that should it really be so easy for emotionally disturbed kids to lay their hands on a lethal arsenal of firearms?

America - or at least the right wing part of America - seems to have its love affair with guns, so there is a choice I guess, if the freedom to own guns is so important to the nation, you will have to bare many more tragedies such as this one. I suppose the parents must feel that their children's lives were worth so much, that the loss of them really should make people start to think that these guns shouldnt be out there that this shouldnt be allowed to happen again... most parents love their children a great deal so I think most of us can appreciate how they feel.

For those who have no love, well of course its sad, but its easy to rationalise it away... and if those kids hadnt have had any guns, they just could have killed all their classmates with a kitchen knife, or a bat, and its people who kill people not guns, and... well all the rest we hear so often from the gun lobby.

What lessons are there to be learned from a couple of sociopathic personalities? I suppose it is worth a footnote to abnormal psychology. Extending the behavior of 2 individuals and drawing conclusions that are then applied to a nation-size population is the height of hyperbole.

Arm every teacher.

I'm serious.

The lesson is surely who easy it was for a couple of sociopaths to get a whole load of guns?

No.
To take freedoms away from millions of people because 2 murderers abused them is not a sensible way to go.

I knew somebody would feel the need to get on a soapbox about guns and why they are responsible and not the kids and their parents.

I could really rant, but it would only send my blood pressure up.

IMHO, the lessons are many. One, kids need to be taken seriously. Bullying is a real problem. Being a teenager is difficult enough with support -- those without, (or with mental illness) need more. Maybe there is a time to seperate "kids." (Or, least restrictive environment isn't always the best choice for special ed. kids.) And I'm sure there is more.

Another thing I've been thinking about is how things really haven't changed that much. There were gangs in the 50's, civil rights and hippies in the 60's, etc. Each had their own element of violance. I believe we are seeing less violance in schools right now because of the war. People have a "safe" and "acceptable" place to focus their energy. What happens when that changes? Unfortunately, violance is a way of human kind -- I wish it weren't true; but history states otherwise.

The issue is guns, and this tragedy happened becaise of guns, not sociopaths... without guns they would have just been two angry kids with no means to do what they did.

Like I said, American people have a choice, if the so called freedom to bare arms is so important, then you will have more tragedies like this, and the parents of the dead shall be the voice of your conscience, of course they can be ignored or rationalised away, but that is what they are.

The Columbine mass murder happened because it was so easy for the kids to get guns, and as long as it remains so easy, the same thing will happen again, there will ALWAYS be sociopathic personalities and angry people, in most countries they are not allowed to be armed to the teeth.

Its not just the guns, its the whole nature of white, anglo saxon based societies (america leading the way, with britain et al rapidly catching up).

Most of the world has very liberal gun laws.

There is something peculiar to the unforgiving, terribly fearful and vengeful societies in the u.s., britain and a handful of other nations with a similar leaning that lends itself to producing large scale acts of terrible violence.

We as people love to be reminded of pain and suffering for some sick reason.

I will just say that I have history to back up my assertion that this is nonsense and then I am done with it.

This didn't happen because of guns.

This didn't happen because these kids were crazy.

This didn't happen because these kids listened to Marilyn Manson.

This didn't happen because of bad parents.

This didn't happen because no one tried to stop it.


This happened because two kids got picked on at school to the point that in their minds the only way to solve it was murder. It could have been done with a knife, car, bombs (which they used), or anything else really. They could have killed someone with a fuckin' screwdriver. You gonna speak out against screwdrivers now? Do we need to ban thoes too? They can be used to kill someone. Fuck the guns. They did this because they had to. It was time for two free-thinking kids to stand up and fight. I mean that.

Well, that really isnt true is it OK?

If two people went on a killing spree armed with screwdrivers its not really possible they could have killed 13 people in one attack. There are many ways of killing people, but guns are designed, created, built and intended to kill people.

2 sociopaths with a chemistry set or some fertilizer and gasoline could wreak havoc even worse than that possible with guns. Witness Oklahoma City. If one doesn't have access to guns, there are a host of murderous options.

This is an endless debate. I've stated nothing more than the obvious. Those in favor of less freedom and more government control will always be with us.

How much freedom should people have then, with regards to weaponry?

handguns? rifles? machine guns? grenade launchers? where is the line, what does the government have the right to say people cannot have?

And freedom is not a simple construct, the freedom of some people creates the unfreedom of others (ie if I am free to do what I want, you would not be free to own a gun)... the goal is surely safety, security, and a society that people can pursue happiness.

We have that society.
Personally, I'm not ready to dismantle it on shot-in-the-dark solutions to solving social problems.

What these two boys did was born of pain. Desperate, agonizing pain. No one gave a shit about them or what they thought. From what I've understood, the symtoms that something was wrong with Harris were quickly suppressed with anti-depressants, offering then, the illusion that all was right.

And the masochistic lamentations that permeate our society five years after...is our guilty conscience at work as we whip ourselves over how we let two innocents turn into demons before our very eyes.

buuuuuuuuut Imaybewrong.

With enough rage and force I'll kill 13 people by myself with nothing more then a screwdriver. You get pushed hard enough you will resort to anything to get the job done. Even if it takes years... you will take the life of the person that fucked with you.

Amen.

As an evil gun-owning American, I will add a comment: Those 2 (as well as their accomplaices) broke numerous federal laws before they even set foot on school property. If you can logically explain to me how more laws would have stopped them, I will be more tham willing to listen.

And that's all I'm saying on that subject.

I got picked on mercilessly in high school. I got over it, I went on with my life.

Perhaps we should control fertilizer better, a registration system might work. Make it a federal crime to own unregistered fertilizer. Some really forward thinking states would then impose that mandatory fertilizer locks be installed at the factory before that fertilizer could be sold in their state. Start a zero-tolerance fertilizer program where crimes committed involving fertilizer receive a minimum 20 year sentence. Anti-fertilizer groups would allow their lawns to wither and die as a show of support. Pro fertilizer groups would sport bumper stickers that read A gun is a tool. Nothing more or less. A state that attempts to remove tools from the populace is exercising the worst form of tyranny.

I'll restate to stay on-topic:

Yes, very easily. The American people must be disarmed. The laws must be changed to make it criminal to own, sell, distribute or buy a gun. The goal is simply that there are no guns in America, we disarm the farmers, we disarm the police, we disarm the criminals, and we disarm the ordinary people - the only people who will be allowed to bare firearms of any kind will be the army.

And yes, the sociopaths may still try to go on the rampage with screwdrivers, or home made bombs, but we will make their job much harder because we will deny them access to instruments which are designed to kill people.

If their were no guns, if the only way to get a gun was to get it on the black market, and it cost at least $1500 and owning one was a federal crime... these two kids wouldnt have had the guns, the Columbine massacre wouldnt have happened, period, simple fact. The kids that died wouldnt be dead today. If we disarmed the people, those kids would still be alive.

But to most Americans it seems the right to own guns is more important than those kids lives, or all the other victimes lives... and of course most gun owners arent killers, most of them are perfectly decent law adiding people... but a gun is a tool designed to kill, and if it is widely distributed their will be more murders, we know this... the gun lobby doesnt want to know it, and that is why they are the parents wont shut up, they have become the conscience of America, they are the one's saying "well sure YOU never did any harm with your gun, but the fact you have it is the reason my child is dead, and how is it worth it?"

So of course the gun lobby want them to shut up, of course they dont want to hear it, but free speech is the American mantra, and you cannot silence the voice of your own collective conscience, because without an outlet for the collective guilt everyone would have to carry it in their heart.

Pray tell, who is this royal "we" you keep using?

The last time I checked, we kicked England out with guns they didn't want us to have.

Well, whoever they are, I'll not lay down for their (or your) misguided, misinformed plans, not while I draw breath.

Two more final (really final) thoughts.

"An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject."

and

Molon Labe.

The civil war was fought mostly between English, German, French and Dutch settlers and their governments, it was not a war between nations because America only became a nation when those settlers were able to expel the British colonial government.. in fact the American's were defeated by the English, German, French & Dutch settlers because the settlers had guns and the Native American people didnt. America lost the war of conquest because of firepower, not won it - thats why it became a European colony in the first place.

When I see "we" must disarm the people, I mean that the government must, the safety of the people is the state's main objective, and the people are not safe when they are so heavily armed and when 10,000 people a year are being shot to death.

Because I am English, and I have always lived in a culture where hardly anyone has a gun, it is difficult for to understand the emotional attachment people have to guns, I accept... when people say "you will only take my gun from my cold dead hand" they cant be just saying "look, I really need this gun to live my everyday life, I use it all the time to do this and that..." it is a very emotional attachment, and that is what has to be broken, that is what the tears of the parents of dead high school kids are trying to wash away. Why does anyone need a gun?

To hunt? Well, I doubt that many gun owners actually do hunt, but those that do dont need to, the state can give them paintball guns and they can go to special centres and have exactly the same experience, without killing and maiming wild animals. If anyone genuinely needs to hunt for food, they should be receive extra welfare so that they can buy enough food to eat which is slaughtered in the conventional way.

For self protection... but this is the ultimate prisoners dilemma... if you have a gun, then the burgular needs a gun the police needs a gun... if they are all disarmed, then we have the same situation and just less fatalities.

For trophy display? I understand a few people like to collect things, and I have no problem with them collecting guns that have been altered so that they cannot fire.

What other reasons are there that people actually need to own a gun for?

I am a criminal.

We are all criminals.


Get the fuck over it.

As Art stated, there are many, many other ways to kill. Most notably, they could have just set fires. That's quite easy.

As King stated, 2 guys with as little as screwdrivers could do a hell of a lot of damage. I guess we'll have to outlaw anything remotely pointy, as well. We're really screwed now.

Also, driving a car or truck through a crowd would kill a HELL of a lot more than 13 people, especially if you spread it out over time.

I'll also add that they made numerous pipe bombs and planted them on campus, and THEY were supposed to be the main source of the carnage. Fortunately, they sucked and the bombs never went off. You don't use guns to make bombs, you use things that are very available to anyone who wants them.

Amen.

To protect myself and my family from the likes of you.

I understand that you have no interest in using any sort of gun, but if you go to a firing range, shoot at targets, and then go paintballing wiht your friends, I guarantee that the experience is not even close to comparable. Thanks to safety equipment, paintball is an almost risk-free sport and more comparable to tag an dcapture the flag than to hunting. Hunting is about tracking and killing an animal for food. It encompasses the enjoyment of tracking and shooting your game, then preparing and cooking it, and then eating something that you worked hard to get.

what's baseball without bats?

i blame the maker of black trenchcoats and would rather drink the screwdriver...

I think many sad things will continue to happen like this, 9/11, the war in iraq... these things will happen, and not until afterwards will people start to investigate to see what could've happened differently, how it COULD have been prevented..etc. Much like the 9/11 commission is doing right now, going over all the info th gov't had before 9/11.

I know that they are able to stop many horrible things from happening, but they can't stop them all.. no matter if there are "pre-warning" signs or not.

Bad things will always happen, but I think everyone learns from them and moves on in some way, shape, or form.

Ya know, jsut once I would like to see a news story that went someting like this:

The above story is completely false, but the point is, you will never see this story in the news because it doesn't sell. Just like you don't hear about people driving safely on the roads...no one cares and it doesn't sell.

There are to many good stories of things that never get reported in our society because the don't sell.

I'm getting pretty tired of people not taking responsibility for their actions. It's always someone else's fault. Bull shit. It is not the fault of an inanimate object. It is the fault of people who make bad decisions because they either don't know better or can't comprehend the consequenses of their actions. Otherwise I could say it wasn't my fault I wrecked my truck...it must be Fords fault because they built it.

And the reason America has 10,000 gun deaths a year and the UK has about 150 is this.

pop great britain 60 million
pop usa 294 million

sounda about right Hanxter, so do the math 60 million into 300 million vs 150 into 10000

As I recall, that 10,000 is a Michael Moore/Bowling for Columbine statistic, right?

that's pretty mean-spirited, making people do math on a weekend. that's why people get shot.

next time can the condescension and do the math yourself. it makes your argument sound better to include numbers instead of "so do the math"

Pardon me for being thick but what is the "this" you are referring to?

I think I got the 10,000 figure from someone who posted it here, but I remember Moore quoted about 11,000, I also remember Bill Hicks quoting 12,000.

And what I mean by "this" is this whole attitude of being so emotionally attached to gun ownership... the fact that people seem to feel it is an inalienable human right to own lethal weapons.

I know, we crazy Americans value Free Speech and The Right to Keep and Bear Arms so much that we made it our First and Second Amendments of our Constitution.

Why would anyone feel that the right to speak your mind is important enough to defend with firearms?

How fucked up is that?!?

:rolleyes:

Meanwhile the statistic in Bowling For Columbine includes statistics where people were killed for defensive purposes, suicide, etc.

Strange Famous, have you ever lived in a wilderness type area? How about an American wilderness where you have animals like bears or wolves? Sure, you might not be attacked by either one, but if you ever come face to face with them and they start coming towards you, you'd want to be holding a nice big gun.

I don't know of the exact percentage, but I do know a VERY large majority of gun owners in Wisconsin hunt.

I will say that your comment on hunting is entirely ignorant and doesn't require rebuttal.

Why not? I would love to see this poll question to every person in the USA: Have you ever pointed a loaded gun at someone, and if so for what reasons? I can tell you the top two answers. 1) No 2) Yes, because I'm a police officer.

I dont want to be accused of taking the thread off course, so maybe hunting is something to discus in another thread?

But with regards to the legacy of Columbine, the police are one of the first groups that will need to be disarmed, if America ever decides to rid itself of guns.

Considering that the thread was about how sick and tired I am of the incescent rehash of Columbine and not about whether or not guns caused it, I think you've already taken it off course.

"Oh my God! Lift me up out of this illusion Lord. Heal my perception that I may know only reality, and only You"

I think Columbine and gun control are pretty much tied together.

Interestingly enough, that was precisely one of the very first things Hitler did. And precisely why it's one of the first 10 Amendments to the Constitution, labelled the "Bill of Rights." Without that right, it's pretty damn difficult to protect yourself from some military coup.

I also find it interesting that you're conveniently ignoring the fact that the logic that all guns should be universally outlawed is no different from the logic that all cars should be outlawed because they can be used - illegally, just as guns are - to kill people. Cars are lethal weapons. Trust me - if I wanted, I could easily kill at least 50 people in about half an hour right here in the city.

How about we disarm the criminals first. Taking away the police's weapons first is like saying "ok, here's a whiffle bat; randy johnson will be pitching to you"

Also, if people are determined to kill each other, taking their guns away isn't going to deter them too much. That pretty much leaves accidental deaths that you can really attribute solely to guns (//edit: now that i think about it, you can't blame guns for accidental deaths, you can blame the morons who caused the accidents. "Guns don't kill people, stupid motherfuckers with guns kill people.")

Why don't we try addressing the underlying issue, which is our obsession with violence, not guns.

Back to the point of the thread.

I figure the obsession with Columbine has to do with our absurd romantic obsession with the near-heroic status that disaffected youth have in our media-soaked society. There are so many instances where alienated and proto-violent young people are held up to be some sort of paragon of cool that many have a knee-jerk emotional affection for the stereotype. Many immature young people identify with this sociopathological pseudo-identity.

Of course it is to their detriment. And it is our loss.

As long as the purveyors of popular culture continue to profit from producing a constant stream of such figures for the consumption of young and impressionable minds, these obsessions will continue. And the pathetic pair of Columbine killers will be dredged up as something we should be paying attention to.

Personally, I have come to loathe this stereotype for what it is - a cheap and manipulative attempt to popularize losers and another example of how a corrupt cultural hegemony profits by appealing to the lowest common denominators of human behavior.

Damn...now I gotta go spend some time at dictionary.com

Are you suggesting that nothing be tried until we somehow know it will cure all ills? In my mind, this is the same logic that perpetuates the continual degradation of the global environment.


Now, this I can agree with. It's unfortunate also that the popularization of the event (or any like it) could have the reverse effect of providing strategy and impetus for others.

We have a lot of gun laws. They represent good-faith efforts at "trying" to cope with the sociopathologies of a hetrogenous post-modern society that is unique on this planet.

The discussion was a specific response to the shot-in-the-dark solution of taking a pivotal liberty away from law-abiding Americans in order to somehow stop violence-prone individuals from acting out their pathologies with guns.

Thanks for your final comment. I do believe it is more relevant to the actual significance of this thread.

*shrug* me too.

Thanks Art! Solid interpretation in my opinion.