Columbine All Over Again!!

Mchatte

New member
Sep 21, 2004
832
0
0
Manitoba
Warning - Very Disturbing!

Check out the video and the MSN Profile. Warning signs are easy to read with 20\20 hindsight but this kid was obviously very troubled. Unfortunately, these types do not start by killing a stray cat or dog and progressing to humans from there.

Not everyone that has an MSN profile or has made a short video like this kid will go out and start a massacre but it is still very distressing.

School Killer MSN Profile and Video


I am not a parent but I certainly do not envy anyone raising a child in today’s society. You may be the best parent ever but there is so much societal interference compared to the previous generation that it seems very difficult but certainly not impossible for someone to raise a well-behaved, respectful child today. You factor in being a single parent family and the pressure is that much greater.

The effect of technology (video games,internet,etc.) on little minds did not exist with “pong” like they do in today’s society.

I believe that school teachers used to play a much more integral part in the molding of our youth and now, I think that they may be severely limited in which disciplinary and other actions to employ that is necessary to achieve that.

You look at the billions spent on gun control. Weren’t the guns in this instance perfectly legal registered weapons? Would the billions of dollars spent on gun control have been better off spent on programs to help troubled youths, for educational school programs, summer camp programs, training counsellors, etc.?

I am not a lawyer, but is the Young Offenders Act in Canada working? Isn’t it a bit hippocritical that in Canada, the names of the young offenders may not be disclosed no matter what they do. But, when a young offender from another country, such as in this case, loses control, then Canada can publicize the name of the offender and pretty much anything else. What will happen when a young Canadian citizen loses control in another country. Does he\she lose their right as a young offender? I know with the technology of today, if information is public in one location, then it is public worldwide which makes publicity banns impossible in such instances.

Media and society make such a big deal out of sexual issues and content. What a big hullabaloo that was for Janet Jackson to bear her breast and also, do not dare say “shit” on prime time TV. It’s ok to have someone go on a rampage and shoot anyone in their way on a TV show or show violent reality “Cop” shows. Wasn’t “Kill Bill” a deep meaningful movie. I’m sure that no one under 18 watched that!

The past was not without its problems and a lot of those problems never reached us by the media available in those days. But I think that now, these instances are more frequent and more violent as well as more publicized.

The parents of the dead and the wounded are grieving very deeply and very hurt by what has happened. How about the parents of the offender? They will be second guessing themselves for the rest of their lives. Could they have done something different! Did they not see any signs? Was it their fault somehow? Where did they fail?

These are just some personal thoughts and opinions. I have no degree in psychology or any of that and if I am erroneous in any of this, please correct me.

There are still wonderful children out there being brought up by great parent(s) and I see them every day. The terrible incidents are caused by such a tiny percentage that we have to appreciate that most parents are doing their best and are doing a fine job. Kudos to today’s parents! Keep up the good work Moms and Dads.


M
 

Gruss-ly

Up standing member
Jul 15, 2004
140
0
0
YVR
www.awpi.com
Imho

If you are feeling murderous and happen to own a gun then it would be convenient to use it. However if you are feeling murderous and don't own a gun then a bat or a machette or a (insert weapon of choice)..... will all do nicely. The lowest common denominator in this equation is the "MURDEROUS FEELING" not the weapon. If society would spend more time on dealing with the way people feel and less time worrying about weapons we would all be a little bit safer!
 

HankQuinlan

I dont re Member
Sep 7, 2002
1,744
6
0
victoria
...It's also a lot more difficult to massacre people with a baseball bat or machete --- I would prefer it if people "feeling murderous" were wandering around with baseball bats and pitchforks.
 

Kev

New member
May 13, 2002
1,617
0
0
Gruss-ly said:
If you are feeling murderous and happen to own a gun then it would be convenient to use it. However if you are feeling murderous and don't own a gun then a bat or a machette or a (insert weapon of choice)..... will all do nicely. The lowest common denominator in this equation is the "MURDEROUS FEELING" not the weapon. If society would spend more time on dealing with the way people feel and less time worrying about weapons we would all be a little bit safer!
I agree.

Automobiles through negligence or by accident are killing thousands every day. The car is not to blame but the driver. We have the same situation with guns.

This character could have climbed behind the wheel of a car and plowed into a group of shoppers killing the same amount of people. He was a time bomb ready to go off. --- Kev
 

citylover666

New member
Oct 4, 2003
19
0
0
60
timec98 said:
It can happen anywhere in the world --- and does; however, what accounts for the following disproportionate stats? Is it the prevalence of guns in the U.S., or societal influences U.S. citizens are under, or ???

Comparison of U.S. gun homicides to other industrialized countries: In 1998 (the most recent year for which this data has been compiled), handguns murdered:
• 373 people in Germany
• 151 people in Canada
• 57 people in Australia
• 19 people in Japan
• 54 people in England and Wales, and
11,789 people in the United States
(The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence)
.
So many people get killed in the US from gun violence because "lawful, licensed and registered gun owners" have 6 hand guns, 2 rifles and a shotgun in their homes & not because of "retarded" gun owners. The problem is how gun policy works as it's meant to work from lawful gun owner exercising their rights to the fullest foolish extent of the law.

Someone breaks in & steals the guns of lawful gun owners & uses them against them or someone else. There's no reason why anyone needs 6 handguns, but no one can tell them otherwise.

The US has Columbines, Jonesboros, Red Lakes because there's just too many damn guns available for any idiot to use whenever they want to. That's why they happen & always will happen in the good ol' USA, & we have lawful, licensed and registered gun owners to thank for that, who refuse to allow even the least sensible laws to happen regarding gun ownership.

These guys couldn't care less how many teens get killed w/ handguns. its the "lawful, licensed and registered gun owners" who are the problem, because they're the ones putting the thousands & thousands of guns out on the street for anyone to use.

That's the difference in the US in the stats up there for the homicide rates, pure & simple -- guns, guns, guns.

We just had 2 different sets of judges attacked -- one judge had her husband & mother murdered in Chicago, one judge was murdered & a couple of others in a courtroom in Atlanta. Did anyone suggest there were too many guns available to psychos? No, we have our idiot politicians wanting more guns in courtrooms, wanting to judges to carry concealed weapons! we have some judicial hearings w/ as many as 12 judges in attendance -- how many people would be shot in cross fire w/ this many judges packing heat? & w/o training, & w/o being able to be told to get training? Not to mention how safe anyone would be at near legal and judicial conventions.

that's my soapbox 2 cents worth
 

dbrw42

New member
Jan 26, 2003
415
0
0
HankQuinlan said:
...It's also a lot more difficult to massacre people with a baseball bat or machete --- I would prefer it if people "feeling murderous" were wandering around with baseball bats and pitchforks.

800,00 some dead in Rwanda, mostly with machetes. And if somebody went on a murderous rampage with a machete, wouldn't the police just shoot his ass?
 

HankQuinlan

I dont re Member
Sep 7, 2002
1,744
6
0
victoria
dbrw42 said:
800,00 some dead in Rwanda, mostly with machetes. And if somebody went on a murderous rampage with a machete, wouldn't the police just shoot his ass?
Good point. Let me amend that to "lone psychos with baseball bats or machetes" are way preferable to ones with guns...because the police could just shoot their asses before they get to the high numbers. The massacres in Rwanda were by organized groups, and not in my line of thought.
 
Vancouver Escorts