Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**filbert**

You could reduce gun ownership by 50% and still wouldn't be enough - you live in a society that is awash with firearms of one description or another. Whatever needs to be done, needs to be drastic, which is why I suspect there is little political or social appetite to do what it takes to stop these killings.

This is what I posted 5 months ago after the last shooting and I feel it is still just as relevant:

filbert wrote:I think it is going to be distasteful for Americans to confront this topic in the coming months given the events that have occurred, but I think it is something that needs to be discussed and debated. One of the issues is that gun ownership and the belief/support in the right to bear arms is quite a cross party thing; it isn't just die-hard Republicans that believe it, which is one of the reasons that top level politicians have traditionally shied away from addressing gun ownership; they know full well that any discussion of gun ownership or attempt to debate the pros/cons of gun laws will turn off vast swathes of their support. No politician who has any ambition of rising to the top (and they all do) is willing to jeopardise his/her future in that way. So the silence continues and the stone is left unturned. I feel, however, that sometimes you have to analyse and debate distasteful subjects if you ever want to make progress. It may be hurtful and someone may suffer politically for it, but the nettle must be grasped. How many more random and senseless killings need to occur before people sit up and think 'this is not right'. You may well draw parallels with other countries and indeed, there are very few countries which have not suffered the hurt of a shooting but where else on earth does this happen on a regular basis?

The problem is that Pandora's Box is well and truly open. Here in the UK, it was easy enough to pass the laws banning handguns because it didn't really affect many people anyway, apart form gun club members. If by some miracle, Obama passed a law banning gun ownership in the US, what happens to all those millions of weapons in the country? They don't suddenly disappear overnight and no amount of amnesties will get rid of them - the guns are there and always will be, unless the government starts getting incredibly pro-active about taking them off people and how many of us think that will ever happen?

The right to bear arms in so deeply ingrained in US culture such that guns pervade so many aspects of American life; it just isn't easy to separate the two. This isn't a case of giving up guns, this is a case of a massive sea change in American culture and thinking to the extent that average Americans reject their guns. But that would require an enormous social and political change in the mind set. Its harsh to say it, but you wanted your guns and your automatic weapons for all and you got it. But the price of that means that you suffer and will continue to suffer such appalling tragedies until such time as Americans say 'enough is enough'.

**Seaward**

filbert wrote:
You could reduce gun ownership by 50% and still wouldn't be enough - you live in a society that is awash with firearms of one description or another. Whatever needs to be done, needs to be drastic, which is why I suspect there is little political or social appetite to do what it takes to stop these killings.

I'm still waiting to hear "what it takes" to stop these killings.

This is what I posted 5 months ago after the last shooting and I feel it is still just as relevant:

Yes, if we turned ourselves, culturally, into Norway, we could stop this sort of stuff. Or maybe not.

Also, please, please, please stop the "you can all get automatic weapons over there!" crap.

**filbert**

Seaward wrote:

I'm still waiting to hear "what it takes" to stop these killings.

Like I said, I don't know. I suspect getting rid of your guns and stopping killing one another would be a start, if I'm going to be flippant about it. There is no easy answer or solution to that. But frankly, I don't really care; it's not my societies kids being killed. Fortunately, we only had to deal with this once in the UK and handguns were banned as a result.

**KalashnikovMarine**

You can though! We can all get automatic weapons... pursuant to state law and having enough money that dropping 20k+ isn't a big deal.

**Ratbarf**

Why have most of these tragedies only occurred recently? (Columbine was really the start)

Well the school ones I think are almost certainly Columbine inspired. (Though I think Ecole Polytechnic was the first.) I think it's mostly just copycat killings.

Repeating firearms have existed for over 150 years – the Colt revolver for example.

Why didn’t those kinds of massacres occur 150… 120.. 100 years ago?

Because bombs were the method du jour?

So the solution is apathy because we can't think of a way to tackle it? I don't know the answer but then again, I'm not paid the money to think of it. In all reality, it is too late for the US to adopt any form of law banning gun ownership - the guns are already in circulation and aren't coming back. What is really needed is an entire cultural shift whereby large volumes and sections of American society reject gun ownership and hand in/destroy their weapons and start attaching a cultural stigma to guns in much the same way as smoking has been. Will this happen anytime soon? Nope.

But I would think it would be better to at least try and do something rather than shrug shoulders and wring hands every time something like this happens.

I think you're mistaking apathy with powerlessness. They don't do anything because they can't, and until someone comes up with an idea that would work without disenfranchising everyone else this is the way it's going to stay.

So yes I'd like a meaningful answer if it does in fact exist. What's changed? What's the root of all of this? Or more simply put, why? These rampages are symptoms, what is the disease?

If you want a partial answer I suggest you find yourself a copy of "The Man Who Studies Murder - Part Two: The Anthropology of Murder" it's a documentary from one of the pre-eminent anthropologists on the topic of Murder. The 2nd part goes into why Americans kill each other more than pretty much everyone else in the Western World.

**KalashnikovMarine**

Ratbarf wrote:
Why have most of these tragedies only occurred recently? (Columbine was really the start)

Well the school ones I think are almost certainly Columbine inspired. (Though I think Ecole Polytechnic was the first.) I think it's mostly just copycat killings.

Yeah, that gels with my old man's theory. He thinks it's media driven. "Hey! If I do that! I can impact billions just like that guy!"

So yes I'd like a meaningful answer if it does in fact exist. What's changed? What's the root of all of this? Or more simply put, why? These rampages are symptoms, what is the disease?

If you want a partial answer I suggest you find yourself a copy of "The Man Who Studies Murder - Part Two: The Anthropology of Murder" it's a documentary from one of the pre-eminent anthropologists on the topic of Murder. The 2nd part goes into why Americans kill each other more than pretty much everyone else in the Western World.

Sounds good, I'll have to go hunt that up. Col. Grossman's psychological texts don't have much to offer on the diseased mind.

**MrMerlin**

Seaward wrote:
MrMerlin wrote:
In Germany? When and where? Only one comes to mind, a while back, with 11 death, not 27.... and that guy got his gun by chance, becuase his father had left the gun safe open (which is very unlikeley to cause another killing spree, because father with guns safes are quite rare here compared to the US)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erfurt_massacre
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winnenden_school_shooting

Oh right, sorry, forgot about the one in 02.

Still, that's two shootings in a decade.... in the us, there have been three major shootings.... this year (And then, there are those mall-shotings, that guy on a university campus, etc etc....). I'm aware that the US has 4 times as many citizens, but you have much more than 4 times the shootings.

So hmm.... why not make a law that denys lunatics access to guns? I'm fully aware that this won't stop ALL shootings, but even if it only stops two, that could still mean thirty lives. And that would be totally worth it imho.
Besides, @those who whine about their rights as gun owners: Are you a lunatic? No? Then why are you whining, nobody wants to take away your guns!

**labmouse42**

House Speaker John Boehner, the top Republican in Congress, said he had canceled the Republican weekly address for Saturday "so that President Obama can speak for the entire nation at this time of mourning."

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/15/us-usa-shooting-connecticut-president-idUSBRE8BD17P20121215

Kudos to Boehner, or being able to put aside partisan politics on this issue.

**djones520**

I think it's important to point something out. In 1992-2000 there was 240 homicides on school property. 2000-2009 saw 144. So that was a hugely significant drop in them. Despite as was mentioned a "relaxation" of laws.

**MrMerlin**

filbert wrote:
Seaward wrote:

I'm still waiting to hear "what it takes" to stop these killings.

Like I said, I don't know. I suspect getting rid of your guns and stopping killing one another would be a start, if I'm going to be flippant about it. There is no easy answer or solution to that. But frankly, I don't really care; it's not my societies kids being killed. Fortunately, we only had to deal with this once in the UK and handguns were banned as a result.

Quote for truth. And they do't even have to get rid of all their guns, just make a law that requires someone who wants to buy a gun to go through a checkup.... It's really not that difficult.

**A Town Called Malus**

MrMerlin wrote:
Seaward wrote:
MrMerlin wrote:
In Germany? When and where? Only one comes to mind, a while back, with 11 death, not 27.... and that guy got his gun by chance, becuase his father had left the gun safe open (which is very unlikeley to cause another killing spree, because father with guns safes are quite rare here compared to the US)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erfurt_massacre
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winnenden_school_shooting

Oh right, sorry, forgot about the one in 02.

Still, that's two shootings in a decade.... in the us, there have been three major shootings.... this year (And then, there are those mall-shotings, that guy on a university campus, etc etc....). I'm aware that the US has 4 times as many citizens, but you have much more than 4 times the shootings.

So hmm.... why not make a law that denys lunatics access to guns? I'm fully aware that this won't stop ALL shootings, but even if it only stops two, that could still mean thirty lives. And that would be totally worth it imho.
Besides, @those who whine about their rights as gun owners: Are you a lunatic? No? Then why are you whining, nobody wants to take away your guns!

Thing is they already have laws like that. What they don't have is a healthcare system where mental illness diagnosis and treatment is readily available to everyone, so a lot of these conditions go undiagnosed and untreated. You can't stop lunatics from buying guns f you don't know who the "lunatics" are, after all.

**WarOne**

The issue is more about the symptomatic cropping up of lunatics who go on murdering sprees.

Removing guns from the streets and from peoples homes would not solve the issue.

Look at Norway for example; they have a very low murder rate and strict gun control. However, they is an avid and large base of gun owners who use guns for hunting and recreational use. They rank 11th in privately owned guns-civilian ratio.

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/norway

http://www.businessinsider.com/mass-murders-in-2012-2012-12

Here's a timeline of some of the worst deadly shootings in the U.S. this year:

January 10, 2012: Three teenagers were shot dead in an ambush in Philadelphia, CBS reported at the time. The 30-year-old suspect opened fire on four teens in a car, killing three and injuring one.

February 21, 2012: Jeong Soo Paek burst into a spa his family owned in Norcross, near Atlanta, Ga. He killed four relatives before turning the gun on himself, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported at the time. Police speculated that financial problems motivated the shooting.

February 27, 2012: A 17-year-old student, T.J. Lane, confessed to going into his Chardon, Ohio high school cafeteria and shooting students at random. Three students died and two were hospitalized, The New York Times reported. Lane said he stole the gun from a relative who had obtained it legally.

March 30, 2012: A gunman drove by and opened fire on a crowd of mourners outside a funeral home in Miami, Fla. Two people died and 12 more were injured, the Miami Herald reported. The mourners were gathered for the funeral of 21-year-old Marvin Andre, who also died in a shooting.

April 2, 2012: One L. Goh opened fire at Oikos University in Oakland, California. He killed seven people and injured at least three more. Goh was a former student at the school and was said to be angry that he was expelled for poor behavior, CNN reported.

April 6, 2012: Five African-American men were gunned down in separate incidents in Tulsa, Oklahoma, ABC reported. Police arrested Jake England, 19, and Alvin Watts, 32, and said that the murders were motivated by racism. Three men died and two were seriously injured.

May 29, 2012: Ian Stawicki went to a cafe in Seattle's University district, shooting and killing four people, ABC reported at the time. He then fled to a parking lot and shot another woman before killing himself. He wasn't thought to have known his victims.

July 20, 2012: James Holmes, 24, allegedly broke into a midnight premiere of "The Dark Knight Rises" in Aurora, Colo., killing 12 people and injuring roughly 60 more. Later, police revealed that Holmes, a doctoral student in neuroscience, spent $20,000 on ammunition and weapons.

August 5, 2012: Seven people died after gunfire broke out at a Sikh temple in Oak Creek, Wisconsin. The gunman, identified by police as Wade Michael Page, also died in the shooting. He was a white supremacist and the shootings were said to be racially motivated.

August 13, 2012: Three people including a police officer were killed in shootings near the campus of Texas A&M University. The alleged shooter, Thomas Caffell, was said to be obsessed with video games and was having financial problems.

August 24, 2012: Jeffrey Johnson shot a former coworker and injured nine more people before being shot and killed by police. The shooting occurred near New York's Empire State Building during rush hour.

August 28, 2012: Robert Gladden Jr., 15, allegedly brought a gun to Baltimore's Perry Hall High School and shot a fellow student, resulting in a critical injury. The boy's mom said he had been bullied.

August 31, 2012: Ex-Marine Terrell Tyler, 22, opened fire at the Old Bridge, New Jersey supermarket where he worked. He killed two of his coworkers before shooting himself in the head.

September 28, 2012: Andrew Engeldinge walked into his former office, Accent Signage Systems in Minneapolis, and "carefully selected" coworkers to execute. He fatally shot five people before turning the gun on himself.

October 21, 2012: Radcliffe Haughton, 45, bought a handgun and drove to a Milwaukee, Wisconsin, spa where his estranged wife was working. He killed three people, including his wife, before shooting himself.

November 6, 2012: Lawrence Jones, 42, opened fire at Valley Protein, the Fresno, California meat-processing plant where he worked. He killed two people and himself. Two more were seriously injured.

December 12, 2012: Jacob Tyler Roberts, 22, allegedly stole a rifle from a family friend and went into a Clackamas, Oregon shopping mall with "several fully-loaded magazines" of ammunition. He killed two bystanders before shooting himself.

December 14, 2012: A gunman opened fire at a Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut. At least 27 people died, including 20 children, according to reports. That story is still developing.

**reds8n**

KalashnikovMarine wrote:
You can though! We can all get automatic weapons... pursuant to state law and having enough money that dropping 20k+ isn't a big deal.

from the link you posted

DID YOU KNOW?? We have several other machine guns being auctioned for only 1 dollar with no reserve.

..think that's probably well within the budget of even a hard up wanna be psycho.

You're an odd country indeed. You'll spend millions and millions of dollars protesting against gay people being able to get married but when it comes to stopping your own children being murdered it's apparently too difficult or too much effort to try and do anything.

**notprop**

djones520 wrote:
I think it's important to point something out. In 1992-2000 there was 240 homicides on school property. 2000-2009 saw 144. So that was a hugely significant drop in them. Despite as was mentioned a "relaxation" of laws.

Would that not be a reflection of the common installation of detection equipment and on site policing that seems common (from the outside) at US schools? I.e. the shooting is now done off campus.

Don't get me wrong no being judgemental as I see first hand random checks by police at UK inner city schools (I build new ones) but theyre mostly checking for knives and drugs.

**djones520**

notprop wrote:
djones520 wrote:
I think it's important to point something out. In 1992-2000 there was 240 homicides on school property. 2000-2009 saw 144. So that was a hugely significant drop in them. Despite as was mentioned a "relaxation" of laws.

Would that not be a reflection of the common installation of detection equipment and on site policing that seems common (from the outside) at US schools? I.e. the shooting is now done off campus.

Don't get me wrong no being judgemental as I see first hand random checks by police at UK inner city schools (I build new ones) but theyre mostly checking for knives and drugs.

I don't know. Most of these big shootings take place at rural schools it seems, where they don't have those types of things. I know none of the schools I went to never had any. The school I graduated on did have a police officer always on the grounds, but that was it.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

reds8n wrote:
KalashnikovMarine wrote:
You can though! We can all get automatic weapons... pursuant to state law and having enough money that dropping 20k+ isn't a big deal.

from the link you posted

DID YOU KNOW?? We have several other machine guns being auctioned for only 1 dollar with no reserve.

..think that's probably well within the budget of even a hard up wanna be psycho.

You're an odd country indeed. You'll spend millions and millions of dollars protesting against gay people being able to get married but when it comes to stopping your own children being murdered it's apparently too difficult or too much effort to try and do anything.

And? You still need to be compliant with all the laws regarding automatic weapon ownership to buy them, even if they are auctioning for only $1.

**WarOne**

reds8n wrote:
You're an odd country indeed. You'll spend millions and millions of dollars protesting against gay people being able to get married but when it comes to stopping your own children being murdered it's apparently too difficult or too much effort to try and do anything.

It is difficult because there are 270,000,000 guns running around America amongst a population of 300,000,000+. To be honest, I don't know where to begin solving the problem. Try to restrict guns, there will still be more violence. Try to take away guns, more violence would ensue.

Take care of the mentally ill...well that could be feasible. Increase awareness and sympathy towards those who feel left out of society and get help to those who need it would be a great step in the right direction.

**Seaward**

reds8n wrote:
You're an odd country indeed. You'll spend millions and millions of dollars protesting against gay people being able to get married but when it comes to stopping your own children being murdered it's apparently too difficult or too much effort to try and do anything.

Again, if you have ideas, I'm sure we'd love to hear them. Most of what's been suggested is already on the books.

**d-usa**

And, it begins on Facebook. Looks like the government supplied the weapons and killed our own children in a false flag operation to pass the UN small arms ban to take away our freedoms...

**reds8n**

And? You still need to be compliant with all the laws regarding automatic weapon ownership to buy them, even if they are auctioning for only $1.

Well done, now follow the part of the thread where it was stated that automatic weapons were far too expensive for normal people to buy.

Fundamentally there is something wrong when a weapon of war can and does exchange hands for that sort of sum.

Factor in the private citizen to citizen sales loophole and from the -- admittedly limited -- reading I've done with regards to ( sp ?) The Tiarht amendments it seems quite clear that the actual regulation of guns has been udnermined extensively. Possiby even beyond the point of saving.

I understand the complexity of the issue. Say tomorrow scientists come out with a study that proves 100% that guns are bad, shorten your life span, penis length, anger God -- all of them ! -- hurt pandas, deplete the ozone layer and make you fat, a study so compelling that even the NRA stodd up and went "wow, we made a bad call here, LOL, sorry!" so the vasy majority of Americans gave up their guns....

.. there'd still be a lot who wouldn't. Say 1 million of them. What are you to do ? Can't lock up or shoot/wahtever that number of people ?

I guess I'd like to see compulsory licenses and training for gun owners. If people are willing to accept the need for licnese for cars, despite their right to freedom of assembly. Or the fact that you have to pay for a phone or an internet connection despite your right to freedom of speech, then I don't see why a license should be such a big deal ?

Maybe even go for a national recognised one so you can carry cross state lines without having to spend x minutes of your life working out if you're going to get arrestted when you go to visit friends/family 2 states over.

.. although I'd keep the prohibition on planes, but YMMV.

All that said, I appreciate you can't retro actively make this change but maybe it's something that could be looked at for the future.

You'll never remove the threat or danger completely. Nor given the law abiding nature of most gun owners, should they be criminalised either.

anyway...

http://www.crowdrise.com/shsrelief/fundraiser/ryankraft

nice site where you can donate to help out those affected by this.

**Seaward**

reds8n wrote:
Well done, now follow the part of the thread where it was stated that automatic weapons were far too expensive for normal people to buy.

Fundamentally there is something wrong when a weapon of war can and does exchange hands for that sort of sum.

I think you're being misled a bit about the ease of the process of picking up a pre-1986 select fire weapon.

Say it's prospectively sold to me for only one dollar. Fair enough. It will not happen, ever, but let's say for the sake of argument it does. I still...

Have to get an ATF Form 4 signed by my local CLEO (Chief Law Enforcement Officer, usually the local county sheriff). He's not compelled to sign it.

Obtain approval from the ATF, who do their own criminal background check, perhaps using the submitted photographs and full fingerprints that I'm required to provide and which they keep registered with the gun afterward.

Pay for the tax stamp.

Wait the three to six months for this all to be approved.

The notion that you can walk into your local sporting goods store and walk out with a brand new machine gun for $500 is quite incorrect. It requires an extensive amount of time and money, and you're thoroughly investigated.

**AtomicEngineer**

Guns are dangerous, of course but its not the main issue, its the easiest issue to jump on. The real issue is lack of proper gun education/understanding and a better check on mental illness. You can never really predict when a person is going to suddenly lose it. It seems like the shooter had some major issues with his parents which eventually led to this tragedy. Unless you have pre-crime minority report style future viewing. Taking away a peoples rights to bear arms is not going to stop it. Because the legal, sane owners of the guns would still have passed all the checks and would still have had the guns for the son to go and take and use against them.

It always seems to be younger men with access to guns or their parents firearms that do this kind of thing, it seems to me that there's some kind of lack in spotting people who are not all their in the morality or mental department. Children should be brought up been taught to respect and fear the gun, not use it in everyday situations they are not toys to be used.

In fact I think educating parents is a good start, teach them to teach their children guns are not just another part of life they are a dangerous tool. Have anyone who owns a gun have to attend safety and real gun ownership classes, with there children if possible. People have been raised with a i can do what i want with a firearm attitude. Ive seen videos of people taking pot shots at bee hives stuck to there houses with guns and just thinking to myself. What are they thinking its a gun a gun! its not a toy that thing can kill!

I think taking away guns is not the real issue i think the real issue is parents not giving there children the right education when raising them about things like morality and the value of life and the things that are dangerous are not to be played with. Raise a generation to respect guns and dangerous and in turn they will do the same for there kids. Guns are too glorified by people now a days, children are left to be raised by call of duty and left to there own devices to learn about guns. Don't take away the danger, learn to respect it. If you lived in an area full of grizzly bears, you don't have all the bears killed or removed if somebody strolls into their area and gets mauled. you teach people how to respect and avoid.

**Quark**

So regarding the "guns are already out there" argument saying we can't do anything, that's just another lazy excuse to stop thinking about the problem. It certainly didn't stop the government from banning Buckyball sales.

You don't change ownership laws directly. Current owners can be grandfathered in. You set up escalating restrictions over years and slowly take guns out of circulation if they can't meet the restrictions. Add in buy back programs to help incentivize gun owners.

This is all not well defined, but that's not my job. Until people stop responding to 26 murdered with "oh well, we can't do anything" then we're in trouble.

**Seaward**

Quark wrote:
So regarding the "guns are already out there" argument saying we can't do anything, that's just another lazy excuse to stop thinking about the problem. It certainly didn't stop the government from banning Buckyball sales.

You're missing the argument, then, because it's not, "guns are already out there, so we can't do anything." It's, "Guns are already out there, so we can't make guns not be out there." We can certainly do something to prevent atrocities like this from occurring, but we won't, because it would make your average citizen too uncomfortable.

These guys who commit rampage sprees aren't just looking to end their own lives. They're looking for spectacle. They're looking for shock. They're looking to make headlines for a few days. They're not wandering into police stations and starting to unload, nor biker bars, nor bad neighborhoods in Watts, nor NRA meetings. They're not heading to places where they could reasonably expect to get a couple in the ocular box the second they start trying to murder innocents. "Gunman Kills 30 In Area Church" gets you primetime. "Gunman Wounds Two Before Being Shot To Death" is local news.

And therein, in my opinion, lies the answer.

**d-usa**

More news out today, lots of stuff coming out via dispatch tapes I assume.

Looks like as police were responding it was already reported by people on the inside that the shooting had stopped. With no active shots being fired it seems to lead more credence to the decision to stage and wait for adequate resources to arrive.

More stories about teachers trying to move kids to save areas and reading stories to them as the shooter was walking around firing.

**dogma**

Brave teachers, in that case.

**Seaward**

Ah, the media. Crap like that is, in part, why this stuff keeps happening.

**MrMerlin**

Seaward wrote:
Ah, the media. Crap like that is, in part, why this stuff keeps happening.

Nothing boosts newspaper sales like a bunch of dead children, huh? For feths sake, they should just stop reporting things like this so extensiveley, becuase who knows, some other feth-head might get ideas.... that has happened before....

**Kilkrazy**

KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Ratbarf wrote:
Why have most of these tragedies only occurred recently? (Columbine was really the start)

Well the school ones I think are almost certainly Columbine inspired. (Though I think Ecole Polytechnic was the first.) I think it's mostly just copycat killings.

Yeah, that gels with my old man's theory. He thinks it's media driven. "Hey! If I do that! I can impact billions just like that guy!"

I think there is something in that, though it is difficult to know why Americans are particularly prone to this kind of behaviour. The easy availability of guns helps, of course, but there are plenty of other "western" nations where it isn't hard to get hold of guns if you want them, and the massacres are much less frequent.

**WarOne**

Kilkrazy wrote:
KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Ratbarf wrote:
Why have most of these tragedies only occurred recently? (Columbine was really the start)

Well the school ones I think are almost certainly Columbine inspired. (Though I think Ecole Polytechnic was the first.) I think it's mostly just copycat killings.

Yeah, that gels with my old man's theory. He thinks it's media driven. "Hey! If I do that! I can impact billions just like that guy!"

I think there is something in that, though it is difficult to know why Americans are particularly prone to this kind of behaviour. The easy availability of guns helps, of course, but there are plenty of other "western" nations where it isn't hard to get hold of guns if you want them, and the massacres are much less frequent.

Unfortunately I have to agree that we as a country and society have issues with violence. How do we solve this in a meaningful way?

**Seaward**

WarOne wrote:
Unfortunately I have to agree that we as a country and society have issues with violence. How do we solve this in a meaningful way?

According to the Interwebs? Renew the Assault Weapons Ban.