Value of life according to Eric and Dylan

I guess it is an obvious fact for all of us on this forum that Eric and Dylan were not "monsters" or "pure evil". But I tried to think as people who say this kind of things. And I thought that a "monster", providing that human monsters do exist, would be someone who would do awful things to others, torture them, kill them, while knowing that it is bad and exactly how bad and serious it is.

As Eric and Dylan killed themselves, they didn't value life that much. I remember when I felt depressed I wanted to die, but I didn't even see suicide as a tragedy anymore. I thought it didn't really matter, you were on earth, you "tasted" life and then if you didn't like it you could put an end to it, that's all and that was no big deal. I assumed that it may have been how Eric and Dylan thought, although I may be wrong, and obviously also how many depressed people think. But I don't really remember how I thought about other's life. I remember that I could watch or read things about people dying in mass shootings, about people being stabbed and that I felt less empathy but that's all.

So I wonder how Eric and Dylan valued other's life. If you don't realize that the life of an ant is in theory equally important to that of a human, you are less a monster if you kill them that if you acknowledge that they are equally important but still kill them. I am not sure I am clear...

So do you think Eric and Dylan were still aware of how serious killing others were? Do you think they still "felt" how what they were doing was awful or did they see others' lives as theirs and so as something that could disappear and it didn't really matter?

Since Dylan saw suicide as a way to get to his version of "heaven" with his love I think he was excited for it.

I know Eric wrote about disabled people, old people, different races etc as if they should die just for being who they were I am not sure if that is one of the many contradictions he had. I think he didn't value his own life and pushed those feelings onto others. I don't think he valued anyone else's life because he saw them just going thru the motions, becoming robots and to him what kind of life was that?

That's really interesting. I don't think they saw the victims as individual people at all. They were part of the "institution of Columbine" that was being attacked. Almost like collateral damage, in a sense. They were not people with lives, they were a means to an end, to make a point. And when a potential victim engaged them in the library, that person was often spared - because they has changed from a nameless target to a real person.

Neah wrote:

I guess it is an obvious fact for all of us on this forum that Eric and Dylan were not "monsters" or "pure evil". But I tried to think as people who say this kind of things. And I thought that a "monster", providing that human monsters do exist, would be someone who would do awful things to others, torture them, kill them, while knowing that it is bad and exactly how bad and serious it is.

As Eric and Dylan killed themselves, they didn't value life that much. I remember when I felt depressed I wanted to die, but I didn't even see suicide as a tragedy anymore. I thought it didn't really matter, you were on earth, you "tasted" life and then if you didn't like it you could put an end to it, that's all and that was no big deal. I assumed that it may have been how Eric and Dylan thought, although I may be wrong, and obviously also how many depressed people think. But I don't really remember how I thought about other's life. I remember that I could watch or read things about people dying in mass shootings, about people being stabbed and that I felt less empathy but that's all.

So I wonder how Eric and Dylan valued other's life. If you don't realize that the life of an ant is in theory equally important to that of a human, you are less a monster if you kill them that if you acknowledge that they are equally important but still kill them. I am not sure I am clear...

So do you think Eric and Dylan were still aware of how serious killing others were? Do you think they still "felt" how what they were doing was awful or did they see others' lives as theirs and so as something that could disappear and it didn't really matter?

How were they not evil or "monsters"? They killed innocent people, while laughing and having the time of their lives while doing so.
They weren't stupid, of course they were aware that killing people was serious and the wrong thing to do, they just didn't care.

They wanted to inflict as much damage and pain on others because of the all wrong they felt was done to them.
I don't think it's logical to compare the value of an ant's life to a human life personally.

So yes, I do think they were very aware of the serious nature of what they did, they even bragged about being more self aware than most people.

I think their actions were definitely evil. I agree with Sue when she answered a question in a recent interview that I saw. She said that Eric and Dylan narrowed the people they were killing down to a single thing. Isaiah’s skin color, Danny had glasses. When you south looking at people as people it was easier for them to do what “they had to do”. And I remember Eric writing how he had to pretend that the people were characters in Doom in order to do this. And I know Dylan talked a little bit about it it is journal too.


Towards the end though, especially in the basement tapes when they say to Nate and Chris if you live. Nate was like a brother to Dylan. He didn’t earn Devon not to go to school on Tuesday. I definitely think at some point in time they did value other peoples lives. But you get so into doing something like this I imagine you have to really disconnect yourself.

Neah wrote:

I guess it is an obvious fact for all of us on this forum that Eric and Dylan were not "monsters" or "pure evil". But I tried to think as people who say this kind of things. And I thought that a "monster", providing that human monsters do exist, would be someone who would do awful things to others, torture them, kill them, while knowing that it is bad and exactly how bad and serious it is.

I know you've said that you're not espousing this viewpoint, so when I make my next point I want to be clear that this is not an attack at you at all.

To call a person, any person, a monster is the most absolutely fucking childish and delusional thing someone can do. Monsters are things that hide under beds or in the closets of small children and scare them at night. Monsters are antagonists in movies, books, and games, where they eat people or stomp through a city breathing fire. Monsters are things people like to tell stories about around campfires in order to scare their friends.

Monsters are not and can never be a couple of teenagers who kill a baker's dozen worth of people at their high school. Monsters cannot be a person who drugs, rapes, and cannibalizes seventeen people. Monsters cannot even be a sports coach who molests boys as young as ten years old, cannot be a schizophrenic person who murders twenty little kids, and nor can a monster be a dictator who caused one of the world's worst genocides in history and the most devastating war in history.

Even if we are to accept that true, pure evil can exist, does exist, and has been demonstrated in real life flesh and blood human beings, there will never ever be a human being on the planet who is or will become a monster, because monsters don't exist.

I can’t really say what they may or may not felt, because I don’t know that much about this case… but I think that, in general, people that do this kind of things just care about the life of family and friends (IF they care about someone).
They probably saw the people they kill as less than humans, as insects without value. They were “aware” of the pain and suffering they were going to cause, but I think they had little to no empathy left, by the end.
Probably was a “they know, but they just don’t care” kind of situation.

Related question: They were willing to kill their friends if they had to (they wanted to kill EVERYONE in the school); but if Dylan had to shoot is mother to get into Columbine that day, do you think he would’ve done it?

Alex213 wrote:

Related question: They were willing to kill their friends if they had to (they wanted to kill EVERYONE in the school); but if Dylan had to shoot is mother to get into Columbine that day, do you think he would’ve done it?

They didn't want to kill everyone:

Eric Harris, 10/23/98 wrote:

Once I finally start my killing, keep this in mind, there are probably about 100 people max in the school alone who I don’t want to die, the rest, MUST FUCKING DIE!

Although I think he meant only 10, because 100 is a lot of people for someone who is supposed to have no friends and who hates everyone.

I have absolutely no sources to back my hypothesis, this is only a feeling, but I don't think they would have killed their parents. Some school shooters did, but to me it seems that you have to have more serious mental health issues than Eric and Dylan. They loved their parents very much and wrote about how they would feel after the shooting. I don't think they could have killed them.

Neah wrote:

Alex213 wrote:

Related question: They were willing to kill their friends if they had to (they wanted to kill EVERYONE in the school); but if Dylan had to shoot is mother to get into Columbine that day, do you think he would’ve done it?

They didn't want to kill everyone:

Eric Harris, 10/23/98 wrote:

Once I finally start my killing, keep this in mind, there are probably about 100 people max in the school alone who I don’t want to die, the rest, MUST FUCKING DIE!

Although I think he meant only 10, because 100 is a lot of people for someone who is supposed to have no friends and who hates everyone.

I have absolutely no sources to back my hypothesis, this is only a feeling, but I don't think they would have killed their parents. Some school shooters did, but to me it seems that you have to have more serious mental health issues than Eric and Dylan. They loved their parents very much and wrote about how they would feel after the shooting. I don't think they could have killed them.

That has been a question that’s come up!

What if Tom or Sue followed Dylan out that morning and said “Dylan take the day off!” And tried to stop him physically

What if it was Devon in the library yelling and crying?


Now for Eric. I don’t think he’d be able to hurt his mom. I think if he tried something with his dad, he’d be SOL.

Neah wrote:

They didn't want to kill everyone:

Eric Harris, 10/23/98 wrote:

Once I finally start my killing, keep this in mind, there are probably about 100 people max in the school alone who I don’t want to die, the rest, MUST FUCKING DIE!

Although I think he meant only 10, because 100 is a lot of people for someone who is supposed to have no friends and who hates everyone.

Okay, but they planned a bombing, not just a shooting. They spared people and all, but If their friends happened to be in the cafeteria at the time of the explosions “well, that just bad luck. Natural selection!” If they really care about their friends, they would’ve just have guns that day, so they could see each and everyone face to face before killing them.

Neah wrote:

I have absolutely no sources to back my hypothesis, this is only a feeling, but I don't think they would have killed their parents. Some school shooters did, but to me it seems that you have to have more serious mental health issues than Eric and Dylan. They loved their parents very much and wrote about how they would feel after the shooting. I don't think they could have killed them.

They probably loved their friends too… but maybe their “mission” was above anything and everyone else.

Alex213 wrote:

Okay, but they planned a bombing, not just a shooting. They spared people and all, but If their friends happened to be in the cafeteria at the time of the explosions “well, that just bad luck. Natural selection!” If they really care about their friends, they would’ve just have guns that day, so they could see each and everyone face to face before killing them.

I don't think bad luck would have stopped them. Especially as, if their plan had worked they would have shot the survivors running outside the school. I'm not sure they thought they would see the bodies in the cafeteria. Columbine experts, correct me if I'm wrong as I'm not sure about that. So in a way, what you don't see don't bother you...

Or maybe they simply didn't think about that. They thought about their plan and not what was not planned.

mamaStardust wrote:

And when a potential victim engaged them in the library, that person was often spared - because they has changed from a nameless target to a real person.

Maybe, but it seems like a cliche to me. Who doesn't repeat this? Yet explain e. g. Lance engaging Dylan at the bottom of the stairs outside and being shot in the face. They did plenty of shooting while people were screaming at them. Consider the leaked part of the basement tapes with Val screaming, for instance. Isaiah spoke to them apparently, and some say John Tomlin did.

As does that it was "the institution of Columbine". I think if they were as familiar with a sports stadium or a hotel resort or whatever - somewhere with the same amount of potential victims, they would've struck there.  Given what Eric wrote, which admittedly does reference needing not to think of them as real people, it's more likely they saw them as Doom monsters, then as standing for all of Columbine.

Alex213 wrote:

Okay, but they planned a bombing, not just a shooting. They spared people and all, but If their friends happened to be in the cafeteria at the time of the explosions “well, that just bad luck. Natural selection!” If they really care about their friends, they would’ve just have guns that day, so they could see each and everyone face to face before killing them.

Possibly. Consider also that it was A lunch. Did many seniors have the first lunch period? Even if they did, they could go off campus for lunch anyway. I think it's possible while they were prepared to kill everyone, as they said in their farewell, they reasoned the chances were low for killing their friends. In fact, shooting people who were fleeing but not from the cafeteria may have been how their friends were at risk.

This was a failed bombing. I do believe they wanted to kill as many people as possible, even if it meant their friends. The moment the first shot was made is when they had to have emotionally been empty. Outside they probably were boiling over with anger; once in the library they still had some anger and momentum (they probably still thought the bombs were going to go off), but once that last trip to the cafeteria proved to them that no explosion would happen they may have started to feel again. But maybe they didn’t feel. Maybe they were empty till the moment they took their own lives. We just will never know.

As far as Dylan shooting his parents: I would say no. I don’t think he would have. Plus, his guns were probably already in the car or in one of his bags.

SenSpiritedAway wrote:

As far as Dylan shooting his parents: I would say no. I don’t think he would have. Plus, his guns were probably already in the car or in one of his bags.

Then again, he had knives if he was determined to get away and they tried to tackle him. Waiting for hours until the massacre with dead parents in the street would've been a bit awkward though.

True. That would’ve been awkward.

It’s strange, would he have broken down and confessed it all to his mom and dad at that moment or hurt them? For whatever reason though I think he wouldn’t have hurt them.

SenSpiritedAway wrote:

True. That would’ve been awkward.

It’s strange, would he have broken down and confessed it all to his mom and dad at that moment or hurt them? For whatever reason though I think he wouldn’t have hurt them.

They seemed to like their parents, particularly their moms, but one could make much of that given their loneliness and the male need for a father figure along with their murder spree. Still, they seem more embarrassed what it will do to their parents than they do think "Fuck yeah, suffer" like e. g. Randy Stair. At the same time, they seem committed to the massacre, and for what it's worth Eric wrote that if anybody tries to stop them, the murder spree begins there. Whether that was false bravado or the real plan, I do indeed wonder, and even if it was the plan for him, whether it would have been for Dylan. Regardless, I guess he knew he could lie well enough that he never had to worry about that. Wouldn't be surprised if it was both. Say, he carried his knives if his parents tried to stop him, but didn't have the gumption to actually do it. Then again, I'm sure they said the same about Charles Whitman or Adam Lanza before they did it.

I guess this is why Columbine is so intriguing. We don’t know the answers to these questions and never will.
As far as Adam Lanza, I’m not as involved in that case as say this one, but did he really kill his mother because he hated her or she tried to stop him? I would think maybe he did it so she wouldn’t have to have the pain of being without him. When I read the final report it came across to me that he was the apple of her eye. Idk. I need to do more research on that before I get talking. Ok, I’m getting off topic. Sorry. Haha I’ll stop now.

Maybe, but I think it's probably not because "we never will" but it's in principle possible to figure out. There's so much evidence to use to reason about, and it's possible to one day find something like "oh dylan carried this thing in case his parents tried to stop him" or "this thing means dylan knew he would have to confess if his parents caught him" etc etc.  This in particular we probably won't know but other things are very much like that. It's been slow given all the media lies and the people parroting them and so forth, but in general one knows more now than he knew yesterday.

I'm not as involved in that case either, probably as it seems like there is a much higher chance of never knowing the answers, but I wasn't even giving a reason for why. Just simply that if we had met him before he shot someone we probably would say he wasn't capable of killing his mother, just like we say about Dylan. Or Kip Kinkel. Or Charles Whitman.

And idk, sometimes I think he did it just to copy e. g. Kinkel and Whitman like to get the most infamy as part of his study of mass murder or as a tribute, and other days I think he did it because while he may have even loved her, he felt she had ruined his life by being overbearing. Being the apple of her eye was the problem. He was still at home, etc. I tend to think it's one or the other though, and not so much about "killing a human harddrive, leaving some mystery" or whatever.

To get back on topic to the OP, I don't think they cared one way or the other. "Value is just a word"