Another Columbine Shooting?

This question always tickled my mind

like..

What if there was another shooting at columbine (god forbid)
What would this do to the E&D "version" does that get washed away and the new one becomes media attention of just a "copy cat/style" of 1999 columbine. I would say their could be a possibility(?) but this time a solo shooting rather than a duo

There was something special there with E&D in regards to both shooting up the place rather than Dylan backing off and not doing it

Still to say off topic if time travel ever existed i'd go back to 1996 to see who shot Tupac Shakur and then to 99 to see Columbine as is- but all that's just day dreaming. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

If time travel existed I'd go back to 1999 find E&D tell them I know everything they're up too (of course, making sure they don't have any weapons them so they can't kill me) then make them talk to me for as long as I felt like, then try to stop them.

I've always wondered another thing kinda odd but what if someone got out from under the table in the library and looked Eric or Dylan directly in the eyes and said 'Wait spare my life or some sort I'll help you kill these people' then instead killed both Eric and Dylan.

I'm just surprised not many jocks did shit like throw a chair of course of obvious reasons but i'm sure they had their backs turned a number of times or when they went to reload weapons

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

cakeman wrote:

I'm just surprised not many jocks did shit like throw a chair of course of obvious reasons but i'm sure they had their backs turned a number of times or when they went to reload weapons

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

The way we think we would have acted, or we think they should have acted in that situation is pretty much irrelevant once you are living it. I have no idea how it felt to be in the library, but I'm sure many people were paralysed by fear, and to scared of death to do anything. It would be extremely hard to think normally and effectively in a situation like that. Of course, Daniel Mauser did actually push a chair at Eric, but only to be shot in the face and killed when it is likely that had he not, he would have survived. Another point, is that there were barely any jocks in the library at the time, and those killed were very much average kids, some who did not know and who were not even in the same year as E&D. I understand that by hating certain parts of the school and some of the people, they learnt to hate the bystanders and everything else just as much, but their choices will always slightly baffle me.

cakeman wrote:

I'm just surprised not many jocks did shit like throw a chair of course of obvious reasons but i'm sure they had their backs turned a number of times or when they went to reload weapons

They had pipe bombs and Molotovs and crickets going off virtually the whole time that made an awful lot of noise and smoke. They took turns reloading so one could cover the other. A number of people did verbally engage with them and tried to tell them to stop. Isaiah resisted as best he could. Daniel fought back. John Tomlin... It was pretty confusing in the library and Dylan's Tech-9 probably sounded fully automatic to all the scared kids. If anyone had any idea about fighting back they probably lost it quick after he unloaded on the girls.

Columbine was not caused by bullying. Eric and Dylan did experience some bullying, but that was not the cause of Columbine.

The cause of Columbine was that Eric and Dylan both had extreme personality disorders that committed them to this crime. That will never be repeated, maybe in US history.

I agree with Dataverse that the chance of a repeat is always a little higher when there was a previous incident because of copycats. But, it won't be a duo.

lasttrain wrote:

Columbine was not caused by bullying.

You are fond of stating this but you seldom, if ever, provide any form of evidence. I think the evidence we have shows that not only was bullying a huge part of what drove the boys to NBK; it is a pattern that is endemic to American society as a whole. Pardon me for saying so, but what you and others such as Cullen are engaged in is denial. It is also a form of dangerous disinformation. If you do not believe (or understand) the sociological aspects of the case (which are equally as germane and fascinating as the  boys' alleged psycopathy) then you are quite missing the point here.

Comprehending Columbine by Ralph W. Larkin is a great place to start if you haven't already read it. I know you are fond of Cullen's work, but Larkin is an actual scholar and an academic rather than a slipshod sensationalist. Because of this, he is able to provide evidence for his assertions, something that many of us still feel is important when you are writing non-fiction.

I don't agree with everything he says, but I think anyone who claims that bullying and the hierarchy of CHS were not primary factors in the boys' lives and in the instigation for NBK should probably at least have the chutzpah to deal with the extensive analysis he provides.  

It is not necessary to read Larkin to get the lowdown on the bullying aspect of Columbine but Comprehending Columbine is a cogent and expedient work that covers the topic quite well imho.

I don't believe bullying was the cause of Columbine. Eric and Dylan did not target bullies in the shooting. When explaining their own motivations, they did not cite revenge for bullying as a primary cause, though Eric did mention teasing in journal entries. In the 11K, 17 people, including Robyn Anderson, say they never saw Eric or Dylan harassed. 20 or so say they saw them picked on for their clothes, while others mention that the harassment was "mild" (only one says it was "relentless").

By contrast, 28 people, including Chris Morris (8897) and Devon Adams (10616), say that Harris and Klebold bullied others, and they did so in ways more extreme than the jocks, such as shooting BB guns at children.

How many of those that Eric said were "bullying" him were actually just standing up to his relentless, homicidal harassment of them? If you go around shooting at children, planning to blow up elementary school students, beating women, constantly starting fights--then indeed you should not be surprised if you get significant push back from those in a position to defend themselves.

lasttrain wrote:

I don't believe bullying was the cause of Columbine. Eric and Dylan did not target bullies in the shooting. When explaining their own motivations, they did not cite revenge for bullying as a primary cause, though Eric did mention teasing in journal entries. In the 11K, 17 people, including Robyn Anderson, say they never saw Eric or Dylan harassed. 20 or so say they saw them picked on for their clothes, while others mention that the harassment was "mild" (only one says it was "relentless").

By contrast, 28 people, including Chris Morris (8897) and Devon Adams (10616), say that Harris and Klebold bullied others, and they did so in ways more extreme than the jocks, such as shooting BB guns at children.

How many of those that Eric said were "bullying" him were actually just standing up to his relentless, homicidal harassment of them?  If you go around shooting at children, planning to blow up elementary school students, beating women, constantly starting fights--then indeed you should not be surprised if you get significant push back from those in a position to defend themselves.

They were bullied, I have nothing skewing my perspective on this, I was not bullied and I had friends. I just haven't cherry picked the evidence in this case to fit with what I want to believe.

lasttrain wrote:

I don't believe bullying was the cause of Columbine. Eric and Dylan did not target bullies in the shooting. When explaining their own motivations, they did not cite revenge for bullying as a primary cause, though Eric did mention teasing in journal entries. In the 11K, 17 people, including Robyn Anderson, say they never saw Eric or Dylan harassed. 20 or so say they saw them picked on for their clothes, while others mention that the harassment was "mild" (only one says it was "relentless").

By contrast, 28 people, including Chris Morris (8897) and Devon Adams (10616), say that Harris and Klebold bullied others, and they did so in ways more extreme than the jocks, such as shooting BB guns at children.

How many of those that Eric said were "bullying" him were actually just standing up to his relentless, homicidal harassment of them?  If you go around shooting at children, planning to blow up elementary school students, beating women, constantly starting fights--then indeed you should not be surprised if you get significant push back from those in a position to defend themselves.

How can you solely use witness statements, many of people who did not know or frequently see E&D no less, as your evidence for your whole belief system over the motives of Columbine? Not a wise move I should say.

On another note, did you have a nice time cherry picking?

eli27 wrote:

How can you solely use witness statements, many of people who did not know or frequently see E&D no less, as your evidence for your whole belief system over the motives of Columbine? Not a wise move I should say.

On another note, did you have a nice time cherry picking?

Amen.

Lasttrain, please address the points made by Larkin. Just for openers. Since you seem (conveniently enough) not to have read Larkin, please respond to these mere excerpts:

"However, within the mainstream of Columbine High School, nonconforming students were perceived as a blot on the reputation of the high school... For some evangelical students, this small group was perceived as evidence of evil" (p. 35)

"The abusive behavior of The Predators (jocks) extended well beyond the grounds of Columbine High School. Rocky H. and several other athletes were convicted of trashing a home in April 1998." (p. 91)

"How visible was bullying at Columbine High School? According to many students,bullying was an everyday occurrence." (p. 93)

"Numerous statements by students indicated that the faculty, especially teachers who were also coaches, either inadvertently or openly encouraged or participated in the harassment or humiliation of students" (p. 98)

"Kurtz (1999) also reported instacnes in which faculty and staff members seemed to be unresponsive to the complaints of students who were harassed by members of the football and wrestling teams" (p.101)

"The candor of this predator [Evan Todd] suggests that in addition to having fun at the expense of fellow students, the predators perceived themselves as defending the moral order of the school" (p. 103)

"Male faculty members who were also coaches were perceived by students as encouraging predatory behavior by the members of the football and wrestling teams" (p. 104)

That is a fraction of evidence available just from Larkin's book! You don't even need Larkin to prove that bullying was the engine that drove CHS culture. He's just the most erudite and scholarly source.

Ralph W. Larkin Comprehending Columbine.  All emphasis is mine.


  [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I'd stick to Larkin's interviewees, but not with Larkin's own interpretation.

After all, Larkin is the guy who claims Eric was a neonazi paramilitary. Sorry to say this, but Larkin and his approach to CHS shooting is full of shit.

Sabratha wrote:

After all, Larkin is the guy who claims Eric was a neonazi paramilitary. Sorry to say this, but Larkin and his approach to CHS shooting is full of shit.

Larkin never says anything of the kind. Please quote something to support your statements.

I think Columbine will have another shooting, but there will be 4-5 deaths at most.