Why Didn't They See Through With Knifing People?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
We knew they had a concoction of various knives on them which they has purchased alongside their guns for some reason, and as a whole they were geared up with other stuff that will cause harm aside from the guns. Why have the knives with them then?
Had they premeditated beforehand should something go wrong like if someone ran up towards them they had a substitute weapon to use?
The knives were a plan B to kill people if they ran out of ammo? They had opportunities to stab people that day, do you think it's perhaps that they were scared or physically unable to stab a person as we all know stabbing someone to death is a very personal and very gory method of murder, and maybe they thought just shooting people was the easiest and quickest way? Did they just want to look the most harmful they could with all the gear?
to add, I know we're aware that Dylan had brought it up in the library and Eric said no and decided to head back down to check the bombs. My question is say, beginning or during the rampage, when adrenaline was still pumping.

I think they couldn't go through with stabbing if lets say they had to. They weren't actually as gutsy as they thought they could've been.

Because the boys were cowards and using a knife is a very up and close way to murder someone, usually reserved for someone who is truly hated by their attacker, not to mention it would have allowed potential victims to fight back.

I don't believe Eric said no to stabbing someone per say....just that they didn't do it. And I do think that they couldn't stab someone.

Perhaps they brought them to use for self defense against people/cops I don't know. But I just don't think they would have ever been able to stab anyone that up close.

Lizpuff wrote:

I don't believe Eric said no to stabbing someone per say....just that they didn't do it. And I do think that they couldn't stab someone.

Perhaps they brought them to use for self defense against people/cops I don't know. But I just don't think they would have ever been able to stab anyone that up close.

He didn't say a straight up No but he was like nah...let's go back downstairs or something like that from the supposed retelling of the how it went down that has been going around for awhile. Basically yeah they didn't do it.

I'm just thinking, that's a beautiful collection of knives and money was spent on it but I just have feeling they weren't going to stab anybody at all so, pretty random they had it as part of their gear.

Maybe just another one of the things that just made them feel tough? If things had gone according to plan when would they have found time to stab someone?

Lizpuff wrote:

Maybe just another one of the things that just made them feel tough? If things had gone according to plan when would they have found time to stab someone?

Exactly. So they were actually shallow and sort of cocky, to make that decision just for the sake of looking threatening, should the knives won't be utilised at all.

Maybe them bringing knives kind of backs up the argument that they might have doubted the bombs going off from the start. Most likely not though. We all know the plan was to pick off fleeing students however, not sure where knives come into that scenario unless they were planning on throwing them.

In reality, they probably just brought them to seem more cool and badass.

ultraviolencelv wrote:

Lizpuff wrote:

I don't believe Eric said no to stabbing someone per say....just that they didn't do it. And I do think that they couldn't stab someone.

Perhaps they brought them to use for self defense against people/cops I don't know. But I just don't think they would have ever been able to stab anyone that up close.

He didn't say a straight up No but he was like nah...let's go back downstairs or something like that from the supposed retelling of the how it went down that has been going around for awhile. Basically yeah they didn't do it.

I'm just thinking, that's a beautiful collection of knives and money was spent on it but I just have feeling they weren't going to stab anybody at all so, pretty random they had it as part of their gear.

I've never understood this point. It's kind of similar to the ''Eric would never have been able to rape a girl'' point too. Evidence suggests that Eric would have been more than capable of performing both acts.

Hectic wrote:

I've never understood this point. It's kind of similar to the ''Eric would never have been able to rape a girl'' point too. Evidence suggests that Eric would have been more than capable of performing both acts.

What's the evidence? I would totally get the knifing/killing but what about rape?

Hectic wrote:

ultraviolencelv wrote:

Lizpuff wrote:

I don't believe Eric said no to stabbing someone per say....just that they didn't do it. And I do think that they couldn't stab someone.

Perhaps they brought them to use for self defense against people/cops I don't know. But I just don't think they would have ever been able to stab anyone that up close.

He didn't say a straight up No but he was like nah...let's go back downstairs or something like that from the supposed retelling of the how it went down that has been going around for awhile. Basically yeah they didn't do it.

I'm just thinking, that's a beautiful collection of knives and money was spent on it but I just have feeling they weren't going to stab anybody at all so, pretty random they had it as part of their gear.

I've never understood this point. It's kind of similar to the ''Eric would never have been able to rape a girl'' point too. Evidence suggests that Eric would have been more than capable of performing both acts.

Could Eric have raped a girl? Yes he very well could have. But I don't think he would. He was all bravado in his journal talking about tricking a girl into his room, and then he gets Susan in there and he can barely manage to kiss her cheek goodbye? It just doesn't make sense. He was a matter of days before he was going to die, alone in his room let alone his entire house with a girl. That would have been the perfect time if it was going to happen. And he couldnt/didn't do it. That is probably because it was Reb talking about a rape. Not Eric.

ultraviolencelv wrote:

Hectic wrote:

I've never understood this point. It's kind of similar to the ''Eric would never have been able to rape a girl'' point too. Evidence suggests that Eric would have been more than capable of performing both acts.

What's the evidence? I would totally get the knifing/killing but what about rape?

Compared to what he did in that library, I believe rape would have been easy for him. That sounds horrible to say, but as much as some of his journal entries probably are just for show, I don't think that particular ''I'll trick her into my room'' stuff is. He was an individual who seriously held onto grudges, and he did not like rejection. Just because he didn't do it on the prom night means very little as he wouldn't have wanted to blow his cover. I believe that had he not gone through with columbine, he most likely would have committed some kind of sexual related crime at some point.

Lizpuff wrote:

Hectic wrote:

ultraviolencelv wrote:

Lizpuff wrote:

I don't believe Eric said no to stabbing someone per say....just that they didn't do it. And I do think that they couldn't stab someone.

Perhaps they brought them to use for self defense against people/cops I don't know. But I just don't think they would have ever been able to stab anyone that up close.

He didn't say a straight up No but he was like nah...let's go back downstairs or something like that from the supposed retelling of the how it went down that has been going around for awhile. Basically yeah they didn't do it.

I'm just thinking, that's a beautiful collection of knives and money was spent on it but I just have feeling they weren't going to stab anybody at all so, pretty random they had it as part of their gear.

I've never understood this point. It's kind of similar to the ''Eric would never have been able to rape a girl'' point too. Evidence suggests that Eric would have been more than capable of performing both acts.

Could Eric have raped a girl?  Yes he very well could have.  But I don't think he would.  He was all bravado in his journal talking about tricking a girl into his room, and then he gets Susan in there and he can barely manage to kiss her cheek goodbye?  It just doesn't make sense.  He was a matter of days before he was going to die, alone in his room let alone his entire house with a girl.  That would have been the perfect time if it was going to happen.  And he couldnt/didn't do it.  That is probably because it was Reb talking about a rape.  Not Eric.  

Yeah, I get that he had an opportunity to do more that night with Susan, but a big part of me still believes he was being super cautious. His life goal/plan was a matter of days away, he got away with so much shit already, notably with his Dad and the bullets situation. He wouldn't have wanted to trigger any more alarm bells and possibly felt if he did do something sexual, it might have turned into something more sinister.

Just my two cents though, your opinion is just as valid. All we can do is speculate.

I think they got them because they thought they looked cool.

Plus, they would have looked more intimidating. If say they were reloading the guns the knives could well have put any would-be heroes off trying to rush them at that point. Note the only attempted Rush was by Daniel once already wounded.

Hectic wrote:

Lizpuff wrote:

Hectic wrote:

ultraviolencelv wrote:

Lizpuff wrote:

I don't believe Eric said no to stabbing someone per say....just that they didn't do it. And I do think that they couldn't stab someone.

Perhaps they brought them to use for self defense against people/cops I don't know. But I just don't think they would have ever been able to stab anyone that up close.

He didn't say a straight up No but he was like nah...let's go back downstairs or something like that from the supposed retelling of the how it went down that has been going around for awhile. Basically yeah they didn't do it.

I'm just thinking, that's a beautiful collection of knives and money was spent on it but I just have feeling they weren't going to stab anybody at all so, pretty random they had it as part of their gear.

I've never understood this point. It's kind of similar to the ''Eric would never have been able to rape a girl'' point too. Evidence suggests that Eric would have been more than capable of performing both acts.

Could Eric have raped a girl?  Yes he very well could have.  But I don't think he would.  He was all bravado in his journal talking about tricking a girl into his room, and then he gets Susan in there and he can barely manage to kiss her cheek goodbye?  It just doesn't make sense.  He was a matter of days before he was going to die, alone in his room let alone his entire house with a girl.  That would have been the perfect time if it was going to happen.  And he couldnt/didn't do it.  That is probably because it was Reb talking about a rape.  Not Eric.  

Yeah, I get that he had an opportunity to do more that night with Susan, but a big part of me still believes he was being super cautious. His life goal/plan was a matter of days away, he got away with so much shit already, notably with his Dad and the bullets situation. He wouldn't have wanted to trigger any more alarm bells and possibly felt if he did do something sexual, it might have turned into something more sinister.

Just my two cents though, your opinion is just as valid. All we can do is speculate.

Yea your opinion probably makes more sense!

Hectic wrote:

Compared to what he did in that library, I believe rape would have been easy for him. That sounds horrible to say, but as much as some of his journal entries probably are just for show, I don't think that particular ''I'll trick her into my room'' stuff is. He was an individual who seriously held onto grudges, and he did not like rejection. Just because he didn't do it on the prom night means very little as he wouldn't have wanted to blow his cover. I believe that had he not gone through with columbine, he most likely would have committed some kind of sexual related crime at some point.

That's pretty valid. I mean, I never thought it deeper where he didn't do it possibly cause he didn't wanna jeopardise blowing his cover. I believe I made a point regarding this in another thread way back, and I said something along the lines of, rape is still an act of intercourse, it was still "sex", and, despite how evidently harmful and homicidal Eric is, I feel like he can't garner that sort of strength or evilness to commit an act of sexual violence. I may be wrong, PLEASE CORRECT ME ANYONE, and I am no rapist, but just an assumption, I feel that even rape takes a significant group of people to be able/want to do it.

Draw_It_White wrote:

I think they got them because they thought they looked cool.

Plus, they would have looked more intimidating. If say they were reloading the guns the knives could well have put any would-be heroes off trying to rush them at that point. Note the only attempted Rush was by Daniel once already wounded.

True, that's true. But it'd have to be a desperate circumstance though, cause to chase off any heroes they had the guns so they could've just shot them. The thing is do they have it in them at all to personally stab someone with their own strength?

ultraviolencelv wrote:

Draw_It_White wrote:

I think they got them because they thought they looked cool.

Plus, they would have looked more intimidating. If say they were reloading the guns the knives could well have put any would-be heroes off trying to rush them at that point. Note the only attempted Rush was by Daniel once already wounded.

True, that's true. But it'd have to be a desperate circumstance though, cause to chase off any heroes they had the guns so they could've just shot them. The thing is do they have it in them at all to personally stab someone with their own strength?

While we will never know, I don't think they did. But if either of them could have, I would lean towards it being Dylan. I feel like he was crazy that day

ultraviolencelv wrote:

Hectic wrote:

Compared to what he did in that library, I believe rape would have been easy for him. That sounds horrible to say, but as much as some of his journal entries probably are just for show, I don't think that particular ''I'll trick her into my room'' stuff is. He was an individual who seriously held onto grudges, and he did not like rejection. Just because he didn't do it on the prom night means very little as he wouldn't have wanted to blow his cover. I believe that had he not gone through with columbine, he most likely would have committed some kind of sexual related crime at some point.

That's pretty valid. I mean, I never thought it deeper where he didn't do it possibly cause he didn't wanna jeopardise blowing his cover. I believe I made a point regarding this in another thread way back, and I said something along the lines of, rape is still an act of intercourse, it was still "sex", and, despite how evidently harmful and homicidal Eric is, I feel like he can't garner that sort of strength or evilness to commit an act of sexual violence. I may be wrong, PLEASE CORRECT ME ANYONE, and I am no rapist, but just an assumption, I feel that even rape takes a significant group of people to be able/want to do it.

That's probably very true too. I am not just coming out and saying just because he shot someone at point blank rage that he would rape someone too. I am really just going by what we know about Eric' characteristics, mixed with the acts he committed and what he said in his journal.

Hectic wrote:

[

I've never understood this point. It's kind of similar to the ''Eric would never have been able to rape a girl'' point too. Evidence suggests that Eric would have been more than capable of performing both acts.

I tend to agree with this point. I would think that someone capable of murder would be capable of really, well, anything else given that murder is considered the ultimate crime. Just my opinion, though.

As to stabbing, I have wondered the same thing. The opinions posted thus far make quite a bit of sense, particularly in regards to being possibly used for anyone who may have rushed them while they were reloading.

lilypadlane wrote:

I tend to agree with this point. I would think that someone capable of murder would be capable of really, well, anything else given that murder is considered the ultimate crime. Just my opinion, though.

For me I can somehow separate sexual assault/rape/intercourse from homicide, Idk why but for me I think it's a huge enough barrier between both. And I'm saying this not forgetting those who have done both (rape+murder). Cause how do you explain criminals who are exclusively rapists but do not follow up with homicide and vice versa? It really depends on prior agenda. And if you think about it before planning NBK, Eric was a normal kid who dated girls and he had been (through accounts) pretty chivalrous with girls excluding the clingyness later on. As someone who's so afraid and delicate around girls in his reality and can only deal with cheek kisses I don't think they can do a 360 overnight and forcefully penetrate a girl. That very one journal entry could very well be a sexually frustrated teen off or on meds who just got done watching Girls Gone Wild or something.

ultraviolencelv wrote:

lilypadlane wrote:

I tend to agree with this point. I would think that someone capable of murder would be capable of really, well, anything else given that murder is considered the ultimate crime. Just my opinion, though.

For me I can somehow separate sexual assault/rape/intercourse from homicide, Idk why but for me I think it's a huge enough barrier between both. And I'm saying this not forgetting those who have done both (rape+murder). Cause how do you explain criminals who are exclusively rapists but do not follow up with homicide and vice versa? It really depends on prior agenda. And if you think about it before planning NBK, Eric was a normal kid who dated girls and he had been (through accounts) pretty chivalrous with girls excluding the clingyness later on. As someone who's so afraid and delicate around girls in his reality and can only deal with cheek kisses I don't think they can do a 360 overnight and forcefully penetrate a girl. That very one journal entry could very well be a sexually frustrated teen off or on meds who just got done watching Girls Gone Wild or something.

Excellent point. Those teenage hormones are something else, and he wouldn't be the first guy to fantasize about rape.

ultraviolencelv wrote:

lilypadlane wrote:

I tend to agree with this point. I would think that someone capable of murder would be capable of really, well, anything else given that murder is considered the ultimate crime. Just my opinion, though.

For me I can somehow separate sexual assault/rape/intercourse from homicide, Idk why but for me I think it's a huge enough barrier between both. And I'm saying this not forgetting those who have done both (rape+murder). Cause how do you explain criminals who are exclusively rapists but do not follow up with homicide and vice versa? It really depends on prior agenda. And if you think about it before planning NBK, Eric was a normal kid who dated girls and he had been (through accounts) pretty chivalrous with girls excluding the clingyness later on. As someone who's so afraid and delicate around girls in his reality and can only deal with cheek kisses I don't think they can do a 360 overnight and forcefully penetrate a girl. That very one journal entry could very well be a sexually frustrated teen off or on meds who just got done watching Girls Gone Wild or something.

YES! He got all embarrassed over possibly upsetting a girl when he asked about the stars in the sky....wow.....

ultraviolencelv wrote:

Draw_It_White wrote:

I think they got them because they thought they looked cool.

Plus, they would have looked more intimidating. If say they were reloading the guns the knives could well have put any would-be heroes off trying to rush them at that point. Note the only attempted Rush was by Daniel once already wounded.

True, that's true. But it'd have to be a desperate circumstance though, cause to chase off any heroes they had the guns so they could've just shot them. The thing is do they have it in them at all to personally stab someone with their own strength?

Yep, like I say, only there to use if reloading. The plan was to cover different exits so they'd have expected to be on their own for the most of the shooting, not walking about together like they did - meaning no cover for each other while reloading so I expect that's what the knives were there for.

Juicy Jazzy wrote:

Because the boys were cowards and using a knife is a very up and close way to murder someone, usually reserved for someone who is truly hated by their attacker, not to mention it would have allowed potential victims to fight back.

Considering they killed others and themselves,I wouldn't call them cowards.I don't consider someone who does that cowardly.

As far as the knives go,I think they were just trying to scare everyone even more.

Lizpuff wrote:

Could Eric have raped a girl?  Yes he very well could have.  But I don't think he would.  He was all bravado in his journal talking about tricking a girl into his room, and then he gets Susan in there and he can barely manage to kiss her cheek goodbye?  It just doesn't make sense.  He was a matter of days before he was going to die, alone in his room let alone his entire house with a girl.  That would have been the perfect time if it was going to happen.  And he couldnt/didn't do it.  That is probably because it was Reb talking about a rape.  Not Eric.  

That's been discussed here:

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

I don't really understand the people that think that Eric couldn't possibly have been capable of something like rape, yet he callously shot people at close range and marvelled at the gory scenes. Because he was such a gentlemanly sweetheart and was totally a decent person, huh? Wasn't that just sooo sweet how he only put his arm around Susan and didn't pressure her into anything? (all the while knowing she may be killed in the cafeteria explosions a few days later). Wasn't he just the picture of chivalry when he shot Cassie Bernall in the head as the poor girl covered her face in terror? That wasn't Eric who killed those kids at Columbine, that was purely his alter ego, Reb. Eric was a sweet, misunderstood person who needs to constantly have his name defended all these years later

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] I've already my point up above, but just for me, in my opinion at least it's still just an opinion, I think Eric was just only capable of homicidal violence but not sexual violence. The way he was with girls beforehand aside, I know many people think that if one can take someone's life why not rape? It's exactly that. A convict just has murder in them but they don't want to sexually overpower a person. I don't know why I'm adamant that Eric is not like that.

Okay, well that's your opinion. I'm just tired of people saying he apparently had the perfect opportunity to rape Susan yet acted like a gentleman so there's no way he could have been capable of being a rapist. Of course he wasn't going to rape a girl and risk getting himself in trouble, especially days before he went on a rampage he had been planning for so long. People really need to exercise some common sense before using that night with Susan as an example of Eric's supposed moral incapability of committing rape.

I am personally of the belief that Eric was certainly capable of rape/absolutely had the foundations to potentially become a rapist if he hadn't committed the massacre, however, his preferred and chosen method of inflicting pain on others was a homicidal rampage and not rape.

bubbles wrote:

Okay, well that's your opinion. I'm just tired of people saying he apparently had the perfect opportunity to rape Susan yet acted like a gentleman so there's no way he could have been capable of being a rapist. Of course he wasn't going to rape a girl and risk getting himself in trouble, especially days before he went on a rampage he had been planning for so long. People really need to exercise some common sense before using that night with Susan as an example of Eric's supposed moral incapability of committing rape.

I am personally of the belief that Eric was certainly capable of rape/absolutely had the foundations to potentially become a rapist if he hadn't committed the massacre, however, his preferred and chosen method of inflicting pain on others was a homicidal rampage and not rape.

I don't know whether or not I believe that Eric could be a rapist. I do, however, completely agree that him not raping Susan was not a reflection of his moral standing. This, rather, was a reflection of his logical understanding that raping a girl just before the massacre he planned to commit may well get him in serious trouble, and that getting in serious trouble may cause his situation to be compromised in a way that would stop him from following through with said plans.

eli27 wrote:

bubbles wrote:

Okay, well that's your opinion. I'm just tired of people saying he apparently had the perfect opportunity to rape Susan yet acted like a gentleman so there's no way he could have been capable of being a rapist. Of course he wasn't going to rape a girl and risk getting himself in trouble, especially days before he went on a rampage he had been planning for so long. People really need to exercise some common sense before using that night with Susan as an example of Eric's supposed moral incapability of committing rape.

I am personally of the belief that Eric was certainly capable of rape/absolutely had the foundations to potentially become a rapist if he hadn't committed the massacre, however, his preferred and chosen method of inflicting pain on others was a homicidal rampage and not rape.

I don't know whether or not I believe that Eric could be a rapist. I do, however, completely agree that him not raping Susan was not a reflection of his moral standing. This, rather, was a reflection of his logical understanding that raping a girl just before the massacre he planned to commit may well get him in serious trouble, and that getting in serious trouble may cause his situation to be compromised in a way that would stop him from following through with said plans.

Thank you. Obviously none of us can say for sure whether or not Eric would've raped someone if he didn't commit the massacre, but the fact that there was certainly a moral vacuity within Eric is not really debatable considering his actions on 4/20.

Don't mean for this thread to sidetrack to eric's rape claim but just a quick one -- re-reading it again, to me this entry sounds like a case of things he was angry about that day/stressed about and he must've been either on or off his meds. His thoughts were all over the place until he finally made that claim that "maybe he just needs to get laid", and his pre-existing rage made him have a thought-vomit on violent sex. This was written in november of '98. I really strongly feel it's just a case of rage release. He's thinking sex would do him good for a bit and then he closes the entry about a Nine Inch Nail video. I don't really think this sounds like rape pre-meditation to me.

Quote :

HATE! I'm full of hate and I Love it. I HATE PEOPLE and they better fucking fear me if they know whats good for em. yes I hate and I guess I want others to know it, yes I'm racist and I don't mind. Niggs and spics bring it on themselves, and another thing, I am very racist towards white trash p.o.s.s like [censored] and [censored] they deserve the hatred, otherwise I probly wouldnt hate them. Its a tragedy, the human nature of people will lead to their downfall. Peoples human nature will get them killed. whether by me or Vodka, Its happened before, and not just in school shootings like those pussy dumbasses over in Minnesota who squeeled. throughtout history, Its our fucking nature! I know how people are and why and I cant stand it!

I love the nazis too... by the way, I fucking cant get enough of the swastika, the SS, and the iron cross. Hitler and his head boys fucked up a few times and it cost them the war, but I love their beliefs and who they were, what they did, and what they wanted. I know that form of gov couldn't have lasted long once the human equation was brought in, but damnit it sure looked good. every form of gov leads to downfalls, everything will always fuck up or yeah something. its all DOOMed god damnit.

this is beginning to make me get in a corner. I'm showing too much of myself, my views and thoughts, people might start to wonder, smart ones will get nosey and something might happen to fuck me over, I might need to put on one helluva mask here to fool you all some more. fuck fuck fuck it'll be very fucking hard to hold out until April. If people would give me more compliments all of this might still be avoidable... but probably not. Whatever I do people make fun of me, and sometimes directly to my face. I'll get revenge soon enough. fuckers shouldn't have ripped on me so much huh! HA! then again its human nature to do what you did... so I guess I am also attacking the human race. I cant take it, Its not right... true... correct... perfect. I fucking hate the human equation. Nazism would be fucking great if it werent for individualism and our natural instinct to ask questions.

you know what maybe I just need to get laid. maybe that'll just change some shit around. thats another thing, I am a fucking dog. I have fantasies of just taking someone and fucking them hard and strong. someone like [censored] were I just pick her up, take her to my room, tear off her shirt and pants and just eat her out and fuck her hard. I love flesh... weisses fleisch! dein weisses fleisch emegt mich soo... Ich bin dech nur ein gigilo! I want to grab a few different girls in my gym class, take them into a room, pull their pants off and fuck them hard. I love flesh... the smooth legs, the large breasts, the innocent flawless body, the eyes, the hair; jet black, blond, white, brown. ahhh I just want to fuck! call it teenage hormones or call it a crazy fuckin racist rapist... BJ ist mir egal. I just want to be surrounded by the flesh of a woman, someone like [censored] who I wanted to just fuck like hell, she made me practically drool, when she wore those shorts to work.. instant hard on. I couldnt stop staring. and others like [censored] in my gym class, [censored] or whatever in my gym class, and others who I just want to overpower and engulf myself in them. mmmm I can taste the sweet flesh now... the salty sweat, the animalistic movement... Iccchhh... lieeebe...... fleisccchhhh. who can I trick into my room first? I can sweep someone off their feet, tell them what they want to hear, be all nice and sweet, and then "fuck em like an animal, feel them from the inside" as Reznor said. oh... thats something else... that one NIN video I saw, broken or closer or something, the where the guy is kidnapped and tortured like hell... actual hell. I want to do that too. I want to tear a throat out with my own teeth like a pop can. I want to gut someone with my hand, to tear a head off and rip out the heart and lungs from the neck, to stab someone in the gut, shove it up to the heart, and yank the fucking blade out of their rib cage! I want to grab some weak little freshman and just tear them apart like a fucking wolf. show them who is god. strangle them, squish their head, bite their temples into the skull, rip off their jaw. rip off their colar bones, break their arms in half and twist them around, the lovely sounds of bones cracking and flesh ripping, ahh... so much to do and so little chances.

and anyway who's to say he meant roleplay or violent sex with a girl who gave consent or was willing? the "trick" part could mean to have a girl agree to hook up with him, with how kind he was before, and when she finally consents to having sex he would have his way the way he fantasised here.

They couldn't bring themselves to use knives.

bubbles wrote:

eli27 wrote:

bubbles wrote:

Okay, well that's your opinion. I'm just tired of people saying he apparently had the perfect opportunity to rape Susan yet acted like a gentleman so there's no way he could have been capable of being a rapist. Of course he wasn't going to rape a girl and risk getting himself in trouble, especially days before he went on a rampage he had been planning for so long. People really need to exercise some common sense before using that night with Susan as an example of Eric's supposed moral incapability of committing rape.

I am personally of the belief that Eric was certainly capable of rape/absolutely had the foundations to potentially become a rapist if he hadn't committed the massacre, however, his preferred and chosen method of inflicting pain on others was a homicidal rampage and not rape.

I don't know whether or not I believe that Eric could be a rapist. I do, however, completely agree that him not raping Susan was not a reflection of his moral standing. This, rather, was a reflection of his logical understanding that raping a girl just before the massacre he planned to commit may well get him in serious trouble, and that getting in serious trouble may cause his situation to be compromised in a way that would stop him from following through with said plans.

Thank you. Obviously none of us can say for sure whether or not Eric would've raped someone if he didn't commit the massacre, but the fact that there was certainly a moral vacuity within Eric is not really debatable considering his actions on 4/20.

This is very true. I cannot prove one way or another. But anyone *could* be a rapist. But not everyone could stand the moral guilt and go thru with it. I cannot say why but imho I just don't think Eric would have been able to go thru with a rape. Despite what happened on 4/20 I just don't think he could get that personal with someone. Just like how I don't think he could stab someone because it is so personal. But in the end like you sad we will never know

Lizpuff wrote:

bubbles wrote:

eli27 wrote:

bubbles wrote:

Okay, well that's your opinion. I'm just tired of people saying he apparently had the perfect opportunity to rape Susan yet acted like a gentleman so there's no way he could have been capable of being a rapist. Of course he wasn't going to rape a girl and risk getting himself in trouble, especially days before he went on a rampage he had been planning for so long. People really need to exercise some common sense before using that night with Susan as an example of Eric's supposed moral incapability of committing rape.

I am personally of the belief that Eric was certainly capable of rape/absolutely had the foundations to potentially become a rapist if he hadn't committed the massacre, however, his preferred and chosen method of inflicting pain on others was a homicidal rampage and not rape.

I don't know whether or not I believe that Eric could be a rapist. I do, however, completely agree that him not raping Susan was not a reflection of his moral standing. This, rather, was a reflection of his logical understanding that raping a girl just before the massacre he planned to commit may well get him in serious trouble, and that getting in serious trouble may cause his situation to be compromised in a way that would stop him from following through with said plans.

Thank you. Obviously none of us can say for sure whether or not Eric would've raped someone if he didn't commit the massacre, but the fact that there was certainly a moral vacuity within Eric is not really debatable considering his actions on 4/20.

This is very true.  I cannot prove one way or another.  But anyone *could* be a rapist.  But not everyone could stand the moral guilt and go thru with it.  I cannot say why but imho I just don't think Eric would have been able to go thru with a rape.  Despite what happened on 4/20 I just don't think he could get that personal with someone.  Just like how I don't think he could stab someone because it is so personal.  But in the end like you sad we will never know

It's difficult to tell, what with most of his writings on women being from an (in my opinion) unreliable source - his journal. But I disagree with people who say that his crime indicates potential to be a rapist. Because, as you said, rape is very up close and personal. Shooting somebody, although less so from a very close range I suppose, is something that is much easier to dissociate from. It is quick and easy. Something like rape or stabbing forces you to be close to the victim, fully acknowledge them and your actions. Really shoves what you are doing in your face, which can be much harder to deal with. If the reason behind them not going through with knifing people was that they couldn't handle it, then I highly doubt that he would be up for raping someone either. Unfortunately at present we are unable to acertain the reason behind the 'decision' not to use knives. We might never know, but I think that, if we did know the reason, it would be the best way to make a more educated guess as to Eric's potential with sex related crimes.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] - Do these messages seem like those of someone with the 'ability' and mindset to rape someone? Maybe, maybe not - but they certainly don't stand out to me as a red flag.

eli27 wrote:

Lizpuff wrote:

bubbles wrote:

eli27 wrote:

bubbles wrote:

Okay, well that's your opinion. I'm just tired of people saying he apparently had the perfect opportunity to rape Susan yet acted like a gentleman so there's no way he could have been capable of being a rapist. Of course he wasn't going to rape a girl and risk getting himself in trouble, especially days before he went on a rampage he had been planning for so long. People really need to exercise some common sense before using that night with Susan as an example of Eric's supposed moral incapability of committing rape.

I am personally of the belief that Eric was certainly capable of rape/absolutely had the foundations to potentially become a rapist if he hadn't committed the massacre, however, his preferred and chosen method of inflicting pain on others was a homicidal rampage and not rape.

I don't know whether or not I believe that Eric could be a rapist. I do, however, completely agree that him not raping Susan was not a reflection of his moral standing. This, rather, was a reflection of his logical understanding that raping a girl just before the massacre he planned to commit may well get him in serious trouble, and that getting in serious trouble may cause his situation to be compromised in a way that would stop him from following through with said plans.

Thank you. Obviously none of us can say for sure whether or not Eric would've raped someone if he didn't commit the massacre, but the fact that there was certainly a moral vacuity within Eric is not really debatable considering his actions on 4/20.

This is very true.  I cannot prove one way or another.  But anyone *could* be a rapist.  But not everyone could stand the moral guilt and go thru with it.  I cannot say why but imho I just don't think Eric would have been able to go thru with a rape.  Despite what happened on 4/20 I just don't think he could get that personal with someone.  Just like how I don't think he could stab someone because it is so personal.  But in the end like you sad we will never know

It's difficult to tell, what with most of his writings on women being from an (in my opinion) unreliable source - his journal. But I disagree with people who say that his crime indicates potential to be a rapist. Because, as you said, rape is very up close and personal. Shooting somebody, although less so from a very close range I suppose, is something that is much easier to dissociate from. It is quick and easy. Something like rape or stabbing forces you to be close to the victim, fully acknowledge them and your actions. Really shoves what you are doing in your face, which can be much harder to deal with. If the reason behind them not going through with knifing people was that they couldn't handle it, then I highly doubt that he would be up for raping someone either. Unfortunately at present we are unable to acertain the reason behind the 'decision' not to use knives. We might never know, but I think that, if we did know the reason, it would be the best way to make a more educated guess as to Eric's potential with sex related crimes.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] - Do these messages seem like those of someone with the 'ability' and mindset to rape someone? Maybe, maybe not - but they certainly don't stand out to me as a red flag.

ITA. One of the many reasons I think the killing stopped was because I think killing the kids at close range was too much for them. There are other reasons in my mind too but I agree with the personal aspects mentioned here for sure.

eli27 wrote:

Because, as you said, rape is very up close and personal. Shooting somebody, although less so from a very close range I suppose, is something that is much easier to dissociate from. It is quick and easy. Something like rape or stabbing forces you to be close to the victim, fully acknowledge them and your actions. Really shoves what you are doing in your face, which can be much harder to deal with. If the reason behind them not going through with knifing people was that they couldn't handle it, then I highly doubt that he would be up for raping someone either. Unfortunately at present we are unable to acertain the reason behind the 'decision' not to use knives. We might never know, but I think that, if we did know the reason, it would be the best way to make a more educated guess as to Eric's potential with sex related crimes.

I like your point [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.].

Perhaps Dylan just said it out of the blue but really had no intention to do it. Who knows.

I agree with those who have stated that they wore and carried knives to appear threatening, which would probably discourage someone from approaching them or trying to disarm them. I also think that in their planning they probably thought they would have it in them to stab people, even as a last resort. But in reality you never know how you're going to react in a lot of situations until you're actually in them. I think this is very Telling in why the outcome resulted in significantly fewer deaths than what they had planned for.

Lizpuff wrote:

bubbles wrote:

eli27 wrote:

bubbles wrote:

Okay, well that's your opinion. I'm just tired of people saying he apparently had the perfect opportunity to rape Susan yet acted like a gentleman so there's no way he could have been capable of being a rapist. Of course he wasn't going to rape a girl and risk getting himself in trouble, especially days before he went on a rampage he had been planning for so long. People really need to exercise some common sense before using that night with Susan as an example of Eric's supposed moral incapability of committing rape.

I am personally of the belief that Eric was certainly capable of rape/absolutely had the foundations to potentially become a rapist if he hadn't committed the massacre, however, his preferred and chosen method of inflicting pain on others was a homicidal rampage and not rape.

I don't know whether or not I believe that Eric could be a rapist. I do, however, completely agree that him not raping Susan was not a reflection of his moral standing. This, rather, was a reflection of his logical understanding that raping a girl just before the massacre he planned to commit may well get him in serious trouble, and that getting in serious trouble may cause his situation to be compromised in a way that would stop him from following through with said plans.

Thank you. Obviously none of us can say for sure whether or not Eric would've raped someone if he didn't commit the massacre, but the fact that there was certainly a moral vacuity within Eric is not really debatable considering his actions on 4/20.

This is very true.  I cannot prove one way or another.  But anyone *could* be a rapist.  But not everyone could stand the moral guilt and go thru with it.  I cannot say why but imho I just don't think Eric would have been able to go thru with a rape.  Despite what happened on 4/20 I just don't think he could get that personal with someone.  Just like how I don't think he could stab someone because it is so personal.  But in the end like you sad we will never know

Lizpuff,
Very well said.I agree.

I've always assumed knifing was a bit much for the two. They had originally planned to shoot fleeing kids with some distance between them. Instead they were shooting kids up close as they hid under desks and pleaded for their lives. I just read Jeff Kass' book and he claims they demanded their victims stop screaming. He cites one student who claimed they were shooting people until they stopped screaming, as if they couldn't handle hearing it. If that's true then it points to a sort of forced dissociated state. Remember they wanted these kids to be zombies and Doom monsters. Eventually the weight of what they were doing had to have sank in, even if they never admitted it to each other out loud.

Nirvana92 wrote:

I've always assumed knifing was a bit much for the two. They had originally planned to shoot fleeing kids with some distance between them. Instead they were shooting kids up close as they hid under desks and pleaded for their lives. I just read Jeff Kass' book and he claims they demanded their victims stop screaming. He cites one student who claimed they were shooting people until they stopped screaming, as if they couldn't handle hearing it. If that's true then it points to a sort of forced dissociated state. Remember they wanted these kids to be zombies and Doom monsters. Eventually the weight of what they were doing had to have sank in, even if they never admitted it to each other out loud.

perfect. Absolutely correct! And I think in a couple of threads back [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] said something similar as this along those lines, about wanting the screaming to stop because it brought them back to reality that those were people begging for their life and they wouldn't deal with it, and having to shoot them quiet was the only way. Knifing would've been too personal and perhaps take longer aswell, I don't think they could handle the extra control of someone's life in their hands. Plus who knows, when they're having their way stabbing a person other kids could possibly overtake them during the process. Stabbing is usually a scenario between two people and the victim being helpless by default.

Plus another thing, I think the disassociation between the two and the adamancy to have the kids be quiet and not screaming for their lives sort of proves that they were conscientious with what they were doing, they were not sociopathic/psychopathic killers. They were normal and were aware of others' agony and had to shut it out there and then.

Cool, we've established that some people don't think Eric could've been capable of raping anyone because the act of rape would've just been too confronting and personal for Eric to apparently handle, but let's not act like Eric would've been opposed to the idea of rape purely on ethical grounds and not other reasons relating to his comfort zone, individual objectives etc. That whole "Eric was a sweet gentleman when it came girls" defense doesn't gel with his actions during the massacre.

bubbles wrote:

but let's not act like Eric would've been opposed to the idea of rape purely on ethical grounds

can't say for sure. He knows wrong from right and throughout he's always tried acting right until 4/20. He was raised strictly and he may say to a girl rape is wrong cause it's the right thing to say, and then turn around and fantasise ripping her pants apart. All in all, he's a contradictory little shit and nobody can say for sure. I just think for me that that one journal entry is not enough to settle if Eric as a whole in his existing amount of lifetime could've been a rapist.

Yep, no one can say for sure. He was still a murderous piece of shit, though, and that's something that can't be disputed (well, maybe the piece of shit part, knowing some of the posters in this forum (Inb4 people are butthurt that I called a kid who killed people he didn't even know in cold blood a piece of shit  ).

I think the knives were mostly for show I mean they were loaded for bear just to kill a bunch of unarmed kids so I just don't think they had the grapes to get up close and personal in a hand to hand type of situation. As for rape I think Eric was smart enough to know if he did it would have ruined everything they had been planning. I also think that he was physically weak he was a small guy and may have been intimidated at the thought of trying to overpower her just to be fought off. But this is just my opinion.

bubbles wrote:

Yep, no one can say for sure. He was still a murderous piece of shit, though, and that's something that can't be disputed (well, maybe the piece of shit part, knowing some of the posters in this forum (Inb4 people are butthurt that I called a kid who killed people he didn't even know in cold blood a piece of shit  ).

I don't deny he was a murderous POS

Whenever I feel sad for either of them it is just for who they were, the children that they were. Not the boys they became

They'd have gotten jumped had they tried to knife people.

Ivan wrote:

They'd have gotten jumped had they tried to knife people.

I agree. I said almost the same thing above, that if they were stabbing people and focused on that individual a group of people could jump them and take over them. Afterall stabbing takes awhile and isn't as instantaneous as a single gunshot.

It is very probable that those knives were an important part of show-up and threatening appearance. Even if Dylan wrote - in that school essay the teacher found so disturbing that she would not grade it - about stabbing one victim in the stomach, in reality it would be different.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], what you say about this is very sensible! Stabbing takes a while and the aggressor has no opportunity to focus on other victims.

Lizpuff wrote:

bubbles wrote:

Yep, no one can say for sure. He was still a murderous piece of shit, though, and that's something that can't be disputed (well, maybe the piece of shit part, knowing some of the posters in this forum (Inb4 people are butthurt that I called a kid who killed people he didn't even know in cold blood a piece of shit  ).

I don't deny he was a murderous POS

Whenever I feel sad for either of them it is just for who they were,  the children that they were.  Not the boys they became

I can deny it.Not the murderous part of course.But the POS part?Absolutely.
I don't think it''s right to refer to any human being as such a thing.
All human lives have value, God created everyone and loves everyone.
I'm aware I'm probably the only person on this board who has this opinion.