For those who say Eric and Dylan did it because of bullying....

Ok then let me ask you this, why where they building bombs? Why did they purchase propane tanks and convert them into time bombs? Why did they need a rifle and shotguns just to kill their bullies? Why couldn't they had just purchase 2 handguns and get it over with? Why would they need to wear trench coast and military like clothing? couldn't they had just wear normal clothing? Why where they shooting at everyone then? Why werent they shooting bullies? Why didn't they successfully kill any of the jocks in the library? Why did they spare Evan Todd? Why did they want to blow up the school then? Why did they want to shoot cops then?


THEY CLEARLY WERE TRAUMATIZED FROM THE VAN INCIDENT ARREST! THEY WANTED BACK AT SOCIETY!

Their trenchcoats were their normal clothing m8.

why where they building bombs?
Because they wanted to blow up the school, they hated the whole facility

Why did they purchase propane tanks and convert them into time bombs?
Probably because they were cheap and easy to get a hold of

Why did they need a rifle and shotguns just to kill their bullies? Why couldn't they had just purchase 2 handguns and get it over with?
Their friend bought them the guns at a gun show, Eric and Dylan were fans of the video game DOOM and the shotguns they chose were their favorite DOOM weapons

Why would they need to wear trench coast and military like clothing?
Because Eric thought of it as a mission, a "revolution", also his dad was in the military so their was probably some influence on him as a kid to act like a solider, handle emotions on the inside, etc.

couldn't they had just wear normal clothing?
Well they wore T-shirts, trenchcoats and army boots, they wore all of these to school multiple times, it was their "normal clothing"

Why where they shooting at everyone then?
This is a mystery but in my opinion since the bombs didn't go off they just wanted some kind of revenge or release of anger toward the school

Why werent they shooting bullies?
Because they didn't come in contact with that many during the shooting

Why didn't they successfully kill any of the jocks in the library?
They could of easily killed Evan Todd, and some of the victims may of wronged E&D in some way in the past, idk

Why did they spare Evan Todd?
This still boggles me, my only thought is psychological torment, sparing him so he can live with it the rest of his life. Or maybe he was a jock but one that wasn't really that mean to E&D (which I don't believe), another reason is they stumbled upon him after eric broke his nose and he was seen by many as being somewhat "out of it" and detracted, reality could of been setting in for both of them and their adrenaline rush probably wasn't as strong as the start of the shooting

Why did they want to blow up the school then?
Because they hated it

Why did they want to shoot cops then?
Possibly for revenge against the van incident or just to fuck with them.

joebox97 wrote:

why where they building bombs?
Because they wanted to blow up the school, they hated the whole facility

Why did they purchase propane tanks and convert them into time bombs?
Probably because they were cheap and easy to get a hold of

Why did they need a rifle and shotguns just to kill their bullies? Why couldn't they had just purchase 2 handguns and get it over with?
Their friend bought them the guns at a gun show, Eric and Dylan were fans of the video game DOOM and the shotguns they chose were their favorite DOOM weapons

Why would they need to wear trench coast and military like clothing?
Because Eric thought of it as a mission, a "revolution", also his dad was in the military so their was probably some influence on him as a kid to act like a solider, handle emotions on the inside, etc.

couldn't they had just wear normal clothing?
Well they wore T-shirts, trenchcoats and army boots, they wore all of these to school multiple times, it was their "normal clothing"

Why where they shooting at everyone then?
This is a mystery but in my opinion since the bombs didn't go off they just wanted some kind of revenge or release of anger toward the school

Why werent they shooting bullies?
Because they didn't come in contact with that many during the shooting

Why didn't they successfully kill any of the jocks in the library?
They could of easily killed Evan Todd, and some of the victims may of wronged E&D in some way in the past, idk

Why did they spare Evan Todd?
This still boggles me, my only thought is psychological torment, sparing him so he can live with it the rest of his life. Or maybe he was a jock but one that wasn't really that mean to E&D (which I don't believe), another reason is they stumbled upon him after eric broke his nose and he was seen by many as being somewhat "out of it" and detracted, reality could of been setting in for both of them and their adrenaline rush probably wasn't as strong as the start of the shooting

Why did they want to blow up the school then?
Because they hated it

Why did they want to shoot cops then?
Possibly for revenge against the van incident or just to fuck with them.

I KNEW all these facts just this thread was made for people who know little to jackshit about Columbine!

NSAhoneypot wrote:

Their trenchcoats were their normal clothing m8.

This was thread was made for idiots/retards who think Columbine was because of bullying! I knew the facts and shit this was just made to challenge the bullying shit

??? Lol

I can't answer to all of your questions as I'm still in my early phase. But I believe that it's been established that most of the school shootings are not because of retaliation against bullying.

Dave Cullen? Is that you?

Why would Dave Cullen be on this forum?

Norwegian wrote:

Why would Dave Cullen be on this forum?

It's a joke because Cullen said that Eric and Dylan were never bullied.

Well, Dylan definitely talked about wanting to kill people and commit suicide before the whole van incident. And they both said on the Basement Tapes that the kids at Columbine had been "giving them shit for years". Eric talked about being picked on for the way he looked and for things such as the clothes he wore. He also wrote in his journal how he felt left out of fun things and that he felt like kids left him out on purpose because he was weird, etc. They left behind a lot of comments about how they were treated at Columbine and even friends of theirs, who knew them personally, said they were bullied.

Granted, the bullying they received may have been mild compared to what some other students go through. Nonetheless, they felt like they were picked on at that school.

I'm not an idiot/retard and this December marks 7 years that I've spent on Columbine. I don't think that bullying was the only reason, but I do believe it was part of the reason. And the reason I think this is because Dylan and Eric said it themselves in their journals, on the Basement Tapes and friends of theirs have said it too.

TheOne99 wrote:

THEY CLEARLY WERE TRAUMATIZED FROM THE VAN INCIDENT ARREST! THEY WANTED BACK AT SOCIETY!

As [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] mentioned, Dylan was speaking of killing people and committing suicide in 1997, long before the van incident which occurred in January of 1998. Eric was doing the same- the first set of blog postings that the Brown's gave to police in which Eric poured out his hatred for just about everything and talked of killing Brooks on his website were written sometime in 1997. The Brown's contacted police, I believe, in August of that year for it.

Their hate ran deep and it was long lived. There was no one thing, like the van arrest or bullying, that the attack can be pinned on.

Langman was the one denying that most school shooters retaliate over bullying. He's also drawn parallels between Marc Lepine and Eric Harris, or something like that. So I'm taking this from Langman.

I agree that bullying can be absolutely devastating, but I also believe that theres no perfect way to profile potential mass murders. Not even psychopathy, because most psychopaths are not murderers.

Norwegian wrote:

I can't answer to all of your questions as I'm still in my early phase. But I believe that it's been established that most of the school shootings are not because of retaliation against bullying.

That's what I'm trying to say here

TheOne99 wrote:

NSAhoneypot wrote:

Their trenchcoats were their normal clothing m8.

This was thread was made for idiots/retards who think Columbine was because of bullying! I knew the facts and shit this was just made to challenge the bullying shit

I was wondering why you were saying these things lol. I was thinking hasn't TheOne99 been here a while lol

I assumed most of us didn’t believe it happened only because of bullying.

Do I think bullying was a factor, yes. I think it was one of the many ways that stoked their anger.The whole reason... no way.

Screamingophelia wrote:

I assumed most of us didn’t believe it happened only because of bullying.

Do I think bullying  was a factor, yes. I think it was one of the many ways  that stoked  their anger.The whole reason... no way.

Yes, exactly. It was certainly a factor. But only a factor.

I think the bullying/being made to feel outsiders built on their unhappiness. I think Eric's longing to bond with his dad more was also a factor but I don't think he would have shot his parents. They didn't feel they belonged at the school, so they loathed the school and almost anyone in it.

They definitely did have their fair share of friends from what I know.

Norwegian wrote:

They definitely did have their fair share of friends from what I know.

Just because you have friends doesn't mean you can't be bullied as well.

You can have friends and still not feel accepted by your peers too.

Pixie13 wrote:

You can have friends and still not feel accepted by your peers too.

Exactly and I think even Dylan Started feeling like he wasn’t accepted even by the people who loved him.

Look at the way Zack talked about him after. It could’ve been of course out of anger but he could have still had those feelings towards Dylan before

Tommy QTR wrote:

Norwegian wrote:

Why would Dave Cullen be on this forum?

It's a joke because Cullen said that Eric and Dylan were never bullied.

He didn't say they were never bullied. He said there was no evidence that the bullying led to the murders E&D committed. He also said E&D "had some bad days, for sure" but were perpetrators of bullying far more than recipients of it.

If the ketchup tampon thing never happened (Cullen thinks it "probably did," but that "the details are murky") than the worst bullying I know of directed at E&D specifically was when Dan Lab punched Eric in the face, which Eric said "didn't hurt" (boy, now THERE'S a good phrase for not taking Eric's journals at face value!)

I view bullying as a lesser factor, not the primary factor. The big smoking gun against the bullying accusation is, as has been pointed out, that nobody can come up with a good reason for why they didn't kill Evan Todd or any one who actually bullied them. Cullen (somewhat ridiculously and questionably, to say the least) thinks that it's because they didn't blow up a football game, or a table full of jocks in the lunchroom.

It is true that you can "have friends" and yet not feel "accepted"--that's how I sure as hell felt when I was in jr.sr. high.

There are more bullying instances in some articles and from Sue in her book and Brooks in his book. Also people are acting like Eric and Dylan were going to run and talk about it every five seconds about being bullied they were probably really ashamed at the instances where it happened. None of us know what any of them went through from day to day. We can’t say who had it worse or not.

I read far more instances of them being bullied than being bullies. However I believe they were probably both. I was horribly bullied but when I faught back I was looked at as the jerk. It’s not all black and wine.

Actually, I seem to remember he did say that they werent bullied. But maybe Im confusing hes words with that of Andrew Gumbel. He does say, howewer, that it wasnt retaliation over bullying. I agree, cause we will ignore everything else about EH by simply looking at bullying. Bullying can really be a damaging factor if taken to the extreme. Take the example of the syrian refugee that recently recorded an attack by hes racist bully. Where hed been severely beaten simply because he came from Syr

Syria, and the bully was a racist nationalist. No doubt, this is really quite extreme. IDK how common this type of extreme bullying is, allthough I can say I experienced some level of extreme bullying and harassment like death threats, people trying to beat me up, stuff like that. IDK how commonplace extreme bullying is from country to country.

Why didn't Eric and Dylans bullies ever come out and apologize for bullying them?

bradt93 wrote:

Why didn't Eric and Dylans bullies ever come out and apologize for bullying them?

Because...they're bullies? 

Norwegian wrote:

Actually, I seem to remember he did say that they werent bullied. But maybe Im confusing hes words with that of Andrew Gumbel. He does say, howewer, that it wasnt retaliation over bullying. I agree, cause we will ignore everything else about EH by simply looking at bullying. Bullying can really be a damaging factor if taken to the extreme. Take the example of the syrian refugee that recently recorded an attack by hes racist bully. Where hed been severely beaten simply because he came from Syr

He didn't record it, someone else did. Also, there's no evidence that he was bullied because he was Syrian. Also, I imagine pushing, shoving and pouring water on someone is common in most countries, going by the kind of footage I've seen from countries like America, Russia, China and India. I know stuff like that (and far worse) was extremely common at schools I went to.

QuestionMark wrote:

bradt93 wrote:

Why didn't Eric and Dylans bullies ever come out and apologize for bullying them?

Because...they're bullies? 

Most likely because they didn't want to put some of the spotlight on themselves after the shooting, as bullying came to be one of the reasons why the shooting even happened. In the 11k document some of them said they didn't remember Eric or Dylan and never had direct contact which I believe is complete and utter BS.

My guesses are: They bullied everyone and maybe forgot their faces (I think this is unlikely though) and they were and still are just protecting themselves and all the horrible bullying that they did and straight up just lied to law enforcement to look like sweet angels.

One jock did admit to being a bully but I'm not sure if he apologised for it.

I’m pretty sure the jock hat was on the show intervention admitted that he bullied them. I think he graduated in 1998.

You're 100% right.

There was a time, however, when Kathy thought of her son as the perfect child and the love of her life. As a student at Columbine High School, Jason was a star athlete who ran with the "cool" crowd. Though he experimented with marijuana and cocaine during his teenage years, his downward spiral didn't begin until 10 months after he finished his senior year of high school.

On April 20, 1999, students Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold embarked on a massacre at Jason's high school. Twelve of his former classmates and one teacher were murdered during this cold, calculated attack.

"A big reason for their rebellion was because of the jocks in '98, saying that we picked on them and that we were bullies," Jason said. "I know I was a bully in high school."

Wracked with sadness, shame and guilt, Jason amped up his drug use and sank deeper into addiction.


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

Yeah my sister has said there definitely was bullying. She was the class of 2000 and a varsity cheer/pom. She doesnt believe the ketchup tampon incident happened but that it was two incidents combined and amplified that turned into that rumor. She also said the worst bullies who did the most egregious stuff were definitely Rocky and his gang who graduated in 98 but there was still pretty bad bullying after just nothing nearly as bad as before.

shadowofthewill wrote:

QuestionMark wrote:

bradt93 wrote:

Why didn't Eric and Dylans bullies ever come out and apologize for bullying them?

Because...they're bullies? 

Most likely because they didn't want to put some of the spotlight on themselves after the shooting, as bullying came to be one of the reasons why the shooting even happened. In the 11k document some of them said they didn't remember Eric or Dylan and never had direct contact which I believe is complete and utter BS.

My guesses are: They bullied everyone and maybe forgot their faces (I think this is unlikely though) and they were and still are just protecting themselves and all the horrible bullying that they did and straight up just lied to law enforcement to look like sweet angels.

One jock did admit to being a bully but I'm not sure if he apologised for it.

Well, it would've been nice you know to see them matured and accept part of the blame too. You're probably right though cowards usually do protect themselves and don't want to come out in the open.

I also think because in the aftermath things got really nasty. With all the lawsuits and pointing fingers. I think that shut a lot of people up, not just from admitting/apologizing for being bullies but anything else that could somehow be misconstrued as being partially to blame and/or knowing anything about the attack before hand. My sister said she didn't talk about knowing Eric for a long time after because if you said anything slightly nice about them around most other students you were attacked pretty bad.

I get a sense that people who knew and liked Dylan are more comfortable with talking about him in a more positive light. I rarely hear anything from people who had a good experience with Eric but we know they existed.

It is almost like Dylan was the boy who went astray, could have been anyone's son or friend and Eric was the big bad who dragged Dylan down.

I wonder if that is because Dylan was more well-liked, he was a local boy and his friends started the "Dylan was the follower" narrative early on?

Pixie13 wrote:

I wonder if that is because Dylan was more well-liked, he was a local boy and his friends started the "Dylan was the follower" narrative early on?

For the record Brooks Brown said it on camera right after the massacre. That was perhaps the beginning of "Dylan the sidekick."

Here is the reason Columbine was a toxic environment for anyone who looked different and was totally unfair.

“Evan Todd, the 255-lb. defensive lineman who was wounded in the library, describes the climate this way: “Columbine is a clean, good place except for those rejects,” Todd says of Klebold, Harris and their friends. “Most kids didn’t want them there. They were into witchcraft. They were into voodoo dolls. Sure, we teased them. But what do you expect with kids who come to school with weird hairdos and horns on their hats? It’s not just jocks; the whole school’s disgusted with them. They’re a bunch of homos, grabbing each other’s private parts. If you want to get rid of someone, usually you tease’ em. So the whole school would call them homos, and when they did something sick, we’d tell them, ‘You’re sick and that’s wrong.'””

Now can anyone really defend a piece of sh** like that?

Whenever I read Dave cullen I see red.
Saying E&D were not bullied is like saying "Columbine was full of flowers and rainbows E&D did this because they were bored." I wish ppl would excuse me for the word not bullshit themselves believing cullen and media informations like they were gay, they did it on April 20 because of Hitlers.
birthday .
They planned the attack for April 19! but were late because their gear arrived late.

An eyewitness saw Eric being picked on & heard Eric saying "I swear someday I'll do it." I think the bullying played the part in the shooting. Other Was mental health. I wish ppl would finally open their eyes on that instead of gun control. Gun control would only reduce shootings.

What is wrong with reducing shootings? Surely that is a good start?

Pixie13 wrote:

What is wrong with reducing shootings? Surely that is a good start?

I actually think that Rebbie likely meant that gun control would only REDUCE shootings, and NOT STOP them completely. Meaning that the main focus being on the weapon is missing out on SO much more that would have a greater effect on the issue.

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

Pixie13 wrote:

What is wrong with reducing shootings? Surely that is a good start?

I actually think that Rebbie likely meant that gun control would only REDUCE shootings, and NOT STOP them completely. Meaning that the main focus being on the weapon is missing out on SO much more that would have a greater effect on the issue.

And maybe also that while shootings might go down, besides guns there are a million other ways to kill people and someone who is motivated will unfortunately find the means.

thelmar wrote:

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

Pixie13 wrote:

What is wrong with reducing shootings? Surely that is a good start?

I actually think that Rebbie likely meant that gun control would only REDUCE shootings, and NOT STOP them completely. Meaning that the main focus being on the weapon is missing out on SO much more that would have a greater effect on the issue.

And maybe also that while shootings might go down, besides guns there are a million other ways to kill people and someone who is motivated will unfortunately find the means.

Very true indeed. Where there's a will there's a way. Until everyone wants to focus on what makes someone SO willing to do such things then their choice of weapon is just secondary in my opinion.

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

thelmar wrote:

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

Pixie13 wrote:

What is wrong with reducing shootings? Surely that is a good start?

I actually think that Rebbie likely meant that gun control would only REDUCE shootings, and NOT STOP them completely. Meaning that the main focus being on the weapon is missing out on SO much more that would have a greater effect on the issue.

And maybe also that while shootings might go down, besides guns there are a million other ways to kill people and someone who is motivated will unfortunately find the means.

Very true indeed. Where there's a will there's a way. Until everyone wants to focus on what makes someone SO willing to do such things then their choice of weapon is just secondary in my opinion.  

The problem is that what makes someone want to kill a bunch of people then themselves is almost impossible to determine. I've sort of mentioned it before but there were other kids at Columbine who were more "at-risk" than Eric and Dylan, yet they never took up arms.

Eric had access to mental healthcare though, didn't he? He also tried killing people with bombs, remind me how that went...

Pixie13 wrote:

Eric had access to mental healthcare though, didn't he? He also tried killing people with bombs, remind me how that went...

Eric Harris' incompetence at bomb making doesn't mean bombs can't easily be made with easily sourced ingredients. The Tsarnaev brothers, Ted Kaczsynski, Anders Breivik, Ramzi Yousef, and Timothy McVeigh are proof of that. Eric's mistake was thinking that gas canisters, which are specifically designed with consumer safety in mind, are like red barrels in video games. The fact of the matter is, mentally ill people who are intent on killing their fellow citizens will find a way to do it, whether you remove the option of firearms from them or not. Although, even when you do that, they can just illegally acquire firearms, like Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold did.

I think Columbine was different than shootings like Sandy Hook and Parkland, I believe gun control (such as limiting firearm sales to cognitively impaired individuals with warning signs) might have made a bigger impact there. Of course there's other reasons, but the killers there slipped through the cracks in very very different ways than Eric and Dylan. I don't think gun control would have had much of an impact on Columbine, there were very different factors at play. But just because it doesn't apply to Columbine doesn't mean I'm totally against it or think it wouldn't help in other respects (I'm not anti gun, I'm from a military family but I do support things like requiring locks around young children, etc.) I also think you can be in favor of one approach while recognizing it's not mutually exclusive. The thing with Columbine was people didn't just latch on to a single cause they did so vehemently and to the exclusion of anything else.