13 victims or 15 victims?

One of the biggest debates regarding Columbine. So...which is for you?

For me, it is 15.

I think they're all victims.

This debate is just a war of words. I'd sooner say 13 victims just to separate them from the 2 assholes who killed them.

I agree that it's a war of words. The total of victims far exceeds 15. Others were physically injured and lots of kids who weren't are psychologically scarred for life. Add in the grieving families and we're getting into many hundreds.
If we're talking about how many people died unnecessarily that day, I think of the number as 15. Dylan and Eric were killers but that doesn't render them inhuman.

I've always been a staunch supporter of the "47 Victim Rule", personally.

Quote :

I agree that it's a war of words.
The total of victims far exceeds 15. Others were physically injured and lots of kids who weren't are psychologically scarred for life.
Add in the grieving families and we're getting into many hundreds.
If we're talking about how many people died unnecessarily that day, I think
of the number as 15. Dylan and Eric were killers but that doesn't render them inhuman.

Yeah, agreed. All 15 fatalities I guess are "fatalities"/"victims", but 13 of them did not have a choice.
However, the literal "victim" count would stretch into the hundreds, maybe even thousands.

Eric and Dylan (in my opinion) are in a sense, victims from another standpoint. Victims in the sense that they didn't exactly choose the circumstances leading up to/surrounding the massacre which likely impacted them, but not victims of the massacre itself. Post subject to change :v.

sergeant hartman wrote:

This debate is just a war of words. I'd sooner say 13 victims just to separate them from the 2 assholes who killed them.

But they were driven to it by bullies and other undue circumstances.

Eric and Dylan were the first victims of Columbine. Whether people would like to look at it squarely in the eye or turn away, the fact is that if we as a society had been able to "save" Eric and Dylan, we would have been able to save them all.

BurnIt wrote:

Eric and Dylan were the first victims of Columbine. Whether people would like to look at it squarely in the eye or turn away, the fact is that if we as a society had been able to "save" Eric and Dylan, we would have been able to save them all.

Amen to that.

Jenn wrote:

BurnIt wrote:

Eric and Dylan were the first victims of Columbine. Whether people would like to look at it squarely in the eye or turn away, the fact is that if we as a society had been able to "save" Eric and Dylan, we would have been able to save them all.

Amen to that.

I do not see Eric and Dylan as victims of Columbine. In a different sense, they were victims of being bullied, but of the massacre, I disagree that they're victims. They committed it.

I find it would be a tad disrespectful to the victims to have their killers memorialized with them in the concrete memorials, not to mention the living who are scarred for life.

However, internet collages and youtube tributes with fifteen faces don't bother me at all if someone wants to include them. But what really angers me when someone comments on a picture of thirteen faces saying "where's Eric and Dylan?" It's like, wow, is it so bad for the victims to be remembered in their own group picture without their killers being given extra attention every single time?

(Please tell me I'm not the only one who feels this way? I hate how unpopular this opinion is lol, even away from Tumblr, where people who share my opinion are assumed to be unaware that "they died too/their parents lost children too". Or described as, my favorite, "ignorant".)

gutenfxckintag wrote:

I do not see Eric and Dylan as victims of Columbine. In a different sense, they were victims of being bullied, but of the massacre, I disagree that they're victims. They committed it.

I find it would be a tad disrespectful to the victims to have their killers memorialized with them in the concrete memorials, not to mention the living who are scarred for life.

However, internet collages and youtube tributes with fifteen faces don't bother me at all if someone wants to include them. But what really angers me when someone comments on a picture of thirteen faces saying "where's Eric and Dylan?" It's like, wow, is it so bad for the victims to be remembered in their own group picture without their killers being given extra attention every single time?

(Please tell me I'm not the only one who feels this way? I hate how unpopular this opinion is lol, even away from Tumblr, where people who share my opinion are assumed to be unaware that "they died too/their parents lost children too". Or described as, my favorite, "ignorant".)

How do you feel about Dylan and Eric's crosses being torn out of the ground, chopped up and thrown away?

Ah, I knew that was coming. I knew It was just me.

(Here comes another unpopular opinion) I understand why they were torn out of the ground and chopped up in the days following the massacre. A way of unleashing anger I suppose. (And a somewhat popular part) but it was still highly unnecessary.

(And back to unpopular) I think Eric and Dylan should have had their crosses put elsewhere, for those who wanted to visit their crosses. Not everyone wanted to see their faces in the same place as the victims' concrete memorials while the shock was still present. People affected by Columbine shouldn't have to have felt obligated to pay tribute to the people who committed the massacre while their emotions were still running high.

gutenfxckintag wrote:

Ah, I knew that was coming. I knew It was just me.

(Here comes another unpopular opinion) I understand why they were torn out of the ground and chopped up in the days following the massacre. A way of unleashing anger I suppose. (And a somewhat popular part) but it was still highly unnecessary.

(And back to unpopular) I think Eric and Dylan should have had their crosses put elsewhere, for those who wanted to visit their crosses. Not everyone wanted to see their faces in the same place as the victims' concrete memorials while the shock was still present. People affected by Columbine shouldn't have to have felt obligated to pay tribute to the people who committed the massacre while their emotions were still running high.

It's not just you, I am sure other people feel that way too. I believe that all 15 were victims though. Mainly because of how Dylan and Eric were treated prior to the massacre that led to them to doing it. I think ripping the crosses out of the ground and chopping them up was horrible though. Dylan and Eric's parents lost a child too, but on the other side of the coin, I can understand why the parents of the children that Dylan and Eric murdered wouldn't want to see their crosses next to their child's. I guess my thoughts on this are more complex than I originally thought.

I think Eric and Dylan were victims of their own mind.

13 for me.

As for the crosses - I think it was absolutely idiotic for them to put one's up for Eric and Dylan. Imagine, let's say, your brother had been gunned down days earlier and his memorial cross is in between the two people who did it.

Just thinking about it boggles the mind. I could never imagine them carving Lanza's name into any memorials at Newtown.

For me 15 victims and Dylan and Eric are the first ones. They are victims of this society, victims of what surrounded them, and eventually of their own mind. The 13 victims are victims of the massacre, of what they provoked and put their crosses there in the middle of the other crosses was totally wrong but they are definitely victims too.

15 victims--Eric and Dylan were victims of the environment and society they grew up in.

I can understand why parents would find E and D's crosses right next to the other 13 victims who were killed by them to be disrespectful and such. They should have been moved a decent distance from the other crosses, at the very least.

15, most of the time. But I understand why sometimes you need a video that talks of 13 families (or 13 victims) because the focus is often on the perpetretors instead of the victims. I also agree that Eric and Dylan's crosses should not have been on that hill.

People's anger is understandable. But reactions are so widely varied. Some victims or people close to victims understand how E & D did such a thing, they hold no anger. You can see how very different people's reactions are when you see the letters, the prayers on Dylan and Eric's crosses. I remember when I watched ''13 families'', it's so apparent from families talking about their loss that some have a lot of anger still, while others have forgiven Eric and Dylan and to some extent, understand why they did what they did (even if it doesn't make it right). That's people who actually lost a sibling, pretty incredible but, it's all very personal, whether someone holds anger, forgive and so on.

Hale-Bopp wrote:

I think Eric and Dylan were victims of their own mind.

I agree. But they were also victims of bullying, medication (for Eric, at least). They were victims of a society that only cares about people who are athletic, pretty, and popular.
However, regarding the crosses, it was disrespectful to the families to put them up right beside the people they killed. I think they should have put the crosses far away from the other 13.

I still don't understand, why people always say, that Eric and Dylan were bullied. I would not consider anything of the things other people did to them as bulllying.
Making fun of someones clothing is not bullying. Shoving someone in the halls, because he is blocking the Jocks way, in not bullying. Throwing a bottle at a random person is not bullying.

For me, bullying is when someone constantly and repeatedly attacking someone else who is specifically targeted on a daily basis. There is no evidence that this did ever happen to Eric or Dylan, so, I don't think that they were ever bullied.

But they, in fact, bullied other people. As Dylan harassed and threatened this boy with special education needs, for example. This boy was chosen as a specific target and attacked on a more or less daily basis down to a point where the boys mother considered to take her son from the school. This was bullying.

I don't say this, because I think Eric and Dylan were monsters and don't deserve our pity, I definitive feel for them. But I feel for them, because I know what a devastating turn took their mind during adolescence. I cant feel pity for them being bullied, because they just weren't.

They werent bully in the way that someone repeatedly attack them but they were rejected by the society, they didnt fit in anywhere because they were not exatcly what people call "normal", even Brooks Brown said that they were a couple of losers and that for a teaneger is really hard to handle, becoming very antisocial with the time. If they started to bully others, it could be a signal of how angry they were with the people for not accept them, sometimes this people start to be very rude with others so it could be how they expressed what they felt.

Mj2beat wrote:

they didnt fit in anywhere because they were not exatcly what people call "normal"

I understand what you're saying but they also had ways of being sure that they didn't. They made being "different" almost a shield of armor and made damn sure people knew they weren't like them.

areyoulistening wrote:

Mj2beat wrote:

they didnt fit in anywhere because they were not exatcly what people call "normal"

I understand what you're saying but they also had ways of being sure that they didn't. They made being "different" almost a shield of armor and made damn sure people knew they weren't like them.

I understand what you are saying too but I think that in the end they did that, because is very possible that they were rejected since childhood, specially Eric that could never made friends easily for moved on regularly so after suffer that problem for so many years, made that "shield of armor" and dont care about people anymore and show them that they were different, was like giving up and finally learn that people doesnt worth it anyway, because their hate against them was starting to grow inside.

JayJay wrote:

15, most of the time. But I understand why sometimes you need a video that talks of 13 families (or 13 victims) because the focus is often on the perpetretors instead of the victims. I also agree that Eric and Dylan's crosses should not have been on that hill.

People's anger is understandable. But reactions are so widely varied. Some victims or people close to victims understand how E & D did such a thing, they hold no anger. You can see how very different people's reactions are when you see the letters, the prayers on Dylan and Eric's crosses. I remember when I watched ''13 families'', it's so apparent from families talking about their loss that some have a lot of anger still, while others have forgiven Eric and Dylan and to some extent, understand why they did what they did (even if it doesn't make it right). That's people who actually lost a sibling, pretty incredible but, it's all very personal, whether someone holds anger, forgive and so on.

I agree with both of these paragraphs. Sometimes it's appropriate to include Eric and Dylan in things, others not. But there are some tumblr/youtube wackos who can't handle when the focus is on 13 and Eric and Dylan are left out of it (like in "13 families", "reunion", Livy paintings, the atrium, Chapel Hill, Clement Park, and even internet pictures of faces). I cannot stand people like that. These same people are so quick to judge and demonize the victims' families reactions to their losses too.

If I remember correctly, at the end of "Dawn Anna" (has anyone else seen or heard of it?) the credits list the 13 victims in memory, pause for a second, then list Eric and Dylan. I kind of like the pause. Not exactly grouping them with their victims, but also wishing them a rest in peace. I remember seeing a news clip of a bell tower ringing fifteen times the week after the shooting. If I also remember correctly, there was a longer pause before the 14th ringing.

Y'know, it's because of this that I actually kind of wish that Rachel Scott had drawn 2 more tears in her last illustration.

I always think 13 victims simply because there were 13 that day who were innocent and died at the hands of evil. Eric and Dylan knew they were going to die, why did they have to take innocent people with them.

Radioactive_Clothing wrote:

13 for me.

As for the crosses - I think it was absolutely idiotic for them to put one's up for Eric and Dylan. Imagine, let's say, your brother had been gunned down days earlier and his memorial cross is in between the two people who did it.

Just thinking about it boggles the mind. I could never imagine them carving Lanza's name into any memorials at Newtown.

I think it was a wonderful thing there were crosses for E &D put up on the Hill.In my opinion,they deserved to be there like the others because they were victims too.People always look at it from the victims' relatives points of view, but there is another side and a point of view that is as valid as theirs.That of Eric and Dylan's parents and siblings.They lost just as much as the other families ,maybe more,and were in even worse agony.I don't know how Eric's parents felt but the Klebolds have come out and said that they were angered and very hurt by the crosses being ripped up and destroyed.Why don't their feelings matter as much as the victims relatives? I also don't think all the victims relatives ,for example people like the Scotts,Curnows, and Bernalls at that time were enraged about the crosses being there.If they were they didn't say anything about it or seem to make efforts to get them removed.

Juicy Jazzy wrote:

I always think 13 victims simply because there were 13 that day who were innocent and died at the hands of evil. Eric and Dylan knew they were going to die, why did they have to take innocent people with them.

Eric and Dylan's actions were evil that day but another sort of evil sparked the fire that led them down this path to start with.What is it but evil to ostracize and humiliate someone for your own pleasure because they are different and don't fit in or fit your standards? This happens millions a time a day in high schools all over the place.

13 victims. When I think "victim" I don't think of the perpetrators.

PaintItBlack wrote:

Radioactive_Clothing wrote:

13 for me.

As for the crosses - I think it was absolutely idiotic for them to put one's up for Eric and Dylan. Imagine, let's say, your brother had been gunned down days earlier and his memorial cross is in between the two people who did it.

Just thinking about it boggles the mind. I could never imagine them carving Lanza's name into any memorials at Newtown.

I think it was a wonderful thing there were crosses for E &D put up on the Hill.In my opinion,they deserved to be there like the others because they were victims too.People always look at it from the victims' relatives points of view, but there is another side and a point of view that is as valid as theirs.That of Eric and Dylan's parents and siblings.They lost just as much as the other families ,maybe more,and were in even worse agony.I don't know how Eric's parents felt but the Klebolds have come out and said that they were  angered and very hurt by the crosses being ripped up and destroyed.Why don't their feelings matter as much as the victims relatives? I also don't think all the victims relatives ,for example people like the Scotts,Curnows, and Bernalls at that time were enraged about the crosses being there.If they were they didn't say anything about it or seem to make efforts to get them removed.

AMEN PaintItBlack!!

PaintItBlack wrote:

Radioactive_Clothing wrote:

13 for me.

As for the crosses - I think it was absolutely idiotic for them to put one's up for Eric and Dylan. Imagine, let's say, your brother had been gunned down days earlier and his memorial cross is in between the two people who did it.

Just thinking about it boggles the mind. I could never imagine them carving Lanza's name into any memorials at Newtown.

I think it was a wonderful thing there were crosses for E &D put up on the Hill.In my opinion,they deserved to be there like the others because they were victims too.People always look at it from the victims' relatives points of view, but there is another side and a point of view that is as valid as theirs.That of Eric and Dylan's parents and siblings.They lost just as much as the other families ,maybe more,and were in even worse agony.I don't know how Eric's parents felt but the Klebolds have come out and said that they were  angered and very hurt by the crosses being ripped up and destroyed.Why don't their feelings matter as much as the victims relatives? I also don't think all the victims relatives ,for example people like the Scotts,Curnows, and Bernalls at that time were enraged about the crosses being there.If they were they didn't say anything about it or seem to make efforts to get them removed.

I agree with this. It was one thing to remove the crosses, but why destroy them? Didn't anyone even consider that maybe their parents would want their crosses? And it is true, Dylan and Eric's parents lost just as much as the parents of the other victims. People seem to forget that though. Regardless of what happened, they were still their children and they were never going to see them again and not only that but they had to accept that their children were not what they thought they were.

PaintItBlack wrote:

Eric and Dylan's actions were evil that day but another sort of evil sparked the fire that led them down this path to start with.What is it but evil to ostracize and humiliate someone for your own pleasure because they are different and don't fit in or fit your standards? This happens millions a time a day in high schools all over the place.

But the millions of people who are bullied each day don't go off on a homicidal rampage, though.

It was stupid because that was always going to happen. Unfair on Klebold's and Harris' that try were torn down the way they were I agree.I doubt the Klebold's and Harris family wanted them their in the first place as they knew that would likely happen - hence why it was never revealed where the boys were buried as a similar thing may have happened at the gravesite.

I don't blame the families that pulled them down - not one bit. I blame whoever put them up in the first place.

In Tom Mauser's book, Walking in Daniel's Shoes, he says that the person who made the crosses was a carpenter with good intentions who never asked anybody's opinion before putting up the crosses on the hill. So, with raw feelings, it was predictable that anger would erupt. It must have lead to more hurt for E & D's parents. Of course, they would not speak up, they basically lost all their rights to speak up and defend themselves and their sons because of how evil they were considered. Tom Mauser himself is of the opinion E&D's crosses should have been put in another place, apart from the others, while still having a right to their own.

Juicy Jazzy wrote:

PaintItBlack wrote:

Eric and Dylan's actions were evil that day but another sort of evil sparked the fire that led them down this path to start with.What is it but evil to ostracize and humiliate someone for your own pleasure because they are different and don't fit in or fit your standards? This happens millions a time a day in high schools all over the place.

But the millions of people who are bullied each day don't go off on a homicidal rampage, though.

Not every bullied victim goes off and commits suicide alone either, but it still happens many times a year all over the world.

Radioactive_Clothing wrote:

It was stupid because that was always going to happen. Unfair on Klebold's and Harris' that try were torn down the way they were I agree.I doubt the Klebold's and Harris family wanted them their in the first place as they knew that would likely happen - hence why it was never revealed where the boys were buried as a similar thing may have happened at the gravesite.

I don't blame the families that pulled them down - not one bit. I blame whoever put them up in the first place.

I don't think it was a stupid thing to do.I think it was a kind,compassionate and very Christian action to take.To me, that is true Christianity in action. Pulling down the crosses and destroying the trees was anything but even though the people who did that were coming from a very self righteous Christian standpoint.
I don't know what Eric's parents felt but Dylan's parents said they welcomed the crosses and were very pleased and touched they were put up and hurt and angered when they were ripped up.Dylan's father referred to the ones who destroyed the crosses and trees as a "lynch mob" and no matter how unpopular this opinion is,I have to say I agree with him.
The victim's parents who tore down the trees and crosses have always been very vocal about not having any sympathy or empathy for Eric and Dylan's parents so I'm sure they did not care at the time how hurt they would be by such an action.

JayJay wrote:

In Tom Mauser's book, Walking in Daniel's Shoes, he says that the person who made the crosses was a carpenter with good intentions who never asked anybody's opinion before putting up the crosses on the hill. So, with raw feelings, it was predictable that anger would erupt. It must have lead to more hurt for E & D's parents. Of course, they would not speak up, they basically lost all their rights to speak up and defend themselves and their sons because of how evil they were considered. Tom Mauser himself is of the opinion E&D's crosses should have been put in another place, apart from the others, while still having a right to their own.

They should not have lost their right to speak.Many people still act to this very day as if their parents have no right to any grief,sorrow, feelings or opinions about anything that happened,or any part of the events.What a shame for them to endure such a tragedy and then be forced to keep silent and not be able to speak in your defense or express your sorrow and agony in any public way for so many years.Eric's parents are still too afraid to speak up.They say they never will.It was people's hateful ignorance and the lawsuits from the victim's families that went on for many years that stopped the Klebolds from being able to speak for so long.

CatherineM813 wrote:

PaintItBlack wrote:

Radioactive_Clothing wrote:

13 for me.

As for the crosses - I think it was absolutely idiotic for them to put one's up for Eric and Dylan. Imagine, let's say, your brother had been gunned down days earlier and his memorial cross is in between the two people who did it.

Just thinking about it boggles the mind. I could never imagine them carving Lanza's name into any memorials at Newtown.

I think it was a wonderful thing there were crosses for E &D put up on the Hill.In my opinion,they deserved to be there like the others because they were victims too.People always look at it from the victims' relatives points of view, but there is another side and a point of view that is as valid as theirs.That of Eric and Dylan's parents and siblings.They lost just as much as the other families ,maybe more,and were in even worse agony.I don't know how Eric's parents felt but the Klebolds have come out and said that they were  angered and very hurt by the crosses being ripped up and destroyed.Why don't their feelings matter as much as the victims relatives? I also don't think all the victims relatives ,for example people like the Scotts,Curnows, and Bernalls at that time were enraged about the crosses being there.If they were they didn't say anything about it or seem to make efforts to get them removed.

AMEN PaintItBlack!!

Thank You Catherine.

I have a great sympathy for the agony the victim's family's have been through and the terrible loss of their loved ones, but I have even more sympathy for the family of E &D because I think they've suffered the most with little help or support and lots of lawsuits, public judgment and harassment to deal with along the way.Despite my sympathy for them,I don't think some of the things some victims families' have done and said over the years towards the H&K families has been right.

15.

I'm still researching the psychological effects of peer victimization but to me there has to be a causal factor for what Eric and Dylan did.

It doesn't make it right.

However, they did commit suicide and that does give us clues as to how they valued themselves. That thinking doesn't come from nowhere. Something did happen to these boys to make them depressed and for what rage they felt to build.

To me they were the victims of society.

If Eric and Dylan are victims of 4/20, then why not extend it to those injured?  Or those who weren't injured but are still suffering from PTSD?  Aren't they also victims of 4/20?

The very definition of victim keeps me from saying that E+D were victims of 4/20/99. The perpetrator cannot be a victim of an attack.

Not everyone agrees that a perpetrator cannot also be a victim.It's all opinion.Perhaps they cannot be a victim in the exact same way as others killed but I believe they can be victims all the same.People who commit suicide alone are also called suicide victims or victims of suicide although most of the time they made a conscious choice to die for whatever reasons.

Yes, that's just my opinion.

I suppose people will always think differently about this sort of thing.

I find it difficult feeling sorry for for murderers. People like Amon Goeth who shot people were more than likely a little mentally unhinged and had quite radical views (ie E&D) - you didn't see many people feeling too sorry for him or his family when they hanged him or call him a victim of the war.

I have a few questions.People always ask others to look at this from the viewpoint of a victims family member. What if you were a parent of E &D's or a sibling? What would you feel then about the crosses and trees being destroyed? Would you still feel then that no murderer ever deserves any understanding or sympathy?

I am not asking out of hostility but sincere curiosity.

It's difficult for me to think from the viewpoint of the family members. I find many of them to be filled with so much hate that it turns me off of their cause completely.

I am not a fan girl. I'm merely someone that has been deeply affected by being out of the norm and I feel that being hateful and disrespectful doesn't add to our understanding of how this occured.

I think what the victims must understand is that it is tremendously difficult to deal with a teenager who is emotionally unstable. It takes a champion of a parent to be able to navigate those waters.

I for one had parents who did not know how to deal with me. And so... they didn't deal with me. I pulled myself out of it.

So in regards to the crosses or trees. The thing is... they did what they could. They couldn't have known. And to deny them a place to grieve to me is just cruel. They didn't pull the trigger.

midema wrote:

It's difficult for me to think from the viewpoint of the family members. I find many of them to be filled with so much hate that it turns me off of their cause completely.

I am not a fan girl.  I'm merely someone that has been deeply affected by being out of the norm and I feel that being hateful and disrespectful doesn't add to our understanding of how this occured.

I think what the victims must understand is that it is tremendously difficult to deal with a teenager who is emotionally unstable. It takes a champion of a parent to be able to navigate those waters.

I for one had parents who did not know how to deal with me. And so... they didn't deal with me. I pulled myself out of it.

So in regards to the crosses or trees. The thing is... they did what they could. They couldn't have known. And to deny them a place to grieve to me is just cruel. They didn't pull the trigger.  

This is a super post.I agree with much of what you said.

I personally think 13 victims. You can think Eric and Dylan are victims but they weren't victims of 4/20. Honestly it doesn't bother me when people say there are 15 victims. What does bother me is when someone makes like a graphic with the 13 and someone has to comment, "15 not 13!!!!". Does it really hurt you that much to see 13 people have their own thing?

As for the parents, while you may not agree with the crosses and trees being taken down, it isn't that hard to understand where they're coming from. If my kid was murdered, I definitely wouldn't be thinking of how the parents of the kid that killed mine would feel. I would definitely feel hate at the moment. So while you don't agree with those actions, you can at least try to see it from their viewpoints. I feel for the Klebolds and Harrises just like I do for the victims families. I do feel sorry that they don't have a place to mourn their sons, so I don't agree with the crosses/trees being cut down but I can understand why the victims family members didn't want them up.

PaintItBlack wrote:

I have a few questions.People always ask others to look at this from the viewpoint of a victims family member. What if you were a parent of E &D's or a sibling? What would you feel then about the crosses and trees being destroyed? Would you still feel then that no murderer ever deserves any understanding or sympathy?

I am not asking out of hostility but sincere curiosity.

I would be too shocked at the massacre itself to really care about a cross and a tree.  I would be more concerned if someone started vandalizing my property, something that didn't happen to the Harrises and Klebolds.

sergeant hartman wrote:

PaintItBlack wrote:

I have a few questions.People always ask others to look at this from the viewpoint of a victims family member. What if you were a parent of E &D's or a sibling? What would you feel then about the crosses and trees being destroyed? Would you still feel then that no murderer ever deserves any understanding or sympathy?

I am not asking out of hostility but sincere curiosity.

I would be too shocked at the massacre itself to really care about a cross and a tree.  I would be more concerned if someone started vandalizing my property, something that didn't happen to the Harrises and Klebolds.

You might think you would not care now but if you were actually in that situation, you might find it hurtful at the time it was happening. Dylan's parents said they did.