Had Columbine been a one off shooting in the 90s...

...do you believe the massive impact it had on zero tolerance, active shooter drills, police response etc- would have happened?

Referring to the lead up to Columbine in the mid to late 90s with the deluge of *small* school shootings with a handful of victims each time, building towards the explosion that was Columbine- theoretically had none of these *small* shootings happened do you believe Columbine would have had lesser impact, and being seen as a freak one off event as such instead of forcing the hand of action?

5PMSomewhere wrote:

theoretically had none of these *small* shootings happened do you believe Columbine would have had lesser impact, and being seen as a freak one off event as such instead of forcing the hand of action?

No, because the smaller shootings were just that - small. Columbine was the only one, thanks to the wall to wall media attention it gathered, to mobilize popular support for so many policies.

Columbine was also the first mass death shooting in quite a long time in the US. It was like the others didn't happen.

QuestionMark wrote:

5PMSomewhere wrote:

theoretically had none of these *small* shootings happened do you believe Columbine would have had lesser impact, and being seen as a freak one off event as such instead of forcing the hand of action?

No, because the smaller shootings were just that - small. Columbine was the only one, thanks to the wall to wall media attention it gathered, to mobilize popular support for so many policies.

I, honestly, think that even with the death toll if there hadn't been such a clamor from the media then the shooting wouldn't have garnered everything it has.

hvernon wrote:

QuestionMark wrote:

5PMSomewhere wrote:

theoretically had none of these *small* shootings happened do you believe Columbine would have had lesser impact, and being seen as a freak one off event as such instead of forcing the hand of action?

No, because the smaller shootings were just that - small. Columbine was the only one, thanks to the wall to wall media attention it gathered, to mobilize popular support for so many policies.

I, honestly, think that even with the death toll if there hadn't been such a clamor from the media then the shooting wouldn't have garnered everything it has.

Absolutely. Mass shootings with equal or greater death tolls have routinely failed to generate the same level of panic, fear, and moral handwringing. It is no coincidence that these other shootings did not receive wall to wall coverage for literal months.

If Columbine had happened five years before or five years after 1999 it would've been unlikely to have generated as much interest as it did. The media had OJ in 1994 and the War on Terror (particularly the Iraq War) for 2004. The Yugoslav Wars simply didn't generate nearly as much interest as either of those two stories, making 1999 the perfect year for a proper domestic panic.

Well, [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] pointed it. Before Columbine,the last "big" shootings( not disrespectful) was the Lubys-Shooting,San Ysidro and Edmonton who all got news-coverage but not to the Extend like it happened in Colorado. I guess that the amount of Victims,Evidence and other Things led to the Conclusion that something must "change"( like [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] mentioned it,zero tolerance and other things) Especially because before Columbine other "small" School-Shootings happened,so i guess that After the society had seen how worse Things can get they demanded change. And then Newtown happened....

It was the most fatal school shooting since 1966.

It was a few things, the early days of 24 hour media and the general moral panic about goths etc during that time made it very newsworthy.