School shooting in Germany leaves 16 dead

[Skybird]

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,612612,00.html

The season is opened.

Just some time earlier: shooting spree in Alabama:

http://www.welt.de/english-news/article3355743/Ten-people-killed-in-Alabama-shooting-spree.html

[HunterICX]

Red it this morning, just horrible
I hope they catch him alive.:shifty:

HunterICX

[OneToughHerring]

Nope, committed suicide. I'd be interested to hear what type of solutions the German media has in relation to stopping incidents like this from happening again. I can sort of read news in German but I'm still learning and my speed of reading is pretty slow.

Edit. Correction, they are still looking for him. Some conflicting info in the media about the situation.

[Fincuan]

Bild now says the Police shot him.

http://www.bild.de/BILD/news/2009/03/11/amoklauf-winnenden/winnenden.html

[Schroeder]

@Fin
Forget Bild! it's yellow press on lowest level.:down:

I always love it when 17 year olds have access to the weapons and amunitions of their parents.:nope:

[OneToughHerring]

At least 16 dead. Nice going, weapon fetishists.

[Larry U-136]

Unbeliveable this stuff has to stop

[Happy Times]

Well it wont stop by taking away legal guns, these are mental issues, these people have used knives, spears, flamethrovers and bombs also.
I could kill ten in a mall with fork if i wanted to.:doh:

[Enigma]

:nope:

[AVGWarhawk]

At least 16 dead. Nice going, weapon fetishists.


How does a fetish have anything to do with this:06:

[Schroeder]

@HT
Actually massacres like this have always been carried out with firearms in Germany (at least I don't recall any massacre with more than a dozen fatals that was carried out with knives). Usually parents made their weapons accessable to their kids or the kids found out were the keys were. Without those weapons such deeds can't be done.

[Thomen]

Damn, that totally sucks. Why allways schools.. :nope:
Wonder how he got his hands on the weapons in the first place.

As morbid as it is, I wonder on whom or what they (especially the media) try to pin it this time. As far as I remember, last time they tried to blame video games and stuff.

[Thomen]

@HT
Actually massacres like this have always been carried out with firearms in Germany (at least I don't recall any massacre with more than a dozen fatals that was carried out with knives). Usually parents made their weapons accessable to their kids or the kids found out were the keys were. Without those weapons such deeds can't be done.

True, but then the parents are at least partially at fault for making the weapons accessible in one way or another.

[OneToughHerring]

Damn, that totally sucks. Why allways schools.. :nope:
Wonder how he got his hands on the weapons in the first place.

As morbid as it is, I wonder on whom or what they (especially the media) try to pin it this time. As far as I remember, last time they tried to blame video games and stuff.

Some say that the media should be quiet about these things, media coverage in a way glorifies these things. Not sure if that's true. I think the media together with the schools could act to prevent these things. Unfortunately it would probably take money and not everyone is willing to put more money into making schools better. Some politicians even have connections to weapon companies, I doubt they will see guns as a part of the problem.

[Schroeder]

True, but then the parents are at least partially at fault for making the weapons accessible in one way or another.
How do you make weapons inaccessable for 17 year olds? If you store them in your house they will sooner or later find out how to get them.:damn:
It would take a safe in a bank that can only be opened with a personal key and a member of the bank`s staff together to really deny access to others.

[Thomen]

Damn, that totally sucks. Why allways schools.. :nope:
Wonder how he got his hands on the weapons in the first place.

As morbid as it is, I wonder on whom or what they (especially the media) try to pin it this time. As far as I remember, last time they tried to blame video games and stuff.
Some say that the media should be quiet about these things, media coverage in a way glorifies these things. Not sure if that's true. I think the media together with the schools could act to prevent these things. Unfortunately it would probably take money and not everyone is willing to put more money into making schools better. Some politicians even have connections to weapon companies, I doubt they will see guns as a part of the problem.

While you have a good point, I do not think weapons are the problem. People are the problem. In Europe and US they use guns, in the Middle East explosives and a mixture of both plus blades in Asia (with Japanese, AFAIR, predominantly using knives and sword for suck acts) .
Personally, I am all for strict laws regarding weapons and Germany has some very strict laws. Unfortunately, and that goes for every country, if you want to get your hands on some weapons: There is always the possibility of getting them. Either steal or buy them on the black market.

Unfortunately massacres like this are great selling points for the media and offer great opportunities for politicians to crawl back into the public eye and blame it it on whoever they like or brings the most votes.

[OneToughHerring]

While you have a good point, I do not think weapons are the problem. People are the problem. In Europe and US they use guns, in the Middle East explosives and a mixture of both plus blades in Asia (with Japanese, AFAIR, predominantly using knives and sword for suck acts) .
Personally, I am all for strict laws regarding weapons and Germany has some very strict laws. Unfortunately, and that goes for every country, if you want to get your hands on some weapons: There is always the possibility of getting them. Either steal or buy them on the black market.

Unfortunately massacres like this are great selling points for the media and offer great opportunities for politicians to crawl back into the public eye and blame it it on whoever they like or brings the most votes.
Well we can't ban people, only educate them and then care for their mental and physical health. This is, if the political parties are willing to pay for things like, say, mental care for young children. From what I know political parties on the right are pretty lukewarm about things like that while at the same time having close connections to weapon manufacturing business.

While I think guns are not 100% of the problem, I wouldn't say that they are 0% of the problem either. The real figure is somewhere in between. And if by creating a very strict gun legislation or through a complete ban there would be a possibility of preventing even ~20% of school shootings, I would definitely consider it.

[Skybird]

We live in a culture of violance. We celebrate violent conflict solving. Morals fail, idols are often misleading todayx, ethics are open for negotiation. Weapons and the access to them is a fetish for not just a few. Values get reduced to money. Displays of brutality fill TV, movie and computer screens 24/7.

Things like the massacre today are just the logical price for that kind of "culture".

Take away perspectives for a future worth to be experienced, and you will earn an attitude that also does not care for the present too much anymore - why should it if the future is not any promising?

[Thomen]

True, but then the parents are at least partially at fault for making the weapons accessible in one way or another.
How do you make weapons inaccessable for 17 year olds? If you store them in your house they will sooner or later find out how to get them.:damn:
It would take a safe in a bank that can only be opened with a personal key and a member of the bank`s staff together to really deny access to others.

If the parents let key the laying around the house it is their damn fault. You can get gun safes that use number combination locks, electronic locks or good ol' mechanical locks.
If they get their hands on weapons it is because the parents or the gun owner got sloppy and lazy.
It is the parents responsibility to educate their children in things like that and instill responsibility and respect to what weapons can do and how to handle them safely.

I grew up in Germany around weapons. My Dad was a hunter and al ot of his friends were hunters also. I knew where the weapons were and what kind of weapons he had. The only way I could get to them would have been to knock my parents out and steal the only key to them that was in the house. My father had his key in his view almost all the time. Even when they went to bed he took em with him.

[Onkel Neal]

I grew up in Germany around weapons. My Dad was a hunter and al ot of his friends were hunters also. I knew where the weapons were and what kind of weapons he had. The only way I could get to them would have been to knock my parents out and steal the only key to them that was in the house. My father had his key in his view almost all the time. Even when they went to bed he took em with him.

Same here, I grew up in the country, my father had a couple shotguns, a deer rifle, and a pistol. He kept them in his closet. While the closet simply had an ordinary door, no locks, he had a superior security system. He told me not to mess with them. That's all it took. He trusted me, and I respected him.

My thoughts go out to the German families who have suffered this tragedy.

[OneToughHerring]

Well I suppose the society cannot function entirely based on a trust system. I mean in USA many people buy guns in the first place to keep safe from other people.

[SteamWake]

Full moon

http://kalender-365.de/lunar-calendar.php

[Onkel Neal]

Well I suppose the society cannot function entirely based on a trust system. I mean in USA many people buy guns in the first place to keep safe from other people.

Not only in the USA.

[SteamWake]

Well that dident take long

EU moves to tighten gun control

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090311/ap_on_re_eu/eu_europe_gun_laws_1

Im expecting to see something similar in US as well.

[Skybird]

Gun laws are alrerady pretty tight in Germany now. And the theory exam is meant to scare people away. I have seen what ammount of material my father had to study when preparing for his WBK - and that was before they made the laws even tighter some years ago, in the wake of another school shooting.

I think that is a rcipe that could work to some degree: make the exams so tough that most people lose interest in even trying to engage with firearms, and that especially the easyminded get sorted out.

[Aramike]

I grew up in Germany around weapons. My Dad was a hunter and al ot of his friends were hunters also. I knew where the weapons were and what kind of weapons he had. The only way I could get to them would have been to knock my parents out and steal the only key to them that was in the house. My father had his key in his view almost all the time. Even when they went to bed he took em with him.

Same here, I grew up in the country, my father had a couple shotguns, a deer rifle, and a pistol. He kept them in his closet. While the closet simply had an ordinary door, no locks, he had a superior security system. He told me not to mess with them. That's all it took. He trusted me, and I respected him.

My thoughts go out to the German families who have suffered this tragedy.Precisely.

Besides, does anyone really think that tough gun laws will deter someone looking to shoot up a school? RIIIGHHT...

...we've seen how well outlawing drugs worked...

[Kapt Z]

no words.:nope:

(regarding the events, not anyone's arguements)

[Digital_Trucker]

That prohibition thing didn't work out very well, either.

[OneToughHerring]

Well I suppose the society cannot function entirely based on a trust system. I mean in USA many people buy guns in the first place to keep safe from other people.
Not only in the USA.

Well yes but in USA in special out of the so called western industrial nations. The 'first world'.

[Foxtrot]

My condolences.

Pity the gunman died or the USA could have sued him for infringement of copyright.

[NeonSamurai]

You know, I don't think guns are the source of the problem, they just increase the body count. The real problems are the media, entertainment, the toxic environment of most schools, and the kids themselves.

Starting with the kids and working backwards. Now it is obvious that there is something wrong with them when they end up going on a shooting spree, the question was what was the cause of it all. Well the first thing is that these kids tend to be different from other kids, they either think, talk or, act (or a combination) differently. Now that normally isn't a problem, until you reach school.

The school system tends to be a very toxic and stifling environment. As much as we like to think otherwise, kids pretty much are vicious intolerant little bastards. They hate difference of any kind and will try to enforce sameness in a group. Those that don't or can't conform they will attack, and ostracize. Different kids are rejected by their peers, and often bullied and brutalized for it. This tends to get worse as children grow older and usually peaks towards the end of highschool. This in my opinion is the principal trigger (and why they target their peers, as they are pretty much paying their peers back for all that was done to them).

The entertainment industry spreads messages of violence and that it is the way to get even. It's a constant reoccurring theme in virtually all forms of entertainment (movies, tv, games) that violence is the best solution to problems, that violence is cool, and that violence is fun and rewarding. This will naturally infect peoples views especially children which have not built up a defense.

Then there is the media and how they report such attacks. They pretty much reverse glorify the acts. Such attacks are spread across the media with reactions of fear and outrage. The individuals who committed the acts are made famous. Media coverage is intense on such events. Pretty much the media turns the individuals into anti heroes, especially in the minds of similar kids.

Last there is the issue of brain development in teenagers which cause them to act rashly and irrationally. I'll spare you the science of it all, lets just say it involves too many neurons and short circuits. It's the principle reason why teenagers will do incredibly stupid things, like try to escape the police in a high speed chase because a tail light is burnt out on the car.

Ok so to sum up, brutalized rejected different kids see going on a rampage as being a good idea because: a) the media makes it sound good, nothing like going out in a blaze of glory. b) entertainment has taught them that the best way to solve problems is to shoot them. and c) their brains are wired making them prone to irrational thought and foolish decisions.

The reason why school massacres are a more modern thing is simply because we have reached critical mass. Rejection and brutalization is not a new thing at schools, nor are people being different, or how teenagers think new either. What has changed is the media, entertainment, and social acceptance of violence. However the best way to deal with the problem would be to deal with the key reason behind the violence, the school environment. Putting the brakes on the media and limiting access to violent entertainment wouldn't be such a bad idea either.

[Biggles]

For me, it matters little why it happened at the moment. The fact that it did happen is just enough for me to feel....I don't know what.

I'm so sorry to hear about these terrible news.

[SteamWake]

What we need is scissor control !


Boy, 8, Stabbed to Death With Scissors, Officer Injured


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,508641,00.html

[Enigma]

What we need is scissor control !

Scissors are not designed to kill. I'm pretty sure you'll find plenty more cases of students being killed in shootings than in scissor attacks. This argument falls on it's face before it's out the gate....

[AVGWarhawk]

What we need is scissor control !

Scissors are not designed to kill. I'm pretty sure you'll find plenty more cases of students being killed in shootings than in scissor attacks. This argument falls on it's face before it's out the gate....

Scissors....I think I will run with a pair of scissors later on. :D

[Digital_Trucker]

What we need is scissor control !
Scissors are not designed to kill. I'm pretty sure you'll find plenty more cases of students being killed in shootings than in scissor attacks. This argument falls on it's face before it's out the gate....
You'll probably find more cases of students being killed by automobiles. Maybe car control legislation is what's needed?

I think you totally missed the point. The weapons (yes, scissors and automobiles are weapons) are not what needs controlling, it's the humans who use them that are the problem.

[Sailor Steve]

Yep, among students cars win. But so does heart disease.
http://www.the-eggman.com/writings/death_stats.html

[Schroeder]

Is there no one else here who sees a major differnce between car accidents and massacres?:timeout:

Car accidents are often caused by idiots who drive to fast and/or intoxicated. But they don't kill on purpose!
All school shootings done in Germany during the last decade were carried out with legally owned fire arms. Not a single one was an illegaly obtained one (at least I don't remember anything about illegal weapons). So I think that gun control can prevent such things at least to a certain degree, one more obstacle that has to to be overcome.

[Thomen]

Is there no one else here who sees a major differnce between car accidents and massacres?:timeout:

Car accidents are often caused by idiots who drive to fast and/or intoxicated. But they don't kill on purpose!
All school shootings done in Germany during the last decade were carried out with legally owned fire arms. Not a single one was an illegaly obtained one (at least I don't remember anything about illegal weapons). So I think that gun control can prevent such things at least to a certain degree, one more obstacle that has to to be overcome.

Vigilant gun owners can prevent more massacres. More restrictions do not really help there, except if you want to confiscate and ban ALL weapons.

[Digital_Trucker]

Is there no one else here who sees a major differnce between car accidents and massacres?:timeout:

Car accidents are often caused by idiots who drive to fast and/or intoxicated. But they don't kill on purpose!
All school shootings done in Germany during the last decade were carried out with legally owned fire arms. Not a single one was an illegaly obtained one (at least I don't remember anything about illegal weapons). So I think that gun control can prevent such things at least to a certain degree, one more obstacle that has to to be overcome.
Of course we can see the difference between car accidents and massacres. The point is that far more people are killed by car accidents than massacres, so maybe we should concentrate on what kills the most people.

As for gun control, it's possible that some of the massacres would be stopped by stricter gun control, but it's my belief that far more would be stopped by the owners of the guns keeping them better controlled (ie locked up). Unless you stop making guns totally (not a bad idea if EVERYONE would do it), someone who wants to kill will find a way to do so (whether it be illegal guns, or scissors, or explosives, or.......)

[Skybird]

Latest news reports:

the boy, 17, was a calm person, but was described to have been more aggressive by very close friend(s). He played table tennis and was a weapons freak. His father legally owns and stores in his household 15 firearms, sidearms as well as rifles, he is member in a local shooting club. The boy was said to have been a good shooter, too. The boy loved to spend time in the cellar playing and handling weapons. He also had a strong interest in horror videos (I know it sounds like clichées, but that's what they said). Friends said in a close intimate social setting he was quite aggressive, while giving an opposite impression in public: being a close, relaxed, almost shy person. He was also said to have alienated and driven away friends in the past by his aggressive, arrogant behavior, showing off with the money of his father.

It seems he intentionally targetted girls, and pupils of the 9th or 10th classes, which is taken as a hint that he was after people he knew, and girls he know. He killed 8 girls, but only 1 boy in the school. It is speculated that disappointing social experiences and the experience of being rejected, play a role in this context.

15 weapons in the household. :dead: Firearms are no books or porcellane miniatures. A weapk is a weapon, and that si what sets it apart from almost all other items and things a person can own. Why couldn't that strange person of a father just collect stamps, if numbers were what counted for him? The bad dreams he now will be haunted by - are well-deserved, I think.

[Bewolf]

Is there no one else here who sees a major differnce between car accidents and massacres?:timeout:

Car accidents are often caused by idiots who drive to fast and/or intoxicated. But they don't kill on purpose!
All school shootings done in Germany during the last decade were carried out with legally owned fire arms. Not a single one was an illegaly obtained one (at least I don't remember anything about illegal weapons). So I think that gun control can prevent such things at least to a certain degree, one more obstacle that has to to be overcome.
Of course we can see the difference between car accidents and massacres. The point is that far more people are killed by car accidents than massacres, so maybe we should concentrate on what kills the most people.

As for gun control, it's possible that some of the massacres would be stopped by stricter gun control, but it's my belief that far more would be stopped by the owners of the guns keeping them better controlled (ie locked up). Unless you stop making guns totally (not a bad idea if EVERYONE would do it), someone who wants to kill will find a way to do so (whether it be illegal guns, or scissors, or explosives, or.......)

That is a given. And if I had trust in maturaity and responsibility in people, I'd be the last person ever opposing legal gun ownership. But these massacres once again prove that there are simply too many wakkos out there, coming out of the blue without prepration for them. That does not apply to the killers only, but to folks beeing irresponsible in general. Check this school shooters father, he had 14 guns in a safe in a basement and one up in the sleeping room. That one up there was used by the kid to do his shooting.

One also has to differ between ppl that actually plan on killing ppl with a gun, and folks that either act out of effect or see the possibility to get famous by using a gun that is available to them. Guns are by far the most easiest means to kill, with the single push of a trigger. No need to get close and personal like with a knive or scissors. No need to waste energy in a brawl or get endangered onself. Guns are by far the most easy means to kill. I am going as far as to say they have such a fascination with a lot of folks one is almost curious as to how it works. Hardly a wonder, because that is what they are designed to do.

Had this father no guns at home, I doubt the kid would have had the balls to kill anybody and eventually had either taken a grip on his life, comitted suicide if not, or might have killed anyways later on. It is debateable what would have happend to him or how he would have acted, but unless he were to become a serial killer I doubt 16 people had to die.

[OneToughHerring]

Of course we can see the difference between car accidents and massacres. The point is that far more people are killed by car accidents than massacres, so maybe we should concentrate on what kills the most people.

As for gun control, it's possible that some of the massacres would be stopped by stricter gun control, but it's my belief that far more would be stopped by the owners of the guns keeping them better controlled (ie locked up). Unless you stop making guns totally (not a bad idea if EVERYONE would do it), someone who wants to kill will find a way to do so (whether it be illegal guns, or scissors, or explosives, or.......)

ABC-weapons don't kill anyone at the moment, does that mean they should be legalised?

[Sailor Steve]

And if I had trust in maturaity and responsibility in people, I'd be the last person ever opposing legal gun ownership.
And I could trust even one person with the power of government over me, I'd be the first. The statistics never tell the other side. In America I know two people personally and know of several more for whom the ownership of a handgun foiled a home intruder. If I know that many, then how many lives did gun owners save last year?

You can only feel safe if you take away the only means an old guy like me has of making himself safe. I can only feel safe if I can prevent guys like you from using the power of government to control my life.

And around we go.

[Bewolf]

And if I had trust in maturaity and responsibility in people, I'd be the last person ever opposing legal gun ownership. And I could trust even one person with the power of government over me, I'd be the first. The statistics never tell the other side. In America I know two people personally and know of several more for whom the ownership of a handgun foiled a home intruder. If I know that many, then how many lives did gun owners save last year?

You can only feel safe if you take away the only means an old guy like me has of making himself safe. I can only feel safe if I can prevent guys like you from using the power of government to control my life.

And around we go.

You see, we had this in another discussion already, the point is not about you having the requirement to be safe. That I understand. Within american conditions I'd want a gun, too. Obviously it is required indeed.

But, the day this urgent need is coming up here, too, I will consider this society having failed. Till then I will support weapon bans over here as well. Because, were the laws even more tight, this massacre would not have happend. And the alternative beeing to have children and teachers having guns, too...well, seriously, when it comes this far, this country is going down the drain anyways.

[nikimcbee]

Not that it means anything, I wonder if he was into the violent video games?

[Sailor Steve]

Or Dungeons & Dragons?

@ Bewolf: Fair point, and taken.

[Aramike]

Because, were the laws even more tight, this massacre would not have happend.So, you know for a fact that this youngster who would kill people would follow the law and not have illegally obtained weapons?

[Skybird]

Eventually, I could live with an argument of legal gun ownership for self-defence. It depends on the single case.

But I also say that there are plenty of people whom I see as such that I do not want to see them with access to firearms. Like I also do not want to see quite some people having the right to hold pets. Or fighting dogs. Or sitting behind the steering wheel of a car. - And that'S why in general I am agai8nst the general permission that in principal everybody can own firearms.

Just the fetish some people - also here in the forum - make of it, regarding how many weapons and ammunitions they claim to need, and why it must be automatic weapons, and weapons designed for use in wartime scenarios - this is what kills the seriousness of it for me, and I use the word "fetish" intentionally and in it's original meaning here. It's much the same why some macho-men think a car with less than 220 HP is not a car to be taken serious.

You do not need assault guns for self defence, you do not need machine guns to protect a farm from the wild bears, and owning a 9mm automatic or a revolver cal.38 (TOTALLY sufficient to protect your house and family in the given crime scenario!) and owning a MP-7 with magazines of 40 rounds and a fire rate of 950 per minute - that are two totally different things.

Why somebody claims a right to own a whole collection of such weapons, or demands the freedom to do so, is beyond me. I do not accept any right of civilian people to turn themselves into one-man-armies. the special case of the first amendement to the Us constitution can only be understood historically, that amendement made sense in the time it was written. In modern times, it makes no sense anymore, since both the Indians and the British are gone since long.

and if you live in a neighbourhood where you think you need the freedom to wage war in order to defend your living there, than you definitely live in the wrong neighbourhood and better should move away before thinking about founding a family.

Every idiot and every one-eyed son-of-a-bitch could use a pistol to kill somebody. With a knife it is a bit more difficult. with bare hands it is much more difficult. With rapiers or swords, it needs special training. But killing with firearms - is no art at all. And that is a problem, imo.

And those wanting to own loads of assault guns and automatic rifles for self-defence: what do you do if you get attacked with a gang-owned mortar launcher, or an RPG? Is that your logic - that then you want a radar-based anti-missile system installed on your roof, or what? Do you sleep in a bunker? Do you claim the right by the example of the aircraft attacks of 9/11 to own your pirvate SAM-launcher in your garden? - The discussion of why owning bigger and bigger guns "for self-protection" is often so easily reaching into the realm of absurdity. For your information: a skilled shooter can kill a person with a soft-powered precision air-pistol. He only needs to aim well for the weak spots of the body.

Assaultguns for self-defence. Daß ich nicht lache.

[Bewolf]

Because, were the laws even more tight, this massacre would not have happend.So, you know for a fact that this youngster who would kill people would follow the law and not have illegally obtained weapons?

Where would he have done it? yes, it is possible in Germany to obtain wapons illegally, but you need the contacts within the criminal establishment to get one. It's not an easy task, as guns are not floating around en masse just so even there. And this kiddo, shy and insecure as he obviously was from al I ready from this case by now, I have a very hard time imagening him going out to talk to some die hard criminals. Armed robbery and comparable armed crimes are rare, reflecting the lack of weapons circling around.

[Platapus]

There were some indicators that caught my eye on this tragedy. Now these are just indicators and hindsight is 20/20. And these are my opinions only.

I have not read anything about how the kid got ahold of the weapons. Since there has been no reporting of him breaking in to any gun safe, I am assuming, absent of any other information, that these guns were unsecured.

Latest news reports:

the boy, 17, was a calm person, but was described to have been more aggressive by very close friend(s). He played table tennis and was a weapons freak. His father legally owns and stores in his household 15 firearms, sidearms as well as rifles, he is member in a local shooting club. The boy was said to have been a good shooter, too. The boy loved to spend time in the cellar playing and handling weapons.

That is something to be concerned with. A 17 year old should not love playing with weapons in the cellar. A gun is not to be played with. A gun is to be used in a responsible manner, not played with in a cellar. Why weren't these guns locked up or the kid under parental supervision?

He also had a strong interest in horror videos (I know it sounds like clichées, but that's what they said). Friends said in a close intimate social setting he was quite aggressive, while giving an opposite impression in public: being a close, relaxed, almost shy person.

Another indicator. There is nothing noteworthy about a person who has a naturally aggressive personality, nor is there anything noteworthy about a person who has a relaxed almost shy personality. However when you have someone who goes to these extremes when in private and public, that should be an indicator that something may be the matter with the kid. Something that probably needs to be looked into by a health professional.

He was also said to have alienated and driven away friends in the past by his aggressive, arrogant behavior, showing off with the money of his father.

It seems he intentionally targetted girls, and pupils of the 9th or 10th classes, which is taken as a hint that he was after people he knew, and girls he know. He killed 8 girls, but only 1 boy in the school. It is speculated that disappointing social experiences and the experience of being rejected, play a role in this context.

15 weapons in the household. :dead: Firearms are no books or porcellane miniatures. A weapk is a weapon, and that si what sets it apart from almost all other items and things a person can own. Why couldn't that strange person of a father just collect stamps, if numbers were what counted for him? The bad dreams he now will be haunted by - are well-deserved, I think.

As with many of these cases, I look squarely at the parents. An adult gun owner has the RESPONSIBILITY to ensure that his or her weapons are safe and pose no risks to the public. This means locking them away, not hiding them away.

Why did the parents enable this kid to have unsupervised access to these weapons?

We have a kid with extremes in personalities depending on his environment who loves to play with firearms. We also have parents who evidently failed to take the precautions to secure their weapons (I have not heard anything about the kid breaking into any gun safe or anything). Add to this mix a kid with some emotional problems and it is recipe for tragedy.

I understand that Germany has some pretty strict gun laws. Gun laws don't seem to do much when you have irresponsible gun owners.

The problem is not guns and not gun owners. The problem is irresponsible gun owners with guns.

How many families were destroyed simply because these parents were irresponsible (assuming that the guns were not secured)?

Why couldn't that strange person of a father just collect stamps... Because the father choose not to collect stamps but choose to collect guns. I hope society is not at the point where our hobbies can be dictated to us. :)

[NeonSamurai]

He might have turned to something else, like pipe bombs or other simple IEDs. Guns aren't the cause, they just make it easy. Availability of guns also isn't a key factor either, guns were plenty available in the 40's - 80's in the US.

[OneToughHerring]

His last name was Kretschmer, hope he's not related to 'Silent-Otto'.

[Aramike]

Where would he have done it? yes, it is possible in Germany to obtain wapons illegally, but you need the contacts within the criminal establishment to get one. It's not an easy task, as guns are not floating around en masse just so even there. And this kiddo, shy and insecure as he obviously was from al I ready from this case by now, I have a very hard time imagening him going out to talk to some die hard criminals. Armed robbery and comparable armed crimes are rare, reflecting the lack of weapons circling around.Like someone else said, who's to say he wouldn't have just built some pipe bombs or other IEDs?

Also, finding contacts within the criminal establishment isn't very hard - certainly not as you're implying. Hence, the world's rampant drug trade. Oh, and black market arms trade.

In any case, this kid was determined enough to shoot up a school. To think that said determination doesn't cross itself over to gaining the means by which to do so is delusional.

[Skybird]

Because the father choose not to collect stamps but choose to collect guns. I hope society is not at the point where our hobbies can be dictated to us. :)
Tools of death are not like any other item, and I have a problem with claiming it "freedom" to collect them like any other items for a hobby. They are not. A firearm is a firearm, and this guy owns 15. A firearm cannot be used for surgery. You cannot drill holes into the wall to hang up a picture, nor can you use it to learn about chemistry, to chop trees in your garden, calculate your taxes, tell your girl that you love her, or bring you from here to there as a tool of transportation. By design, a firearm and a weapon is meant to kill, and that is all it does. It's a tool of death, and all talking about deterrences does not change that, but only leads to an easyminded and craeless attitude towards using these tools (or even launch whole wars carelessly). Making that a hobby, an item of excessive interest, is something that tells something about the mind having that interest. A fascination for weapons is something that is neither desirable, nor is it healthy. It is intersted in death, and in how to destroy life. Owning a whole collection of weapons for sports or hobby only - that you cannot describe as a need coming from the sports. Man, I own two swords myself, one was a gift, the other I bought before. My father is sports shooter, but only owns two firearms of two different callibres that he practices with, and for some time only he owned a third one. Also a ranger and a hunter would not need 15 different guns.

I also refuse to accept a general freedom to buy and collect any given drugs. Poisons. Explosives. Freedom and the claim for freedom - has limits as long as you do not live alone on the planet. Where you live in a social community with others, your freedom has limits, necessarily. Unlimited freedom withion a communal context can only be gotten at the price of egoism and anarchy -and the conflict coming from that, inevitably.

[Platapus]

By design, a firearm and a weapon is meant to kill, and that is all it does.

You are making your own inference here. By design a firearm is designed to propel its bullet explosively down the barrel.

While it is common to use a gun to kill people, one can't make the claim that this is "all it does". It is one purpose, albeit a common purpose, but hardly "all that it does".

Man, I own two swords myself, one was a gift, the other I bought before.

What a horrible hobby. Swords are designed to kill and maim people. Truly the only reason a person would own a sword is that they intend to kill someone as they serve no other design purpose.

A sword cannot be used for surgery. You cannot drill holes into the wall to hang up a picture, nor can you use it to learn about chemistry, to chop trees in your garden, calculate your taxes, tell your girl that you love her, or bring you from here to there as a tool of transportation.

When it is applied to your hobby it sounds kinda silly don't it? :)

[qoute] Also a ranger and a hunter would not need 15 different guns. [/quote]

But a collector may. A collector is probably not going to collect 15 of the exact same firearm, now will they?

Who decides how many is too many? You? Me? the government? <shudder> An irresponsible parent with a wacko kid with one unsecured gun is more of a threat to society than a responsible parent with 100 guns.

See it is not the guns that is the issue. It is the human.

However, as a supporter of freedom, I fully respect and honour your personal decisions and opinions concerning firearms. I hope that you have the same respect and honour towards the responsible gun owners.

I am sure we both have the same disdain for irresponsible gun owners... especially when innocent people get hurt.

<actually disdain is way too polite a word concerning MY feelings>

[baggygreen]

Maybe its different to me having a little military behind me. But I have no issues with firearms. The old cliche of 'guns don't kill people, people kill people' is 100% true. Like someone else posted, guns give the criminal the potential to increase the number of victims.

15 seems an excessive number of weapons to keep in the home. To own? not necessarily. But excessive to keep in the family home.

By the sounds of it, the parents did some things right, and others wrong. Right, they trained the kid in the safe handling of firearms. wrong, in that they let him work with weapons alone.

A ban to restrict firearm ownership won't help. All it does is take away people's passion. What needs to be implemented is regular psychological testing of firearm licence holders. Annual, perhaps.

Still, this won't help stem the tide of illegally owned firearms. What will start helping that is severe punishments. Let the courts make it known that illegal possession of firearms is a serious, criminal offence and will be punished with 10 or 15 years, non-parole.

[Happy Times]

It seems he intentionally targetted girls, and pupils of the 9th or 10th classes, which is taken as a hint that he was after people he knew, and girls he know. He killed 8 girls, but only 1 boy in the school. It is speculated that disappointing social experiences and the experience of being rejected, play a role in this context.

Again.
The biggest pattern in these killings over the years is that they are young males unable to get laid.:salute:
What about the US killing today, the same?
I also would put my biggest blame on the violence and porn that children are exposed of.

The rejections, bullying and resulting repressed anger is nothing new but the reaction and responses are now influenced by these.
The shooters usually lack social interaction skills and harbour ideas of their superior intellect over others, like this German kid.
Its all part of the same defencive reaction.
Some angry young men join Nazis or Antifa, some start shooting by themself.

So the solutions have to be found in the homes and schools.
The exposure to violent entertainments at young age should be made harder.
I would include yearly psychological tests in schools and make it mandatory that parents attend regular parent/teacher meetings.

This would prevent more school shootings than gun laws, i can promise.
But most importantly it would save much more lives not lost in suicides, drug addictions etc. that are also often the result of the same reasons.

[Schroeder]

Like someone else said, who's to say he wouldn't have just built some pipe bombs or other IEDs?

Also, finding contacts within the criminal establishment isn't very hard - certainly not as you're implying. Hence, the world's rampant drug trade. Oh, and black market arms trade.

In any case, this kid was determined enough to shoot up a school. To think that said determination doesn't cross itself over to gaining the means by which to do so is delusional.
Well, so far only kids who had access to weapons started shootings. No one possesed an ilegal weapon. Given the rather small number of gun owners in Germany it is odd that ALL amok kids came out of gun owner families.
There hasn't been a single case of a non gun owner kid to do such a massacre.

So you see, obviously they don't try to get ileagal weapons or build IEDs.
I think one thing that is important is that those kids can get their hands on guns easily.
I believe that the knowledge of having power (a gun) available makes people to think about using them.

But changing gunlaws over here is something different than changing gun laws in the US. If anyone has a gun then I surely have one too just to be "safe". Here in Germany it is quite unusual that a burglar is armed with a firearm. Therefore no need to have one yourself.
I think it is also quite futile to try to order anything like gun restriction in a country that is already full of weapons.

[Skybird]

[You are making your own inference here. By design a firearm is designed to propel its bullet explosively down the barrel.
What'S the intention of that? Doing the washup in the kitchen? Educate your kids?

Let'S not split hairs. A scalpel can be used to kill, top cut vegetables, to do surgery, or as a screw driver. A firearms: shoots to kill.


While it is common to use a gun to kill people, one can't make the claim that this is "all it does". It is one purpose, albeit a common purpose, but hardly "all that it does".

but it is. You cannot use it for anything else, and as long as you do not load soft rubber bullets, the idea of a firearm is to be a lethal thing. Inetnion or not, that'S what it is. And if people have the inention to kill, they would nevertheless find it harder without firearms available. Every idiot can pull trigger and kill even from a distance of many meters. with a club or a knife, or bare hands - it is something different. Yiu need to come close. You see into the other's eyes. You expose yourself to more risk, the closer you come.


What a horrible hobby. Swords are designed to kill and maim people. Truly the only reason a person would own a sword is that they intend to kill someone as they serve no other design purpose.

A sword cannot be used for surgery. You cannot drill holes into the wall to hang up a picture, nor can you use it to learn about chemistry, to chop trees in your garden, calculate your taxes, tell your girl that you love her, or bring you from here to there as a tool of transportation.

When it is applied to your hobby it sounds kinda silly don't it? :)


It is silly. my mentor and Zen teacher was a japanese, and indeed his ancestors had been Samurais, he claimed. He played as a colleague with my father in the same orchestra in berlin, in the 80s. I got his sword because his son died and he had no more members of his family left to give it to, which was a very tragic thing for him indeed. Before that, I bought one original sword from the time between the world wars and two wooden swords, becasue for years he also was my martial arts trainer. I am not a collector, and now I am stranded with one quite valuable ancient sword I am responsible for - but not having children or trainees myself.

Queer? But true.

But a collector may. A collector is probably not going to collect 15 of the exact same firearm, now will they?

Who decides how many is too many? You? Me? the government? <shudder> An irresponsible parent with a wacko kid with one unsecured gun is more of a threat to society than a responsible parent with 100 guns.

As I said, I have probelms with the freedom to collect tools of modern warfare, modern assault guns and rapid firarms. Firearms like this are not like any other item to be collected. they do not collect to the usual hobby of collecting something. I also would not accept the right to collect grenades. Explosives. Poisons and drugs. Regarding civilians owning military firearms, assault guns, I wpould ban that completely. such weapons belong to the security and military services, but not into civilians' hands. For self protection, a pistol, a hunting rifle, a revolver is good enough.


See it is not the guns that is the issue. It is the human.
But you still lock your door when leaving the house, safeguarding against the optimistic possibility that only reasonable people will realise that your door is open.

If you leave firearms to people, you leave the chance that they will be abused. and they will be abused. Take away the firearms, and it does not matter whether someone woudl abuse them or not - he can't abuse them, since they are not there.

Again, eventually I could accept permission for people living in checked and cofnrimed dangerous areas to own a pistol or a revolver for self-defence. But no grenades. no missile-launchers. No machine guns and no assault rifles. Being fascinated by them means to be fascinated by what kills, by what takes life, by what is in favour of death and what is against life. And that is simply sick. Some posts earlier I said we live in a culture that celebrates violance. It is a violant culture. And it is a sick culture, yes.

However, as a supporter of freedom, I fully respect and honour your personal decisions and opinions concerning firearms. I hope that you have the same respect and honour towards the responsible gun owners.
With the above limitations, yes.

I am sure we both have the same disdain for irresponsible gun owners... especially when innocent people get hurt.
Yes, sure, I take that as a given, else i would not even discuss it with you - there would be no use in doing so, then. ;)

[Fincuan]

Well, so far only kids who had access to weapons started shootings. No one possesed an ilegal weapon.

Same thing up here. The two school shootings we've had were both performed with the wackos' own guns. In both cases it was a .22 Walther P22(a P99 lookalike).

[Platapus]

but it is. You cannot use it for anything else, and as long as you do not load soft rubber bullets, the idea of a firearm is to be a lethal thing. Inetnion or not, that'S what it is.


I can easily refute your hypothesis using myself as a case study

I own hand guns and use it for things other than killing. In the 20+ years of shooting I have never killed anything with one of my handguns. But I used to be a competition shooter. I have never loaded "soft rubber bullets" in my shooting experiences. Therefore, you are mistaken when you say you can't use it for anything else (meaning killing). It is simply not true.

I have handguns which will never be used to kill anything as the design is impractical for killing but excel in target shooting. Again, I offer that as evidence that your position that firearms can only be used for killing is inaccurate.

I also have one firearm that is for display only. It is far too valuable (sentimental value only) for me to shoot. Yet more evidence that refutes your position that firearms can not be used for anything other than killing.

Your hypothesis that firearms can only be used for killing and that they can't be used for anything else is simply not true.

[Happy Times]

All the males in Switzerland that are in reserve have assault rifles at home.
Volunteer homeguard members in Estonia, Sweden and Norway also have assault rifles at home.
I remember one shooting in Switzerland and one in Sweden.

Before WW2 all the homeguard members in Finland had rifles at home, my grandfathers unit had two fieldguns also!
There was one shooting in the 30s involving a relative, three illegally armed communists drunk, kicked the door and entered the house to kill him, he shot the first one dead and the others fled.
Today that would take you to prison here.

Maybe its something perverse in the times and not the weapons?

[Happy Times]

but it is. You cannot use it for anything else, and as long as you do not load soft rubber bullets, the idea of a firearm is to be a lethal thing. Inetnion or not, that'S what it is.


I can easily refute your hypothesis using myself as a case study

I own hand guns and use it for things other than killing. In the 20+ years of shooting I have never killed anything with one of my handguns. But I used to be a competition shooter. I have never loaded "soft rubber bullets" in my shooting experiences. Therefore, you are mistaken when you say you can't use it for anything else (meaning killing). It is simply not true.

I have handguns which will never be used to kill anything as the design is impractical for killing but excel in target shooting. Again, I offer that as evidence that your position that firearms can only be used for killing is inaccurate.

I also have one firearm that is for display only. It is far too valuable (sentimental value only) for me to shoot. Yet more evidence that refutes your position that firearms can not be used for anything other than killing.

Your hypothesis that firearms can only be used for killing and that they can't be used for anything else is simply not true.

Agreed:yep:

[mengle]

we can't blame it on the firearms or the videogames .... we just have to admit that there are some isolated sick minds in the world.
How can we heal them? i don't know :nope:
bothering me is that by something like that people come closer to eachother, holding hands and stuf like that, but after copple weeks they behave just like before "selfish"

[Skybird]

Your hypothesis that firearms can only be used for killing and that they can't be used for anything else is simply not true.

A plum pudding is for eating. The fact that I still have not eaten it and it just is there and is being watched at, does not change that it is for eating only. You cannot do anything else with it. The mere reason why firearms were invented was to make killing more efficient, and to bring death faster and over a longer distance. That was their birth, and that is the reason why they get refined. Nobody invents a better version of the kalashnikov to score better points at the Olympics. And for shooting at the Olympics, you do not need so many private weapons that you could arm a private army with them. Nor do you need military equipment to secure your civilian self-defence.

I rate it as hair splitting what you try to argue over. Firearms in general are tools to bring death to the target. That'S what they are, that's what they excel in, that's the purpose they do not go beyond. If you form an emotional relation to them, than you form an emotional relation to a tool of death. Maybe you have a hidden thanatos-drive, then. That sometimes they are used for Olympic tournaments does not chnage the fact that they have not been invented to compete at the Olympics, but are in use at the Olympics because they have been invented for the purpose to kill. Without that purpose, they would not be there.

Additionally, sports shooting uses different ammunition, or even air pistols, than combat weapons.

Note that I indicated that I eventually accept possession of a revolver or pistol for self defence, if the living condition is accordingly. I question the demand for owning overkill capacity for that purpose, in form of the weapon formats that I criticised. Neither self defence nor hunting nor sports is an excuse to own firearms of military potency, and to own them in quantities to equip your own private police force. where this is the case, I want the state to enforce his monopoly on the use of force, move in, and disarm the private wannabe-warlord. I also would not accept a private person to own private combat-ready tanks with functional weapon systems, or a missile-armed combat helicopter. I also do not accept private enterprises to own and lease military units like mercenary companies use to do. We have had all this in europe, and all we got from it were centuries of wars, wars and more wars waged by factions that would have gone bancrupt in times of peace, so they enforced wars. To form national states that enforced both regular national armies that were not made of mercenaries anymore, and to enforce the state's monopoly on the use of force, were two things in european history that served us well. On the other hand, the militarisation of american society has not save america from having launched more wars in modern history than any other nation, nor has it made the Us society a less violant and fear-driven community as it is the case. weapons, wwpaons, weapons - production of weapons both for private and military customers even has turned into a economy branch without which the American economy would not be survivable anymore, to wider degree than in any other weapon-producing national economy on the globe.

weapons, owning weapons, focussing on weapons, religiously crusading for the demand to have as free access to them as you want, without any limits in quality and quantity, is a national obsession. and this in a country were violence and brutality is omnipresent in the media and the entertainment sector. the news is filled with it. TV series are filled with it. Movies are filled with it. Games are filled with it. Ideology is filled with it, and is focussing on it. whatever I see in media coming from Hollywood and american TV makers - for the most is filled with violence and brutal stuff from A to Z. This display of violence has become an export hit.

Free access to weapons, and a public fascination for violence - that's what is called an explosive mixture.

Here I must totally agree with the movie Bowling for Columbine, where they said that American society is a society that is and whose media are deeply focussed on fear and violence both in fiction and news and reality TV - and also showing a perverse fascination for it. That analysis of society maybe was the most thorough and brilliant part of the whole film. Never again has he become so good in any of his later films.

However. Bedtime, and two chess matches running, so: I leave it to this.

[Aramike]

Well, so far only kids who had access to weapons started shootings. No one possesed an ilegal weapon. Given the rather small number of gun owners in Germany it is odd that ALL amok kids came out of gun owner families.
There hasn't been a single case of a non gun owner kid to do such a massacre.That is a VERY good point, Shroeder, and certainly deserves examination. Kudos.

However, that begs additional questions. For one, the cross-section of examples of school shootings we're examining isn't incredibly large, so is it safe to say that any hard conclusion should be derived from it?

Secondly, if favorable gun laws saved 20 lives across a nation, but result in 16 deaths in a school, where do we go from there?

Finally, considering how rare these instances are, how can one use them to support the banning of firearms? Nutjobs aren't going to stop being nutjobs just because we want them too.So you see, obviously they don't try to get ileagal weapons or build IEDs.
I think one thing that is important is that those kids can get their hands on guns easily.
I believe that the knowledge of having power (a gun) available makes people to think about using them.Well, Timothy McVeigh wasn't a student, but he did blow up a federal building...
But changing gunlaws over here is something different than changing gun laws in the US. If anyone has a gun then I surely have one too just to be "safe". Here in Germany it is quite unusual that a burglar is armed with a firearm. Therefore no need to have one yourself.But it's unusual to attack a school, also. It is also unusual to be burglarized altogether.

Owning a gun for defensive purposes is generally a step taken to protect against the rare. But, it is better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.

What should be examined are not the laws that allowed this kid access to guns but rather the guardians who enabled that access.

Finally, school shootings are extremely rare. It would be dangerous to think that some other kind of attack isn't possible or even likely.

[NeonSamurai]

Use of IEDs has been attempted a few times by these kids, including at Colombine (sp?). They are also incredibly easy to make, especially with the internet providing recipes and "how to" instructional videos. You don't even need special chemicals to do it and all the materials are easily available in any western country (and impossible to ban due to common mundane use). If made correctly their potential lethality can easily equal any assault weapon.

To address the problem you need to address the root if you want to solve the problem, and eliminating firearms won't solve the issue as I had pretty much same knowledge on IEDs I do now as I did when I was 16-17 (and that was even pre internet). If I had wanted to though I could have easily caused massive amounts of carnage and death with the knowledge I possessed at the time.

I never thought of doing such a thing though, nor would I ever due to my deeply held beliefs on the value of all life. Even though I faced many of the same issues those kids did, and had a fair amount of exposure to violent media. My interest in IEDs was part of my curiosity in all things, and I have never made any explosive devices (so don't bother raiding my house as you wont find anything explosive beyond a few packs of matches and a bbq propane tank :p2:)

[Bewolf]

Where would he have done it? yes, it is possible in Germany to obtain wapons illegally, but you need the contacts within the criminal establishment to get one. It's not an easy task, as guns are not floating around en masse just so even there. And this kiddo, shy and insecure as he obviously was from al I ready from this case by now, I have a very hard time imagening him going out to talk to some die hard criminals. Armed robbery and comparable armed crimes are rare, reflecting the lack of weapons circling around.Like someone else said, who's to say he wouldn't have just built some pipe bombs or other IEDs?

Oh yeah, lots of IEDs going up here on a regular basis by all these kids wanting to kill without having a gun. Scissors and knives used on a regular basis to get some old fashioned school massacre up and running. Yeah, expirence really proved that one. :88)

The argument of other means used to kill but a gun is getting old.


Also, finding contacts within the criminal establishment isn't very hard - certainly not as you're implying. Hence, the world's rampant drug trade. Oh, and black market arms trade.

Finding contacts within the criminal establishment isn't very hard? Black markets arms trade? Come again? I think you confuse european conditions with third world or american ones. We have illegal weapons. After the collaps of the iron curtain there also was a lot of russian weaponry released on western Europe. But that was 20 years ago, and nothing of even remotely in scale compared to the US is avaiable here. Most what is floating around in Europe, by now even eastern Europe, if at all, are gas and air weapons, even within the cirminal scenes. The only ones possessing real guns are larger organisations like the Mafia, the Hells Angles, Neo Nazis and the likes. Hardly organisations reaching numbers having any impact on regular life in Germany.


In any case, this kid was determined enough to shoot up a school. To think that said determination doesn't cross itself over to gaining the means by which to do so is delusional.

Oh the convinience of a simple world view! That maybe the easy availability of a gun most probably has played a part in developing this deterination didn't cross your mind, obviously.

[HunterICX]

Mobile phone footage of the last moments of the shooters life
he seems to lay down and then shoot him in the head when the police corners him (footage is censored in that matter)

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=9c7_1236837917

HunterICX

[Skybird]

Oh yeah, lots of IEDs going up here on a regular basis by all these kids wanting to kill without having a gun. Scissors and knives used on a regular basis to get some old fashioned school massacre up and running. Yeah, expirence really proved that one. :88)

The argument of other means used to kill but a gun is getting old.



And car traffic - do not forget the lethality of car traffic! :ping:

[jeremy8529]

Guys, I just skimmed over the tread to be honest, but I believe one of the reasons that these shooting happen at schools is because of mistreatment. You have these student's that never really did fit in the first place, and the "cool" and the "popular" people make it there bussnise to make these "freaks" pay for being different. Most of the time, these people are physicly and emotionaly intimitated for so long, that they just eventualy snap and lust for revenge. Their brains end up getting so warped they belive that they are doing the world a favor, by striking back at society for the good of people like them selves. If you havn't noticed, most of these people that do these shootings, are not motivted by greed, and very few of them are the "happy" people in life.

[Schroeder]

Secondly, if favorable gun laws saved 20 lives across a nation, but result in 16 deaths in a school, where do we go from there? And how about stricter gun laws that prevent the 20 attempted kills from happening in the first place AND prevent the school massacres?

Finally, considering how rare these instances are, how can one use them to support the banning of firearms? Nutjobs aren't going to stop being nutjobs just because we want them too. I rather have a nutjob with a knive than one with a semi auto pistol. The guy with the knive can't massacre 16 people in a classroom. With melee weapons only you can stop such idiots for example by using chairs as weapons. If he is armed with a gun then you have nothing to defend yourself.


But it's unusual to attack a school, also. It is also unusual to be burglarized altogether. I think all of those masacres with 10+ fatals were school shootings over here. And the seceond sentence of yours makes guns unnecessary altogether.;)


Owning a gun for defensive purposes is generally a step taken to protect against the rare. But, it is better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.
Did you ever consider that the easy gun avialability might make those things not so rare anymore? I think having a gun gives you the confidence to commit such things in the first place. I don't think anyone who has no weapons at hand would consider to storm a classrom and kill people.


What should be examined are not the laws that allowed this kid access to guns but rather the guardians who enabled that access.
Why focusing on just one thing and not both? Yes, the parents broke laws by not locking the gun away furthermore I read that there was plenty of ammo in the house freely accessable, so I take your point and say you are right about that the existing laws have to be enforced better. But since that is close to impossible other options should be examined as well.


Finally, school shootings are extremely rare. It would be dangerous to think that some other kind of attack isn't possible or even likely. Yes they are rare, but have increased over the last decade haven't they? Attacking with other means than guns requires some efforts to build explosives or other weapons. That might discourage people to even consider such deeds.

[kiwi_2005]

Damn, that totally sucks. Why allways schools.. :nope:
Wonder how he got his hands on the weapons in the first place.

As morbid as it is, I wonder on whom or what they (especially the media) try to pin it this time. As far as I remember, last time they tried to blame video games and stuff.

Haven't read the whole thread but was just watching 'BBC World News' here and the German Police stated they think they know why he killed so many ppl, when searching his computer they found violent computer games.:hmmm: Not saying they are wrong in that statement but come on, I don't think for one second that violent computer games caused him to kill.

[NeonSamurai]

Caused no, but it may have contributed to the of triggering the final event.

As I keep saying, if you want to deal with the issue, deal with the root cause of the problem. Which is the toxic social environment virtually all (if not all) these teenage mass murderers came from. Then look at the contributing factors as well such as the media, the treatment of violence in mass entertainment and the messages they send, and easy access to the means to carry out these mass killings, guns and/or IEDs.

One should also pay attention as to the reasons why these shootings have become so prevalent in the last 15-20 years, and by in large didn't happen before that.

[Bewolf]

Damn, that totally sucks. Why allways schools.. :nope:
Wonder how he got his hands on the weapons in the first place.

As morbid as it is, I wonder on whom or what they (especially the media) try to pin it this time. As far as I remember, last time they tried to blame video games and stuff.
Haven't read the whole thread but was just watching 'BBC World News' here and the German Police stated they think they know why he killed so many ppl, when searching his computer they found violent computer games.:hmmm: Not saying they are wrong in that statement but come on, I don't think for one second that violent computer games caused him to kill.

Tell me one youngster not having some kind of ego shooter on his computer. It's as common nowadays as plastic soldiers and war playtools 50 years ago.

[Bewolf]

Guys, I just skimmed over the tread to be honest, but I believe one of the reasons that these shooting happen at schools is because of mistreatment. You have these student's that never really did fit in the first place, and the "cool" and the "popular" people make it there bussnise to make these "freaks" pay for being different. Most of the time, these people are physicly and emotionaly intimitated for so long, that they just eventualy snap and lust for revenge. Their brains end up getting so warped they belive that they are doing the world a favor, by striking back at society for the good of people like them selves. If you havn't noticed, most of these people that do these shootings, are not motivted by greed, and very few of them are the "happy" people in life.

The reasons for all this I think are bit more complex, even though you are on the right track.

I think only very few realize how different our society is nowadays compared to just 30 years ago.

First of all, society is fragmenting. Up until the 50ies, you will notice most everybody had the same fashion, living very comparable lifes, communities going to church or public services on a voluntary basis. Most ppl lived by rules defined by the great majority and did well with it. Common values and steady, hardly changing jobs gave a security not to be found today.
Instead individualism, though not bad in general, nevertheless causes society to splitter up, making ppl lose their holding within social groups and leave them alone in the open to care for themselves. If they can't, they are labelled as lazy or are pressured into acting against their personality. What they first expiriences as freedom led them the way to lonelyness. There are more singles and more divroces nowadays then ever before. Only the strong and determined have chances in such an environment, everybody with defencies in this regard are left behind. And that's even what they are told right into their faces.
Telling them to straighten up and develop self discipline is more easily said then done.

Another problem is choices. This may sound odd, but ppl have too many choices what to do nowadays, and with too many choices there are too many variables to go wrong. In past times, ppl only had limited options in their lives. And once, for example, they settled for a job, they could be pretty sure to stay within that job for the rest of their lives. Today everybody is asked to be flexible, learn all your life, get into different jobs. This starts in school already and puts a stress on ppl during all of their lives never seen before. Constant fear off losing a job by some big company streamlining their business for shareholder value is the norm nowadays, even if ppl worked hard all their lives. One mistake, or none at all, can be enough to ruin the rest of your live.

Now I am not saying to go back to a uniform and streamlines model, for that i am too much a fan of varyity, but the backsides of this come to light to an ever increasing degree and solutions must be found to deal with this.

And let's not forget a trend of idealizing certain role models in the media, giving boys and girls alike the impression of having to fullfill criteria of beauty and demeanor impossible to fullfill from the earliest years on. It's not like us old brats who grew up in different times and thus have the self esteem to overlook and deal with these issues. Constant complexes and dissatisfaction coupled with a lack of understanding by a society that is completly focussed on success does it's own to destroy any self esteem right from the start. Without loving and understanding parents children nowadays hardly stand a chance to get a good live even started.

And opposite to media induced perception this is more common then not.

[Bewolf]

Oh yeah, lots of IEDs going up here on a regular basis by all these kids wanting to kill without having a gun. Scissors and knives used on a regular basis to get some old fashioned school massacre up and running. Yeah, expirence really proved that one. :88)

The argument of other means used to kill but a gun is getting old.


And car traffic - do not forget the lethality of car traffic! :ping:

oh yeah! right, I forgot indeed, cars were designed as weapons as well and regulary driven into schools to kill! how could I have missed that. :damn:

[mengle]

Guys, I just skimmed over the tread to be honest, but I believe one of the reasons that these shooting happen at schools is because of mistreatment. You have these student's that never really did fit in the first place, and the "cool" and the "popular" people make it there bussnise to make these "freaks" pay for being different. Most of the time, these people are physicly and emotionaly intimitated for so long, that they just eventualy snap and lust for revenge. Their brains end up getting so warped they belive that they are doing the world a favor, by striking back at society for the good of people like them selves. If you havn't noticed, most of these people that do these shootings, are not motivted by greed, and very few of them are the "happy" people in life.

The reasons for all this I think are bit more complex, even though you are on the right track.

I think only very few realize how different our society is nowadays compared to just 30 years ago.

First of all, society is fragmenting. Up until the 50ies, you will notice most everybody had the same fashion, living very comparable lifes, communities going to church or public services on a voluntary basis. Most ppl lived by rules defined by the great majority and did well with it. Common values and steady, hardly changing jobs gave a security not to be found today.
Instead individualism, though not bad in general, nevertheless causes society to splitter up, making ppl lose their holding within social groups and leave them alone in the open to care for themselves. If they can't, they are labelled as lazy or are pressured into acting against their personality. What they first expiriences as freedom led them the way to lonelyness. There are more singles and more divroces nowadays then ever before. Only the strong and determined have chances in such an environment, everybody with defencies in this regard are left behind. And that's even what they are told right into their faces.
Telling them to straighten up and develop self discipline is more easily said then done.

Another problem is choices. This may sound odd, but ppl have too many choices what to do nowadays, and with too many choices there are too many variables to go wrong. In past times, ppl only had limited options in their lives. And once, for example, they settled for a job, they could be pretty sure to stay within that job for the rest of their lives. Today everybody is asked to be flexible, learn all your life, get into different jobs. This starts in school already and puts a stress on ppl during all of their lives never seen before. Constant fear off losing a job by some big company streamlining their business for shareholder value is the norm nowadays, even if ppl worked hard all their lives. One mistake, or none at all, can be enough to ruin the rest of your live.

Now I am not saying to go back to a uniform and streamlines model, for that i am too much a fan of varyity, but the backsides of this come to light to an ever increasing degree and solutions must be found to deal with this.

And let's not forget a trend of idealizing certain role models in the media, giving boys and girls alike the impression of having to fullfill criteria of beauty and demeanor impossible to fullfill from the earliest years on. It's not like us old brats who grew up in different times and thus have the self esteem to overlook and deal with these issues. Constant complexes and dissatisfaction coupled with a lack of understanding by a society that is completly focussed on success does it's own to destroy any self esteem right from the start. Without loving and understanding parents children nowadays hardly stand a chance to get a good live even started.
And opposite to media induced perception this is more common then not.


I agree, thats my point to, but i could not explain in English like you do, using a
wrong word could upshet some people like it did in my "SAD DAY IN BELGIUM" thread.

[August]

Finally, school shootings are extremely rare. It would be dangerous to think that some other kind of attack isn't possible or even likely.

The largest school massacre in US history was not committed with a gun but rather a bomb (three bombs actually).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

[Aramike]

Finally, school shootings are extremely rare. It would be dangerous to think that some other kind of attack isn't possible or even likely.

The largest school massacre in US history was not committed with a gun but rather a bomb (three bombs actually).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disasterGood call. :rock:

[Foxtrot]

"I can't take any more ... I thought this sort of thing only happened in America. But it seems that America has come to Germany."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/7937772.stm

Yes, America is responsible if you sneeze and cough. :shifty:

Perhaps she wanted to say "America came to Germany before TO CLOSE DOWN THE CONCENTRATION CAMPS AND LIBERATE THE POPULATION."

[NeonSamurai]

Interesting find, though slightly different as that guy wasn't a student and did it for entirely different reasons then your teenage high school shooter.

Getting back to IEDs though they have been attempted in the past, The plan for Columbine had been to use 2 propane bombs which they had set up in the cafeteria under the library which were to go off at lunch time. If they had gone off the casualties would have been massive as it would have destroyed the cafeteria and probably brought the library above crashing down. When the bombs didn't go off then Harris and Klebold went in shooting (they were waiting outside). The 2 also brought several pipe bombs all of which also failed to detonate.

All told they had 2 propane bombs, several pipe bombs and even some molotovs. According to wiki they built a total of 99 IEDs

In this case it's very lucky that these kids didn't know how to properly make IEDs or the casualties would have been in in the hundreds.

Lastly those 2 bought their guns through legal and semi legal channels.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbine_High_School_massacre

[A Very Super Market]

Oh my god, what. Did you just say that? Why? This was, for once, a reasonable discussion, and you (Who took no part in the rest of the thread) must come and invoke Godwin's law for the sheer hell of it? :nope:

[Jimbuna]

I wonder if Germany will now go down the same route as the UK did and ban ownership of handguns :hmmm:

[Schroeder]

@AVSM
http://www.dontfeedthetroll.de/images/dftt.gif

[Skybird]

I wonder if Germany will now go down the same route as the UK did and ban ownership of handguns :hmmm:
It was mentioned by some politicians that sport shooters should store their weapons in safe rooms in the club bulding, and not be allowed to take them home and store them in a safe anymore. While I cannot object much to that, it is not practical, since the number of weapons clubhouses would need to store would increase by a factor of three at least, and these storage capacities simply are not there. Such buildings also would be made attractive targets for criminals, eventually.

In Germany it is mandatory that oyu must store your weapon and ammunition separately, and mostly in a safe or special weapon safe, while hunting weapons (long rifles) eventually are allowed to be stored in locked cabinets inside locked rooms. For transportation from shooting gallery to home and back, locked suitcases are needed.

Carrying a weapon concealed is principally banned for private persons in Germany, which I think is a very, very good thing.

But we have far too many sunday hunters and folklore shooters in Germany, and many of them can'T shoot well - my father says both ambitioned sports shooter as well as members of the police that he met on shooting galleries in Berlin and now in Münster look down on them with disgust. Some years ago while I was still at university I drove with friends in a car through a regional forest, wehre a group of these freaks hat assembled. They shot over the street from one side to the other, killing a goose on the other side, just some meters from us away, although they had seen us coming. Schießwütiges Spießbürger-Geschmeiß - ballert wild herum und auf alles, was sich bewegt. And afterwards aprés-hunt with loads of beer and german Volksmusik.

Of course we should have called the police and filed the incident. But hey we were young, in a hurry, and a bit crazy outselves, so...

As worse and disgusting are trophy hunters.