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.

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.

What we need is scissor control !

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

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

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.

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

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.

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.......)

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.

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.

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

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.