O the news makes it up here, lots of American TV channels.
We’re just not as crazy as the USA is, yet.
I’m sure we will be eventually though.
You’re right they are not putting guns in peoples hands, I agree.
But I do believe they are putting ideas in peoples heads, ( albeit not the brightest people) by essentially advertising the events 24/7.
I don’t know what the answer is , but I’m sure the media is at least part of the problem/cause for the ever growing numbers of these things, in the USA.
How many of us had ever thought about ,just the possibility, of a school mass murder before we’d ever heard of one on the news?
I know I never had.
We know one thing for sure. None of them are exceptional. U-S-A! U-S-A!
Maybe so, but we need to know these things. I’ve luckily never been in a situation where guns were involved. But with the rate of school shootings BESIDES the other murders with guns, my vote (and maybe others) will not support a candidate who is pro-gun rights.
Another thing is the why of the situation. What caused this kid (and maybe another) to mass murder this morning? What problem/issue led to bringing guns to school to kill people? We need to know how people who do these sorts of things makes them tick.
You know, I’ve watched far too many of these stories being covered and one thing I’ve noticed is that NOT ONCE has the media ever glorified the shooter(s). Why do you think it is that future shooters don’t take away the message that shooting up is schools is VERY BAD? For that matter, why don’t the politicians try to take more serious steps to curb access to guns? Is the media to blame for that as well?
Nobody really cares. Nobody with a very loud voice, anyway. And to even raise the question is to invite accusations of trying to humanize (easily misread as having sympathy for/agreeing with) the shooters. But at last one was taken alive. Let’s see what he has to say.
The Parkland shooter was taken alive. Not sure we learned anything useful there.
While it’s true the KDR is not listed and lauded (although the internet being what it is…), the shooters still get their names in lights. The acknowledgement is (possibly) encouragement that a future shooter will make a lasting impression on the world. Even if it’s negative and their last, it’s meaning nonetheless.
ETA:
Heh, forgot about that guy. Well that balls up my previous hypotheses. Back to Musee des Beaux Arts. Shit happens and any meaning is subject to proximity.
It’s not very easy to get permission to carry a gun in a school zone, even in Texas.
We learned we should distribute all the wimmenfolk like they were cattle or something, so every guy gets a heifer, and has a chance at one of the best heifers.
Or at least that’s what that joke of a “public intellectual” Jordan Peterson and his ‘incel’ followers tell us.
Oh wait: or was that Toronto? Or both? The mass killings, they run together.
ISTM that if more resources where available to people suffering from mental illness, the media would have far less shootings to report. Thus, less copycat glory seekers. Sure, some evil bastards would still do evil things, but I bet we could put a real dent in the mass shooting statistics. To say nothing of improving the lives of those suffering from mental illness.
Colour me hopelessly naive.
Maybe someone should explain that because of this, the law will try to execute this kid before he’s 21. Life over, done and done, that’s what you’ll win, kids. No family, friends, fun, just staring at walls until you’re chemically cooked. I remember being a teenager in the '80s, I never had the idea of bringing a gun to school because of 17-year-old teen issues. So who knows?
I’d also like to see that if this kid stole a gun from his parents or someone else, the gun owners also get prosecuted and gun license revoked.
The little shit built some IEDs. What is this world coming to?
[quote=“Inigo_Montoya, post:28, topic:814400”]
While it’s true the KDR is not listed and lauded (although the internet being what it is…), the shooters still get their names in lights. The acknowledgement is (possibly) encouragement that a future shooter will make a lasting impression on the world. Even if it’s negative and their last, it’s meaning nonetheless. QUOTE]
That^^^ seems to be enough for them.
We have to remember, these are not people thinking normally.
Though it is becoming more the norm.
While you may not have ever thought of a school massacre before hearing about one on the news, it was attributable to your own lack of knowledge, not that they didn’t occur. One of the worst school massacres in history was in 1927. This problem predates television. What makes it distinctive today is the firepower.
No meaningful arguments here. Just tossing out a remark relevant to johnod’s observations about reporting the incidents. IME pretty much anyone in high school could do with some intensive psychotherapy. But this is 'Merika. [rant deleted, logging out for the day]
My point was who had thought of one before the recent batch wit all the media coverage.
Not that it had never happened before.
I’ll attribute your confusion to your lack of reading comprehension.
A site called Heavy (dunno if they are reliable or not) has some information about the shooter: Dimitrios Pagourtzis: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know | Heavy.com
None.
Yeah, that’s useful.
Way back in 1998, Kip Kinkle was taken alive too. This was the biggest one before Columbine. So we’ve had 20 years to learn from that. I guess we’re slow learners.