School Shooting They Didn't Cover

[Ariya]

http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1582039/20080221/id_0.jhtml

Thank you major new medias for ignoring the school shootings that involve gay Americans. Truly you are doing such wonderful jobs.

[Corwin]

It doesn't sound to me like they didn't cover it just b/c he was gay, in fact, it sounds like ppl are trying to make more of an issue out of the fact that 1 admittedly gay student was shot out of 21 victims, isn't the tragedy here more that these kids were shot, or if you have to be a step removed from that sentiment, that the other 20 children weren't covered in the article, the whole article revolves around just the one gay kid, and the fact that they are going to try and prosecute the shooter as if it's a gay hate crime rather than just a criminal act in which 21 children were injured, it seems to me that most of the news outlets see if as the latter and didn't feel the need to immediately give it coverage in a world where there have been enough school shootings that it wouldn't garner them ratings, now if the shooter had come to school and only shot gay kids, then it could be considered a hate crime and would have been more than likely picked up by the major news agencies immidiately, and if it hadn't at that point then your comment about them not reporting it b/c it involved a gay american would seem more relevant

[leerock89]

they probably didnt want to make it major because they didnt want another ruckus. sure the kid was gay. sure another kid shot him in school. but that kind of publicity is not something u or anyone should want. and it freedom of speech. if they didnt cover its cause they chose not to. thats why polls forums and other such public opinions exist.

[Crymson]

While it is sad that a person is dead, a 14 year old could be tried as an adult. the article made it sound like he was guilty, but still. a 14 year old being tried as an adult. This is a story with the possibility of two tragedies.

[Corwin]

while I admit that trying him as an adult might result in a tragedy that most of us would not want to willingly participate in, ie. sitting on that jury, but let's face it, as more and more of this kind of thing happens, perpetrated by children of younger and younger age, we have to find a way to divine if they truly understood what they were doing and the consequences to others of their actions, namely injury and death, b/c if we continue to try them as children the penalties are lenient enough that they are not a deterrent, and it becomes a large enough issue that trying them as adults and sentencing them as such seems the only way to get their attention and show them how wrong their actions are, and even then, prison life gets romanticized so much by rappers, and especially gang members who want these kids to act this way, that most of them don't seem to understand that going to prison isn't going to net them a recording contract, or lots of loose women, so the question becomes, do you want to try them as children and have them out in 2 or 3 years w/o very little understanding of their actions, or treat them as adults and in 2 or 3 years of living hell in a state penitentiary find that they understand their actions and will never do something so heinous again

[Crymson]

I understand what you're saying Corwin. but this kids 14. Junior High/Middle School. this isn't like a 17 year old highschool junior or senior. this is a kid. we need to be proactive not reactive. Instead of more kids-tried-as-adults we should be teaching in school that killing, fighting, hurting people is always wrong.

[silkshadow]

i dont know if you just slap them on the wrist theyll do it agian and others will see that they can get away with it also.

[Crymson]

but is an 8th grader (i think) really responsible for killing someone in the way that any of us 18ish+ people are?

[leerock89]

it depends on the kid. if he felt nothing from the killing he needs an adult sentence. if hes in shock and feeling severly depressed i think the whole entire incident going through his head over and over is punishment enough. i mean killing someone in this day of age isnt something a normal person in the more civilized world would want to think about. and usualy when it happens its from serial killers and monsters who dont understand the value of a life. if this kid has a heart at all this is going to haunt him for the rest of his life.

[Crymson]

But how many people (especially 14 year olds) are monsters?

[Corwin]

I don't know, when I was in 8th grade I understand the consequences of an action like that, that would be why I didn't go kill someone, and if I had, I wouldn't have been suprised in the least to be tried as an adult, and I"m sure the parents of the injured or dead children feel that he should be tried as an adult too, the only ppl directly involved that don't think that way are the kids parent's b/c they don't want to believe that they failed to make their child understand the realities of a situation like this by the time he got that old, but when you get down to it, one of the major problems facing this country is trying to decide where that line should be, at what age is it ok to try them as an adult in the case of certain criminal acts, should the line be age based, or should it be based on mental faculties, there's a chance a mentally disabled person of 25 would not understand his actions but that a 10yr old genius who is in his freshman year of high school would, so how do you decide which one you should charge which way, if we go by an age standard alone we are asking for trouble in the future, but if we go through psychological analysis then we're going to have scammers, and expert witnesses paid off to swing their vote or trying to push their own views, rather than having these things become less of an issue as we supposedly become more advanced, more civilized, we've actually come up w/ more and harder problems to deal w/

[leerock89]

depends on the parents and society.

[Crymson]

If you cant drink, smoke, or vote then why should you be able to be tried as an adult. You can be tried as an adult because you are an adult, not because you did an adult thing. If someone isn't responsible enough to be given alcohol, a car, or a vote, how can they be responsible enough to face an adult's punishment?

[Corwin]

you say that, but let's face it, what age do most kids start smoking, drinking, having sex, even driving at these days, there's a good chance any underage joyriding is in a stolen car to boot, so why shouldn't they be tried as an adult, they understand that these these are wrong at least to enough of a degree that they know to keep it hidden from police, parents, teachers, and other adults

[Crymson]

Because they aren't adults. You wouldn't put a dog on trial for murder, even if it did kill someone. Why? Because a dog is not a person. You wouldn't charge a 2 year old for murder, even if they did shoot someone intentionally (other than the fact you could never prove it) because they don't qualify even as a juvenile. trying these kids as adults means that it will be on their record for life that they killed someone as an adult. and we all make mistakes (drinking, smoking, having sex without protection, etc.) That's part of growing up. But part of growing up is also being able to say: "Yea, I got so smashed so bad I couldn't even stand once. when I was 16." And everyone says, "oh, when he was 16."

[Corwin]

actually the will and have put dogs on trial for murder, that's how they get put down, and yes I see what ur saying but just b/c you are young doesn't mean you should be able to escape the most extreme effects of your actions, if some 15yr old gangsta wannabe came up in broad daylight and shot your parents, or your sibling, or your girlfriend/fiance/wife, how would you feel about it, chances are the lifestyle and the actions have been romanticized for him, thinking he's going to get respect and women by doing something like that, but he knows exactly what he was doing and what it meant, now are you saying you wouldn't want to try him as an adult just b/c he's 15, if it was accidental I could understand, but w/ full knowledge of the consequences of his actions and the mental capacity to understand it, that's usually what they use to determine if they should try someone as a minor or an adult

[Crymson]

Even if they shot me I would want them tried as a minor. I know that if I were a minor and got busted for something I would want to be tried as a minor.

[tangaloor5]

The real question is, even if the 14 year old is tried as an adult would prison actually accomplish anything? It may scare the person, but it wouldn't get to the root of the problem that actually caused them to kill people.

[Crymson]

True. as I said before. We should be proactive, not reactive.

[Corwin]

I didn't say shot you Crymson b/c you would likely still want to be lenient w/ them, but if they shot a loved one like your mom or dad, your emotional response would likely be different

[Crymson]

maybe it would. I would hope that I would have the calm and wisdom to want that person tried as a minor, but I think that is something that you cant comment on until you've lived through it. and I never have.

[tangaloor5]

Unfortunately, under the current legal system the best that could be done would be to try to scare them with jail. I mean they already did it, proactive isn't going to help much.

I think 14 is old enough to understand death and that killing is very final and wrong. Come on, so many people died, there has to be a penalty for that.

[Corwin]

so you feel you can't comment on something like that, but you feel you have the necessary experience to comment on someone being tried as an adult or a minor? not trying to be offensive or argumentative, I'm just saying, that seems a little hypocritical, like you want to make a nice safe decision that makes you seem like a good guy while staying away from the questions that might make you change your tune

[Crymson]

Oh, I could say that I would say try them as a minor. And I will. so there.
But I also know that when I get angry I lose my head. I also know that I can start with all the best intentions, and let my emotions get the best of me.
I'm not trying to sound like a saint, I am by no means the most moral and righteous person in the world.

[leerock89]

this is getting to complicated!! look the kid killed someone who happened to be gay. media didnt cover it cause in reality thousands of people die daily and one more crackpot kid on the news isnt gonna help much.the kid screwed up! if he regrets it then try him as a minor if he doesnt send that fool to prison and keep him there. the fact that there are kids like that mean that the parents are really fucking up. like really really really screwing with the kid and turning him/her into one bad sheep. the parents should get tried for failure to teach their own offspring the difference between right and wrong.

[Crymson]

That's a blanket generalization. There are some really good parents with really screwed up kids, and vice versa. You can't say that because someone is screwed up that their parents are screwed up, or that they screwed their kid up.

[tangaloor5]

By the way, why is it so important that one of the people killed was gay. A person is a person right. You don't really need to emphasize that one thing. I would really hate to be characterized by only one thing.

[Crymson]

By the way, why is it so important that one of the people killed was gay. A person is a person right. You don't really need to emphasize that one thing. I would really hate to be characterized by only one thing.

I agree. It seems like a crime committed against a minority or someone with an alternative lifestyle is more important than one committed against a "normal" person.

[tangaloor5]

I agree. The whole "hate" crime thing is stupid. A crime is a crime. Many killings are done because of hate that don't qualify as a "hate" crime. Singling out just a few types isn't right.

[leerock89]

i dont know if i agree with that. true, crime is a crime but when u add hate to it it usually means something done out of hate(duh) while a regualr crime doesnt need hate to happen. ex- stealing a car for the money vs stealing a car because u really hated the person who drove it. thats why hate crimes are frowned on more then regualr crime. they did it out of hate. i mean common professionals in the dark underworld world do wat they do cause its their job. regular people who commit hate crimes arent commiting it cause they do that crime on a regular basis but because they hate someone/something, and, as we humans are petty beings, we lash out in rage and hate.

[Crymson]

The problem is how do you prove beyond a doubt that a crime was a hate crime and that a minority or person of alternative lifestyle wasn't just a random victim? It can be done, sometimes, but I would venture most of the time it can't be proven. even when it is the case.

[leerock89]

see thats where its all f-up. the court system barely work(learned that from exp), lawyers are for the most part corrupt(also from exp), and the masses like it when people are in the shit hole. its a demented society we live in but ill tell u i wouldnt want to be living in any other era. i mean wat would i do without animefuel!?!

[Crymson]

Good point. Anime makes all the wrongs of the world ok.:D

[Corwin]

I think we just need to re-institute the death penalty, not for every murder, but for 50% of them at least, and get rid of this 30yr wait on death row making appeals in cases where guilt beyond doubt, sort of like Ron White talks about it, put in an express lane, that would at least be a deterrent, if I knew I'd be executed 10min-10months, after I killed someone assuming that it was proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, especially in the case of the accused pleading guilty, then I'd be a lot less likely to go kill someone, but as long as ppl know they can sit in jail for the rest of their lives enjoying tv, internet, gym equipment, a bed, a roof, 3 squares a day, and not having to spend a dime of their own on it, yes they lose freedom but a lot of them don't seem to care, and many of them become so institutionalized after a few years in that they don't want to get out, I mean I wouldn't be able to smoke or drink whenever I wanted anymore but compared to not having to pay rent, make a mortgage payment, car payment, buy groceries, pay bills and taxes, that's not a bad deal

[tangaloor5]

I disagree. I don't think the death penalty is a good idea. There is too good of a chance that someone who is actually innocent would die. That even happens now with the long wait. I really don't think jail should be comfortable though. Why should they get tv and internet, let them be bored.

[leerock89]

i actually like wat corwin said. in fact lets take it a step further and have all those on death row do some gladiator things and have them die publicly.

[Corwin]

as I said, it should only be used in cases where it is beyond doubt that the accused is guilty

**Lee thought I don't think that's a good idea, I don't really agree w/ the idea of ppl viewing an execution now, it just gives too many ppl an opportunity to indulge their dark voyeur

[leerock89]

i know i know. well do it live too. like some reality show.

[Crymson]

I agree with tangaloor5. However, we should give everyone guns. Statistics show that areas where obtaining weapons and licenses are easier that violent crime is lower. therefor the more guns, the less crime.

here is just one reference, its a bit old, but still valid, other than a few comments about liberals
http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/wew/articles/95/more-guns-less-crime.htm

[tangaloor5]

As for the shadow of a doubt thing, that is dependent upon the person viewing the evidence. You're only suppose to convict people if there is proof beyond a shadow of a doubt but there are still many innocent people convicted.

As for the guns thing. I am afraid to own a gun because the chances of a mugger, for example, using it on me is probably pretty high.

[Crymson]

But if everyone has a gun, no one would pull one, because ten people would pull one on them in response.

[tangaloor5]

Now there's a scary thought. One crazy person pulls a gun and the next thing you know everyone shooting. It would be horrible.

I'm really against that now.:(

[Crymson]

maybe, or maybe all the crazy people would just get shot in the first few weeks and no one would ever get shot again.

I was actually kidding. :)

[tangaloor5]

Even so. That could happen and if one person pulls a gun and ten more do as well who will know who originally pulled a gun. They might all end up being shot. That's a good way to get a massacre. And the worst is that it could really happen.

[Crymson]

true enough. its unfortunate that anyone ever turned a tool on someone else, making it a weapon.

[tangaloor5]

Yeah, but there is no way to prevent it, unfortunately.

[leerock89]

its a constitutional law to be allowed to bear arms making usa GREAT!! of course i personally dont own one but i do plan on getting one(been watching to much zombie stuff makeing me paraniod)

[Crymson]

I have gun. I shoot targets with it. I find it relaxing. same thing with my bow. now, if only we could get rid of all the stupid people... (not mentally challenged, they're okay.)

[tangaloor5]

Tell me how would you kill the undead with a little bitty bullet anyway. If you're really afraid of zombies invest in a flamethrower and explosives. They would definitely work.

Hard to come after someone when you in 200,000 pieces or a pile of ash after all.

[tangaloor5]

I have gun. I shoot targets with it. I find it relaxing. same thing with my bow. now, if only we could get rid of all the stupid people... (not mentally challenged, they're okay.)

Exactly which group of stupid people are you reffering to?:confused:

[Crymson]

people who would shoot someone else.

on the subject of zombies, shotguns can be effective if you target the head or neck.

[tangaloor5]

Zombies don't need their heads. I mean they're dead right and they don't seem to need their brains that much either.

I agree people who shoot other people are stupid. I'm not against using guns in hunting or on a shooting range.

[leerock89]

in most zombie myth if u damage the head enough they are done for.

and people need to shoot other people otherwise the wars we have would be veery long

[tangaloor5]

Wars are incredibly stupid, but they too seem to be inevitable. At least there aren't that many of them.

[leerock89]

eh are u craazy?? theres wars happening all the time!!

[tangaloor5]

Sorry, I don't read the news very often, too depressing.

[Crymson]

If no one killed anyone else there wouldn't be wars. can violence really end violence? can hate really end hate? is it possible? take it in war, or in the case of the kid shooting another kid. Did it make anything better?

[leerock89]

lol! to bad man news is where alot of topics come from like this thread which started off as a cry against the medias neglect of a school shooting and ended talking about zombies and war

and crymsn u got that from gundam didnt u? i mean your avatar screams it

[tangaloor5]

Yeah it was quite a change in topic. However, zombies are a lot nicer to talk about since they aren't real.

As for there never being war or killing people. It will probably never happen. As long as there is envy, greed, hate, etc. There will always be the unpleasant results of these emotions.:(

[Crymson]

lol! to bad man news is where alot of topics come from like this thread which started off as a cry against the medias neglect of a school shooting and ended talking about zombies and war

and crymsn u got that from gundam didnt u? i mean your avatar screams it

Yes and no. I had the question before I saw SEED, but I really liked the way they put it. It's been a hard question for me to deal with, as I can be a violent person. And I've come back to that question they ask in SEED over and over again.

other than that I like the Athrun character, and I look a little bit like him (similar hair cut)

[Corwin]

Ok I think first things first, even if no one killed anyone else war would still exist, there are many forms of war, we just tend to think of what we perceive as it's most violent form when we hear the word, there are also economic wars, as well as social and political revolutions for instance, before making such a statement like that, research should really be done

[Crymson]

Ok I think first things first, even if no one killed anyone else war would still exist, there are many forms of war, we just tend to think of what we perceive as it's most violent form when we hear the word, there are also economic wars, as well as social and political revolutions for instance, before making such a statement like that, research should really be done

You may disagree, but I would call that an argument of semantics

[Corwin]

Semantics or not, truth is truth, and while I may hold strong opinions on certain subjects I am willing to open myself up to other viewpoints which you seem to be having a hard time doing, as every post you make seems to scream out how you think you're right and everyone else is wrong, I would say to you that while this is a debate and naturally a heated discussion that you shouldn't be as argumentative and close minded as you seem to be, I may be wrong, but that's how it seems to me

[Crymson]

I think everyone has subjects that they are open to changing their minds about, and others they are not. this just happens to be one I have strong opinions about. I may be wrong, I may be right, who's to say? At the end of the day I know there are some things I am right (or close to right) on, and many I am not. And though we debate, I don't think lower of people for their opinions, I'm glad people don't think like me, cuz that would probably be a pretty bad world.

I think this will be my last post in this subject, as I am getting emotionally involved, which probably isn't good. I am a naturally argumentative person, and I often play the devil's advocate. Perhaps it's a flaw of personality; who knows?

Anyway, in another topic then.