Jump to content

School Shootings


Recommended Posts

I noticed how no one has started a thread on the Montreal school shootings. When I heard about it my first thought was 'here we go again with a media frenzy, endless analysis and hand wringing'. I promptly turned off the news. I am wondering if I have become cynical because I read/listen to way too much news/current affairs or whether others share my fatigue when it comes to public tragedies like this one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 82
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

[i will start with the opinions. Here goes....]

I can not help but think that less people could have been shot by either one of two things:

1) armed security guards an campus

2) more people commonly bearing arms

The witness testimonies that I heard repeatedly involved the shooter clearly walking with his rifle in full view before shooting. That tells me that he could have been taken down by security guards or fellow by-standers -- provided everybody else was armed.

At the very least, pepper spray could have helped subdue him before the police arrived.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[i will start with the opinions. Here goes....]

I can not help but think that less people could have been shot by either one of two things:

2) more people commonly bearing arms

At the very least, pepper spray could have helped subdue him before the police arrived.

Oh definately.....everyday people shooting at each other will definately produce less people being shot....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Charles Anthony,

I can not help but think that less people could have been shot by either one of two things:

1) armed security guards an campus

2) more people commonly bearing arms

#2 is unreasonable for so many reasons, not the least of which is that even in the US, schools ban guns. So, technically, even with the 'right to bear arms', there should not have been another gun in that school to kill the shooter.

Have you ever noted the suicide rates? More guns would simply mean more people would choose to 'go out with a bang'. (silly pun intended)

As to #1, a possibility, but unless they are posted in every room (or at every entrance) there is little to be done, a response time of even a few minutes would generally be inadequate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Charles Anthony,
I can not help but think that less people could have been shot by either one of two things:

1) armed security guards an campus

2) more people commonly bearing arms

#2 is unreasonable for so many reasons, not the least of which is that even in the US, schools ban guns. So, technically, even with the 'right to bear arms', there should not have been another gun in that school to kill the shooter.

Have you ever noted the suicide rates? More guns would simply mean more people would choose to 'go out with a bang'. (silly pun intended)

As to #1, a possibility, but unless they are posted in every room (or at every entrance) there is little to be done, a response time of even a few minutes would generally be inadequate.

Given that the first reports that came in were a man dressed in camo, two gun men, etc etc etc.....You gotta laugh at the possibility of dozens and dozens of armed teenagers rushing to scene shooting at each other....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[i will start with the opinions. Here goes....]

I can not help but think that less people could have been shot by either one of two things:

1) armed security guards an campus

2) more people commonly bearing arms

The witness testimonies that I heard repeatedly involved the shooter clearly walking with his rifle in full view before shooting. That tells me that he could have been taken down by security guards or fellow by-standers -- provided everybody else was armed.

At the very least, pepper spray could have helped subdue him before the police arrived.

Armed security guards on campus, probably. More people commonly bearing arms, possibly in this case but not in general.

Are you the one volunteering to go against someone carrying a semi automatic rifle carrying only pepper spray? You are a lot braver than I.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

O.k. guys here's my two cents. Remember this is not a political terrorist. This is not someone part of a terrorist cell deliberately doing this as an expression of political will. This is someone who for all intense and purposes is typical of the lone gunman who goes bezerk; a male, who felt marginalized and a failure,

and who after attempts to seek approval and admittance from his peers, gave up, and in one act of suicide, decides to affirm his identity to the world he feels rejected him.

The bottom line is you can say society caused it, blame his parents, etc., but the reality is, this guy was mad, and no amount of guns, preparation and precautions will ever stop a mad man intent on killing people. That is the cold scary reality just as it is with terrorists. You can try, but you can't prevent it.

However there is a lot Montreal police did learn. After the horrible Lepigne massacres of women in previous shooting in Monteal, Montreal police studied and learned from it. Under the old procedures, police arriving at the scene of a mad man shooting and running loose, would hold back, form a secured zone, and wait for Swat.

However because of lessons learned from the previous massacre, Montreal police changed their procedures, and now give the first police officer on the scene discretion to proceed without waiting for swat.

In this case keep in mind the shootings although it no doubt seemed like ages for the students was approximately 15 minutes and was in fact successfully contained when the original officers on the scene chose to use their discretion and take the gunner down.

Without lessons learned from the previous massacre, perhaps the gunman could have reloaded and killed more people while the police at the scene waited for Swat.

As well, as tragic as all the injuries are, because of lessons learned in the last massacre new procedures put in place, enabled an emergency doctor to get to the scene in minutes and allowed a relatively quick arrival and transfer of injured students to the Montreal General hospital. It could very well be that lessons learned and the new emergency procedures enabling a faster delivery of injured students will save lives that might have otherwise been lost due to delays.

The sad fact is this mad man probably could not be stopped but the police and emergency response teams

will carefully study this terrifying event and learn from it as well and continue to develop improved methods.

I personally don't think an armed guard would have stopped this. Most studies show armed guards freeze.

It is very very hard to teach someone to be able to kill someone.

When the police draw their guns and shoot and kill it is very unusual but they have the additional training a security guard would not.

I personally think it is dangerous for anyone but a police offer to have a gun. I also down pepper spray would have taken this guy down or a phaser.

Luckily police officers were already at the scene and others arrived within 4 minutes. Luckily this idiot even shooting at point blank at this time only seems to have killed one knock on wood.

I went to Dawson (when it was on the old campus on Selby Street) so I sort of felt that extra punch listening to the story.

I can only tell you what I learned living in Israel (temporarily) and from some of my friends who lived in Belfast and Londonderry or Derry however you say it....you can't live in fear...it will drive you crazy....you have to let the professionals, i.e., the police and emergency people do their job and learn from it...but you yourself can't give in to fear and start calling on your society to turn into a police state. Don't give your freedom away to these idiots.

That said, I think this is again a reminder why we need gun control and why people should not get access to guns. Yes I appreciate people who hunt to feed themselves have a good reason for a rifle. I just think we need to make sure only certain kinds of rifles are purchased....they are stringently controlled and people who own hunting rifles are of legal age and demonstrate they are hunters.

I would even say yes have a law that says people in NON rural areas or who live in cities over a certain size

can only have access to their rifles during hunting season and otherwise these rifles must be stored in government licensed and controlled hunting clubs and the conditions for using the rifle is limited to a specifically licensed hunt with specific conditions as to the days and hours it is used.

No one should ever be allowed to own a hand gun. You want to use one for target practice, then have government controlled gun clubs that own the guns and you are only allowed to use them at the club and the club owner is under strict conditions as to how he stores those hand guns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) armed security guards an campus
The cost having armed guards on every school in the country would be huge. Would you really want to stick the taxpayers with such a bill?
2) more people commonly bearing arms
This single tragedy has 2 people dead and 20 wounded. A society with more guns would likely have many gun related accidents - this would lead to an increase in gun related deaths even if many deaths are not called 'crimes'.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That said, I think this is again a reminder why we need gun control and why people should not get access to guns. Yes I appreciate people who hunt to feed themselves have a good reason for a rifle. I just think we need to make sure only certain kinds of rifles are purchased....they are stringently controlled and people who own hunting rifles are of legal age and demonstrate they are hunters.

I would even say yes have a law that says people in NON rural areas or who live in cities over a certain size

can only have access to their rifles during hunting season and otherwise these rifles must be stored in government licensed and controlled hunting clubs and the conditions for using the rifle is limited to a specifically licensed hunt with specific conditions as to the days and hours it is used.

No one should ever be allowed to own a hand gun. You want to use one for target practice, then have government controlled gun clubs that own the guns and you are only allowed to use them at the club and the club owner is under strict conditions as to how he stores those hand guns.

I liked everything you said, Rue. I only cut your post for the sake of brevity.

Like you, I strongly oppose the ownership of guns in a society. Unlike other means by which people may be killed, a gun is manufactured for the sole purpose of killing. In the 18th and 19th century, killing creatures for food and other resources was still a necessary function. Today it seems unlikely that plays any role except in the remoteness far from supermarkets.

However, agreeing with you about guns, does not deal with the essential question about why this young man behaved the way he did and what can be done to ameliorate those causes. Because the shooter might as easily been an arsonist responsible for many more deaths or a bomber or the driver of a car mowing down people as they sat on the grass having a last smoke before class, controlling and outlining guns may not solve the problem of people "going postal".

Of course, I have an idea.

I have spoken to many young people over the years who have expressed extreme anger and hatred toward their fellow students and have dealt with many who have acted out that emotion who might well have killed if a gun had been placed in their hand. Usually that anger passes quickly and two students in an angry fight at lunchtime might be the best of friends at the end of the school day.

In my opinion, for some, the insult to their person is continuous, as they are bullied and disrespected, disdained or mocked without let up. Most of them live with a deep depression that soon colours all their thinking and spins scenarios of revenge and dominance in circles around their brain to the exclusion of all else. Once out of control, the individual is sort of captive to the depression which must be acted out, usually as suicide sometimes as revengeful suicide as in Montreal yesterday.

So, the solution is to treat the depression. The best treatment is prevention. The schools have come a long way in the past ten years in improvement of instruction with respect to bullying and respect for others. Hopefully in the future, depression will be better understood, treated and tolerated by the depressed person as a result of the changes in schools.

That is the prologue.

Political change is also an important element. As we witness on these forums, many Canadians view others disrespectfully because of differences in skin colour, culture, ethnic origin, ideological commitments and so on. It is probable that for everyone who speaks openly in such a manner, there are hundreds and, perhaps, thousands, who behave in such a manner toward others.

For some the solution is total assimilation of all citizens into the dominant WASP culture that was Canada in the 19th century. But the fact of the Quebec Act and the fact of continuous immigration have rendered that impossible.

The only solution left is to enforce the requirements of the Charter of Rights far more vigorously and push the voice of the disrespectful behind the barrier of good law and good enforcement.

I listened to Dr. Elliott Leyton(http://www.mun.ca/marcomm/gazette/2001-2002/feb21/books5.html) being interviewed on CBC just a few minutes ago. He observed that Canada had only three of these mass murders, Lepine, and Fabrikant, and now Gill all in Montreal, all immigrants or children of immigrants. He called on the intellectuals of Quebec to set aside any bias and examine why the society of Montreal and Quebec produces these men. He opined that something was not working right in that society.

I think he is on to something. But is the rest of the country better off? There are deaths of children in Vancouver that can be traced to the same factors of immigrants or their children and isolation and ghettoization of immigrant populations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However there is a lot Montreal police did learn. After the horrible Lepigne massacres of women in previous shooting in Monteal, Montreal police studied and learned from it. Under the old procedures, police arriving at the scene of a mad man shooting and running loose, would hold back, form a secured zone, and wait for Swat.

Rue, you fail to mention that purely by chance, there was a police car with two cops parked in front of the college at the time this forcené entered the building. (The cops were there for a drug-related investigation. The entrance to the college is one of Montreal's several drug markets.) I know the building and from what I can gather, this guy didn't get very far and was followed by the police from the moment he started shooting.

The short video filmed by a student inside with a cell phone shows the police pointing a gun inside and near the entrance to the college.

I agree rue that this good fortune of the cops being there, combined with the policy of intervening immediately saved many lives.

I am very curious to hear the story of these two cops and what they did. Students describe a situation where the cops and the shooter argued with each other. It appears that the cops shot him in the leg but that's not clear to me. The police I know (MPs in fact) always said to me that they would go for a head shot in such a situation.

There's another point which intrigues me. The body shown lying beside a police car in front of the college was the shooter - it was eventually covered in yellow plastic. How did it get there? It seems that the police dragged the body out of the building and left it there. Although I have seen reports that the shooter tried to leave the building and fell there.

This strikes me as odd.

-----

Overall, I disagree that there is nothing to do in the face of such threats.

You've pointed out how a change in policy can save lives. Perhaps arming and training security guards in places with high traffic is a good idea.

The fact that this shooter was killed so quickly will deter other lunatics from doing the same.

The WTC offers another similar lesson. In 1993, they learned how to evacuate the building. In 2001, many lives were saved because people knew how to evacuate quickly.

There are lunatics, fanatics and crazy people in this world who do bad things. We should not throw up our hands and fatalistically accept this. Instead, we deal with it as best we can.

Finally, you mention living in Israel with these threats. I agree completely. In my experience, it is important not to succomb to fear. Life is for the living.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am very curious to hear the story of these two cops and what they did. Students describe a situation where the cops and the shooter argued with each other. It appears that the cops shot him in the leg but that's not clear to me. The police I know (MPs in fact) always said to me that they would go for a head shot in such a situation.

Good thing your MP buddies weren't there. Head shots are great on the PS2, but cops and soldiers are taught to shoot at the centre of visible mass.

There's another point which intrigues me. The body shown lying beside a police car in front of the college was the shooter - it was eventually covered in yellow plastic. How did it get there? It seems that the police dragged the body out of the building and left it there. Although I have seen reports that the shooter tried to leave the building and fell there.

It could be they took him ousidet while he was alive. Remember the Mayerthorpe RCMP shootings? All four were kille dinsight the Quonset hut, but the news showed their bodies outside where they were taken (perhaps to receive medical attention?)

The fact that this shooter was killed so quickly will deter other lunatics from doing the same.

I disagree. The guy wanted to die. So did the Columbine shooters and others of their ilk. I don't think someone like that can be deterred.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Head shots are great on the PS2, but cops and soldiers are taught to shoot at the centre of visible mass.
I'm no gamer, I'm just repeating what they told me.
It could be they took him ousidet while he was alive. Remember the Mayerthorpe RCMP shootings? All four were kille dinsight the Quonset hut, but the news showed their bodies outside where they were taken (perhaps to receive medical attention?)
The police are going to have to explain how the body got in front of the college and why it was lying there for hours covered in plastic. That's the photo that made front pages around the world.

[Russian police would do something like that. Place the body out for everyone to see.]

Incidentally, La Presse ran a photo taken by a businessman from the twelfth floor in a building across the street. It shows the shooter on the ground before the plastic was put across his body.

BTW, the cafeteria is just beside the entrance. The shooter seems to have gone no further than a few meters inside the building from the entrance - but I may be wrong.

The fact that this shooter was killed so quickly will deter other lunatics from doing the same.
I disagree. The guy wanted to die. So did the Columbine shooters and others of their ilk. I don't think someone like that can be deterred.
If this guy simply wanted to die, he would have shot himself. He intended to cause tragedy.

He may been a lunatic but he wasn't irrational.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will post this here. I found the link from the French forum I frequent:

14 décembre 2004

Kimveer the destroyer

J'espère que vous me pardonnerez ça, mais il ne faut pas oublier ses compagnons de galère :

GO KIMVEER, GO !

Merci.

J'ai passé trois semaines délirantes avec Kimveer, qui est un québecois dont LES PARENTS (note subtile aux personnes réticentes à intégrer les "immigrés de deuxième génération" *) sont d'originaires d'Inde. Nous avons joyeusement sauté un plomb collectif pour nous protéger de l'ambiance de travail opressante imposée par nos collègues temporaires dans cette merveilleuse compagnie qui fabrique des planchers de luxe. En quittant la compagnie, je n'ai même pas récupéré une des gigantesques planches destinées aux rebuts (qui sont magnifiques et qui vous couteraient un dixième de votre salaire l'unité) tant j'avais hâte de partir.

Especially for you Kim :

(hey, could you get me one of these gigantic boards we moved the other night before leaving ?)

* Un immigré de deuxième génération est une personne qui est née dans un pays mais dont les parents sont nés ailleurs. D'ou éducation et culture de l'enfant généralement différente (à des degrés divers) de celle des gens du pays dont la généologie remonte jusqu'à Noé. Nombre de ces enfants sont bilingues, certains (comme moi) sont unilingues de la langue du pays où ils sont nés. Mais certaines têtes réductrices veulent les qualifier d'immigrés (immigrés d'où, du ventre de nos mères ?) plutôt que de citoyen du pays, ce qui permet de faire un pas en direction de - pourquoi pas, dans le meilleur des cas - l'expulsion le jour ou le pays vote des lois qui permettent de renvoyer les immigrés du pays. Dans le cas de Kimveer, bien qu'il ait toujours vécu à Montréal et que toute sa culture soit québecoise (anglophone, détail ô combien important), cela permettrait de dire qu'il est hindoux de deuxième génération. Et de le traiter comme tel si un gouvernement raciste voyait le jour. Un choix de mots plus lourd de conséquences qu'il n'y parait, et qui souligne les faiblesses du processus d'intégration (allez, disons des deux bords, du pays et des immigrants).

Link

This is troubling in several ways. First, it reminds me of discussions on this forum about how immigrants integrate into western society. Second, I fear that we'll now find a plethora of websites with references to this lunatic.

Students reported that he swore in French using Quebecois slang. The text above seems to have been written by a European.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That must have been it. But - if he's just a regular run-of-the-mill white guy, then ... oh well.. he was just crazy and let's not think about it any more.

Or a run of the mill brown guy.

I eagerly await Michelle Malkin's treatise on the IndoIslamoVampire threat.

Or we talk about the coincidence that all three such attacks have been in Montreal - in a culture that's supposed to be so much more laid back, anti-gun, tolerant and non-violent than that of, say Ontario, and also, coincidentally, all three shooters were immigrant men (though this one seems second gen).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Students reported that he swore in French using Quebecois slang. The text above seems to have been written by a European.
The text is peculiar. "(anglophone, détail ô combien important)" is bizarre.

combien: is that a trans-anglicisation of "how" as in "how much" ? Maybe the writer should have said "detail peu important" or "detail fort important" instead, I am not sure.

1) armed security guards an campus
The cost having armed guards on every school in the country would be huge. Would you really want to stick the taxpayers with such a bill?
No, I would not force the tax-payer to foot that bill (or any bill , for that matter).

If it was a private school, I believe the school should have the right to have armed guards if they choose.

2) more people commonly bearing arms
This single tragedy has 2 people dead and 20 wounded. A society with more guns would likely have many gun related accidents - this would lead to an increase in gun related deaths even if many deaths are not called 'crimes'.
I just find it intriguing that that the only people I see carry hand-guns (other than police officers) are bank guards switching cash at ATMs.

We permit deadly force to protect the bank's precious money but it is too expensive to protect students on campus.

The fact that this shooter was killed so quickly will deter other lunatics from doing the same.
I disagree. The guy wanted to die. So did the Columbine shooters and others of their ilk. I don't think someone like that can be deterred.
If this guy simply wanted to die, he would have shot himself. He intended to cause tragedy.
I just heard on the news that the police shot him in the arm and then he turned his gun on himself. Who knows???

Moving his dead body is messing with a crime scene.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

O.k. guys here's my two cents. Remember this is not a political terrorist. This is not someone part of a terrorist cell deliberately doing this as an expression of political will. This is someone who for all intense and purposes is typical of the lone gunman who goes bezerk; a male, who felt marginalized and a failure,

and who after attempts to seek approval and admittance from his peers, gave up, and in one act of suicide, decides to affirm his identity to the world he feels rejected him.

He had twentieth century disease, most like. He was a violent soul who got his lessons on manhood from video games and gangsta rap, from the likes of Pulp fiction and Goodfellas, that kind of phoney, ultra-tough macho bullshit which has young black men knifing each other in night clubs because one guy brushes against another guy's arm and they both had to throw their chests out to assert their manhood. Young idiot men (most all young men are idiots) without any real outlet for male agression and either without fathers or without the kinds of fathers who can reign them in and teach them how to be men in a world where most male behaviour is sneered at and disparaged by an effeminate and ignorant elite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've resisted commenting on this because not too much is known except what the media has dug up in a rush. It took weeks to find out what happened in the last Montreal shooting.

I think it is terribly tragic and while people might say there is a need for new gun laws, more police, better security, etc, etc, I think that we'll not know the full picture for some time.

I'll be curious to see what the police conclude once their investigation is over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've resisted commenting on this because not too much is known except what the media has dug up in a rush. It took weeks to find out what happened in the last Montreal shooting.
The confusion in this case is due to too much information.

I think it appears now that two (?) policemen, by chance near the college's entrance investigating a drug affair, intervened immediately and confronted this lunatic. One of the police shot him in the arm, and then he shot himself. All of this happened in minutes, and within a few metres of the main entry door - in Dawson's ground-floor cafeteria.

If that's right, these police officers, as much as our soldiers in Afghanistan, deserve our gratitude. These police have a story to tell.

The work of the police in this case is remarkable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,695
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Linda Teskey
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Yakuda went up a rank
      Experienced
    • QuebecOverCanada went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • Jeary went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Gator earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Jeary earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...