Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

An Open Letter to the Next School Shooter

unprepared.life

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 38 posts

Re: An Open Letter to the Next School Shooter

#21

Post by drekipus »

hellofelicia wrote: post #13

This reads well-meaning, but ultimately misdirected. There is no solid data corroborating the "school shooters are bullied" narrative - in fact, many of them have a long history of being bullies themselves, which then gets twisted from "kids try to avoid the weird kid who does disturbing things" into "poor little baby had no friends". Disabled, queer, poor teens are not shooting up schools. The profile of a school sh…

> Disabled, queer, poor teens are not shooting up schools.

Because 1. there's support networks for them, and 2. they don't have the resources themselves.

The "white upperclass male" has the resources to do harm, and don't get supported.

I keep thinking of Elliot Rodgers, who had a thought that girls owed it to him to date him. I don't think any of that was because he was white, male, or upper class. It was because he was lonely. And without proper socialisation and support he got further and further into the deep end. Males are violent but it can be channelled into positivity.

It drives home why such divisive language doesn't help the situation.

Obviously the whole "everything supports them every other day" isn't true, because of they were supported, they wouldn't be going through this mess. Or you can believe that it is due to inherent "whiteness", or "maleness", if you would like to continue to divide these kids further.

Re: An Open Letter to the Next School Shooter

#22

Post by hellofelicia »

drekipus wrote: post #21
hellofelicia wrote: post #13

This reads well-meaning, but ultimately misdirected. There is no solid data corroborating the "school shooters are bullied" narrative - in fact, many of them have a long history of being bullies themselves, which then gets twisted from "kids try to avoid the weird kid who does disturbing things" into "poor little baby had no friends". Disabled, queer, poor teens are not shooting up schools. The profile of a school sh…

> Disabled, queer, poor teens are not shooting up schools. Because 1. there's support networks for them, and 2. they don't have the resources themselves. The "white upperclass male" has the resources to do harm, and don't get supported . I keep thinking of Elliot Rodgers, who had a thought that girls owed it to him to date him. I don't think any of that was because he was white, male, or upper class. It was because h…

Many people are lonely, but only some of them shoot up little kids. Hell, I'd say most kids are bullied in some way or another at some point during their journey through school! It is important to reach out to all teens and address bullying for a multitude of reason, but the narrative of a misfit loner is just that, a narrative that most often falls apart during the investigation into the shooter's background.

Elliot Rogers did not kill young women because he was lonely. He did it because he felt entitled to do that and lacked awareness into his own contribution to his loneliness.

> Or you can believe that it is due to inherent "whiteness", or "maleness", if you would like to continue to divide these kids further.

If whiteness and maleness doesn't contribute to this issue, how come this crime has such a distinctive perp profile? As far as I know, young women in the US are not banned from going to a gun shop and getting an AR-15 as soon as they turn 18, and have equal capacity to contract mental illness. The difference is they don't feel like they are owed something that the world hasn't given to them. This is behavioral issue, not a mental health issue.

Re: An Open Letter to the Next School Shooter

#23

Post by factcheckdec »

hellofelicia wrote: post #22
drekipus wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Disabled, queer, poor teens are not shooting up schools. Because 1. there's support networks for them, and 2. they don't have the resources themselves. The "white upperclass male" has the resources to do harm, and don't get supported . I keep thinking of Elliot Rodgers, who had a thought that girls owed it to him to date him. I don't think any of that was because he was white, male, or upper class. It was because h…

Many people are lonely, but only some of them shoot up little kids. Hell, I'd say most kids are bullied in some way or another at some point during their journey through school! It is important to reach out to all teens and address bullying for a multitude of reason, but the narrative of a misfit loner is just that, a narrative that most often falls apart during the investigation into the shooter's background. Elliot…

You have a poisonous, race and gender obsessed world view.

Re: An Open Letter to the Next School Shooter

#24

Post by igetspam »

hellofelicia wrote: post #22
drekipus wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Disabled, queer, poor teens are not shooting up schools. Because 1. there's support networks for them, and 2. they don't have the resources themselves. The "white upperclass male" has the resources to do harm, and don't get supported . I keep thinking of Elliot Rodgers, who had a thought that girls owed it to him to date him. I don't think any of that was because he was white, male, or upper class. It was because h…

Many people are lonely, but only some of them shoot up little kids. Hell, I'd say most kids are bullied in some way or another at some point during their journey through school! It is important to reach out to all teens and address bullying for a multitude of reason, but the narrative of a misfit loner is just that, a narrative that most often falls apart during the investigation into the shooter's background. Elliot…

Another common thread for many of these shooters is violence or threats of violence toward women. It is sometimes discussed but doesn't get a lot of emphasis. In a society building on misogynistic ideals, it's easy to speculate on why that may be.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/10/us/mass-shootings-misogyn...

https://www.bostonherald.com/2022/05/30/wendy-murphy-texas-s...

Here's where Red Flag laws could do a lot.

Re: An Open Letter to the Next School Shooter

#25

Post by igetspam »

SCUSKU wrote: post #12

Thanks to the author for writing this. As a young man who has come out the other side, I appreciate the courage of the author to put this message out there and expose themselves like this on the open internet. I hope we as a society can continue to be more open about ways to communicate frustration, depression, and sadness. This way it won't be pent up released in an explosive event like a shooting.

Come out the other side of what? Youth or did you find yourself in the world of 4chan and red pill?

I'm not trying to troll. I'm genuinely interested in learning more, if you were having thoughts of violence that could have ended tragically.

Re: An Open Letter to the Next School Shooter

#26

Post by ekianjo »

hellofelicia wrote: post #13

This reads well-meaning, but ultimately misdirected. There is no solid data corroborating the "school shooters are bullied" narrative - in fact, many of them have a long history of being bullies themselves, which then gets twisted from "kids try to avoid the weird kid who does disturbing things" into "poor little baby had no friends". Disabled, queer, poor teens are not shooting up schools. The profile of a school sh…

> there is not solid data

you sure about your claim?

> According to Lee (2013), there are two leading causes of school shootings: bullying (87%), as well as both non-compliance and side effects from psychiatric drugs (12%). Most school shooters claimed or left evidence behind indicating that they were victims of severe and long-term bullying. The majority of bullying victims experienced feelings of humiliation, which resulted in thoughts of suicide or revenge (Lee, 2013).

https://www.counseling.org/docs/default-source/vistas/school...

Re: An Open Letter to the Next School Shooter

#27

Post by mushbino »

Markoff wrote: post #16
mushbino wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, nobody remembers the US killing 20% of the Korean population. People remember what's geopolitically advantageous and reemphasized regularly. Most people don't remember all the people killed in the Murrah building. It's usefulness in the public consciousness is long gone. The MOVE bombings, the battle of Blair mountain, or Tulsa until very recently.

You don't need most people to remember you to be remembered and recognition changes over time, someone seen as villain can change in few months/years into hero. It comes down what are your goals, after all people will never agree on everything and will have always different opinions. The most recent example is certain Eastern European politician best known for corruption, purging opposition, making headlines together…

In the cases you've mentioned, people by and large don't form their opinions based on studying historical facts in an objective way but based on what they're told, almost exclusively by their government in these cases. Certain atrocities are highlighted and emphasized repeatedly, others are overlooked or hidden, but rarely because of how bad or bloody they were. World history is basically the history of war and few people consider them all to be bad.

The only school shooters I can remember the names of are the Columbine shooters and I'd say that's mostly due to the fact they were the first in the modern school shooter era (depressing reality). Perhaps that fame helped fuel other shootings, but I can't name a single other one out of the many since then.

I'm sure the fact that we're so used to acts of violence in the US on a regular basis is a contributing factor. At this point you'd have to do something pretty horrendously bad to go down in infamy. On the other hand, if it were an act (without innocent casualties) committed against say a financial, insurance institution or some other disliked entity, they could become a folk hero.

Re: An Open Letter to the Next School Shooter

#28

Post by SCUSKU »

igetspam wrote: post #25
SCUSKU wrote: post #12

Thanks to the author for writing this. As a young man who has come out the other side, I appreciate the courage of the author to put this message out there and expose themselves like this on the open internet. I hope we as a society can continue to be more open about ways to communicate frustration, depression, and sadness. This way it won't be pent up released in an explosive event like a shooting.

Come out the other side of what? Youth or did you find yourself in the world of 4chan and red pill? I'm not trying to troll. I'm genuinely interested in learning more, if you were having thoughts of violence that could have ended tragically.

I have experienced episodes of depression throughout my teenage years and now my mid-20's, but never allowed myself to believe that I was having depression because I thought I wasn't "one of them" I thought I was stronger, somehow better than everyone else. YouTube started recommending red pill videos such as edits of American Psycho, Fight Club, The Joker, basically movies of men expressing their feelings via violence.

I recently sought out a psychiatrist as well as a therapist, and have been taking medication. My psychic pain has been alleviated thanks to the medication, which has given me breathing room to work on a lot of toxic mentalities that I carried. Like that the most important thing about my life was my job or how much money I made, caring about status and prestige above all things, thinking of myself as a machine solely to milk for money, among other things like toxic masculinity.

While I never had easy access to weapons, nor do I think I would have ever committed a mass shooting, I can easily see how someone with a weaker support system than I had would be driven to retaliate against society because violence is oftentimes seen as a valid means of emotional expression for young men.

Anyways, thanks for asking :)

Re: An Open Letter to the Next School Shooter

#29

Post by hellofelicia »

ekianjo wrote: post #26
hellofelicia wrote: post #13

This reads well-meaning, but ultimately misdirected. There is no solid data corroborating the "school shooters are bullied" narrative - in fact, many of them have a long history of being bullies themselves, which then gets twisted from "kids try to avoid the weird kid who does disturbing things" into "poor little baby had no friends". Disabled, queer, poor teens are not shooting up schools. The profile of a school sh…

> there is not solid data you sure about your claim? > According to Lee (2013), there are two leading causes of school shootings: bullying (87%), as well as both non-compliance and side effects from psychiatric drugs (12%). Most school shooters claimed or left evidence behind indicating that they were victims of severe and long-term bullying. The majority of bullying victims experienced feelings of humiliation, which…

Yes, I'm actually pretty sure. Peter Langman, a very well known expert on the matter, sees no clear connection between bullying and shooting, also points out that many shooters were bullies themselves and don't target their supposed offenders: https://schoolshooters.info/sites/default/files/bullying_sch...

It's interesting that you quote that shooters "claimed" and "experienced feelings" of being ostracized, because many of them do indeed feel that way, like Elliot Rodgers thinking of himself as a perfect gentleman passed over by women for some incomprehensible reason despite clearly not being one. The catch is that those feelings are not always rooted in reality: many of them were well-liked and popular. What they also often turn out to be, though, is "injustice collectors" who tend to hold grudges and refuse to take responsibility for their own shortcomings (including, I assume, their own contribution to being excluded by others), according to this FBI report: https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/stats-services-publicati...

Re: An Open Letter to the Next School Shooter

#30

Post by ComradePhil »

sofixa wrote: post #19
ComradePhil wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hitler is recognized and admired by many. If the change in world order happens when his significance is still fresh, he will surface back as a universally admired figure because it is not very difficult to piece together what the Nazi regime actually did vs what the Soviet occupiers accused them of (and what the US went along with).

> because it is not very difficult to piece together what the Nazi regime actually did vs what the Soviet occupiers accused them of (and what the US went along with). Could you entertain us with more detail on what you mean here? Germany's atrocities are well documented across Europe ( and North Africa). The Soviets had nothing to do with Drancy or Bergen-Belsen for instance. We know of the Auschwitz horrors through…

[flagged]
Post reply on HN