Elementary School Shooting

[annewandering]

I'm sorry, I know this isn't a good place or time for soap boxes, but some of this is just wrong.

It's wrong to flat out demonize the shooter in this case. It's wrong to paint him as a vicious monster and ignore any context from the rest of his life.

Sane and healthy people with proper support networks and loving relationships don't do these things. Something beyond the normal life has to happen to cause someone to stray that far from the light of Christ. It may be anger, depression, insanity, or abuse... We don't know what this man's struggles were.

I think it's important that we remember that 27 people died to day. Not 26 people and a monster. 27 people. One of those people is in greater need of the Atonement than any of us, or any of the other 26. One of those people is going to feel more shame and sorrow than any of us, or any of the other 26. But I say with all the confidence I can muster that Christ will, without judgment, embrace 27 souls today. While I understand it will be difficult for the families of those affected to hold the same attitude (nor do I expect them to), more of humanity needs to learn to recognize the divine worth of all 27 of those souls.

Sane people dont do these things. Legally sane maybe but not sane. I dont have a lot of sympathy but he was not sane.

One of the things I read is that he may have been let into the building because he was known because of his mom which got me to thinking. What shooting spree anywhere in any school has been done by unknown shooters? As far as I know they were all known at the schools. They have all been troubled people. Most were bullied. We have a problem but its not something that can be dealt with after. It has to be done before. How many knew this man had problems? What kind of help was he getting? His age is similar to my son with the ptsd. Was he a soldier? Something was wrong and something could have been done most likely to have prevented all this. We need to work harder on prevention.

[Bini]

I'm confused. Is this thread a "mourning thread" or a "current events thread"? I figure the latter allows room for speculation and even debate. However, if it was intended as the first, I agree this is not the place to stand on one's soap box.

I'm so very late in hearing about this news. Heartbreaking doesn't even begin to describe this unfortunate event. My thoughts and my prayers tonight will be with those lost and those grieving.

[NeuroTypical]

Anne points out a very core difference between people. Some folks just can't imagine a sane person committing acts of evil. Others can. I'm in the latter camp. Of course there are sane people who choose to commit acts of great evil.

I was bullied. I won't be harming innocent people any time soon. My wife has ptsd - she won't either.

Yes, prevention is good. Early detection and action is important. Workplaces seem to be figuring this out. Something else that prevents stuff like this - allowing citizens to arm and defend themselves. Schools are gun-free zones. That means none of the good law-abiding people will be armed.

I'll be watching carefully to hear who ended this guy's spree. If he didn't do it himself, and the responding police didn't do it, then who did?

[NeuroTypical]

I've started a mourning thread. No debate or arguing over there, please.

http://www.lds.net/forums/current-events/50801-elementary-school-shooting-mourning-thread.html

[MarginOfError]

Moe, I agree with everything you said except for the following two points:

Nonsense. Sane, rational people commit violent crimes every day. The murders in Connecticut are an extreme example, but it is not without precedent.

Children from good homes and good families choose evil over good every day of the week.

More to the point, however, with this statement, you are both begging the question and contradicting yourself.

Withholding judgement means not condemning him without the facts. It also means not absolving him of responsibility without the facts.

You are correct when you say that we don't know what this man's struggles were.

To acknowledge that and yet turn around and speculate that he must have been the victim of mental illness, of anger, depression, and/or abuse is to speculate ahead of your facts.

So repeat the part your selective reading skipped over: "Something beyond the normal life has to happen to cause someone to stray that far from the light of Christ." The speculations of what could cause a person to lose said light of Christ were an unfinished list. Hence the '...' (although I can understand why their meaning may have been lost).

In any case, the bigger issue I was pointing at was a loss of the light of Christ, not the presence of any other specific factor.

I don't see where you are reading any absolution from me. He will pay a just sentence for his actions. But that sentence is not mine, nor your, nor anyone's to give but Christ's.

I suppose that depends upon what you mean by "embrace", doesn't it?

If this man was truly insane, then he bears no responsibility for his crime. There was no sin because there was no agency. He will be welcomed as yet another victim of this tragedy.

If, on the other hand, he was sane and cognizant of his actions, then he bears the taint of his actions.

For you to assume that he will be welcomed "without judgement" is to assume that he bears no responsibility for his crimes- an assertion not anywhere in evidence.

If you can't imagine a Savior capable of embracing one of those he gave his life for without judgment while still being prepared to mete out justice, then I feel sorry for you.

For you to assume that he is but another victim in this tragedy is to assume that he was not responsible- again, an assertion without any evidence behind it.

He was a victim. His victimization may be harder to categorize and classify, but that doesn't mean he wasn't a victim. Nor does that remove his responsibility for his actions.

I also find the "without judgement" qualifier to be counter-scriptural, at best

We are taught quite explicitly and clearly in Scripture that 1) we cannot be saved in our sins, and 2) that no unclean thing can enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

Finally, we are taught that Christ is our penultimate judge and advocate.

If by "embrace", you mean "welcome him, weep with him, and try to comfort him", then I can agree.

If by "embrace", you mean "welcome him without judgement and with forgiveness and sanction" then you are presuming... much.

So read again what I wrote. "Christ will, without judgment, embrace 27 souls today." Where in there does it say anything about sanction and forgiveness?

While we don't know his heart, his mind, or the state of his soul, Christ as our Lord, Savior, advocate, and judge does know.

And this man will be judged by Christ, accordingly.

Hmmm...you might almost be getting it now. Maybe the light will go on soon.

Perhaps it would be best that- as you insist that we not judge the man- that you practice some of that restraint yourself.

"While I understand it will be difficult for the families of those affected to hold the same attitude (nor do I expect them to), more of humanity needs to learn to recognize the divine worth of all 27 of those souls. "

I don't think you give me nearly enough credit.

[MarginOfError]

Anne points out a very core difference between people. Some folks just can't imagine a sane person committing acts of evil. Others can. I'm in the latter camp. Of course there are sane people who choose to commit acts of great evil.

While you see it this way, what I see follows the subsequent analogy

The wondrous things we see in life that we cannot explain, we call miracles.

The horrible things we see in life that we cannot explain, we call evil.

I was bullied. I won't be harming innocent people any time soon. My wife has ptsd - she won't either.

The vast majority of people who suffer these trials don't harm people. That's what makes identifying them and predicting their actions so difficult. They are so far into the tails of the distribution that we can't get enough data to understand them well enough.

But that's neither here nor there, because the typical argument is that most people that create these kinds of tragedies suffer from some kind of condition, but we understand that the converse is not true.

Yes, prevention is good. Early detection and action is important. Workplaces seem to be figuring this out. Something else that prevents stuff like this - allowing citizens to arm and defend themselves. Schools are gun-free zones. That means none of the good law-abiding people will be armed.

I'll be watching carefully to hear who ended this guy's spree. If he didn't do it himself, and the responding police didn't do it, then who did?

Allowing trained, responsible and engaged citizens to arm and defend themselves may prevent more tragedies like this, but I don't think your average citizen meets all those criteria. As long as there is a clear minimum standard for carrying a firearm, I'm all in favor. But I don't want it to be easier. In fact, I'd like the permitting process to entail a course on mechanics, marksmanship, and ethics as well (at least that's what I'm saying today).

[pam]

so sad, especially right during the holidays.

People always say "especially during the holidays" but there is never a good time and I think at that point the holidays become the least of anyones worries.

[MarginOfError]

People always say "especially during the holidays" but there is never a good time and I think at that point the holidays become the least of anyones worries.

I agree with this in principle, Pam, but it's going to be a lot harder to face those 18 empty stockings in 11 days than it would have been if this had happened six months ago.

[Backroads]

My mom was wondering what it would be like if principals were allowed to keep a weapon.

Yet would that ever backfire?

I am pro-gun, but there are no quick solutions. I am in favor of prevention and doing all we can in regards to prevention, but I don't think in this imperfect world there will be enough prevention possible to make the world go smoothly.

[Backroads]

I agree with this in principle, Pam, but it's going to be a lot harder to face those 18 empty stockings in 11 days than it would have been if this had happened six months ago.

We are a people that connects with meanings and symbols. No, there is never a good time for a tragedy, but somehow the season adds a little more to the heartbreak.

[Bini]

People always say "especially during the holidays" but there is never a good time and I think at that point the holidays become the least of anyones worries.

I agree. But just a side thought. I remember a few years back, there was a family that lost the mother and a child in a car accident on Thanksgiving. For the father and the remaining children, I bet a turkey dinner and yams was the last thing on their minds but I think the pain of losing loved ones ON Thanksgiving, will always make it a bittersweet holiday. Hopefully, through time, it will become sweeter and less bitter.

[pam]

I agree. But just a side thought. I remember a few years back, there was a family that lost the mother and a child in a car accident on Thanksgiving. For the father and the remaining children, I bet a turkey dinner and yams was the last thing on their minds but I think the pain of losing loved ones ON Thanksgiving, will always make it a bittersweet holiday. Hopefully, through time, it will become sweeter and less bitter.

Hopefully over time they can use Thanksgiving as a day to be thankful for the time they had with those loved ones and use it as a day of remembering.

[selek]

Sane people dont do these things. Legally sane maybe but not sane. I dont have a lot of sympathy but he was not sane.

I find it truly amazing what one can accomplish when one makes up one's vocabulary as one goes..

To quote from Through the Looking Glass (specifically, Alice's conversation with Humpty-Dumpty).

Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. "Of course you don't—till I tell you. I meant 'there's a nice knock-down argument for you!' "

"But 'glory' doesn't mean 'a nice knock-down argument'," Alice objected.

"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less."

"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."

"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master that's all."

By arbitrarily redefining "sane" to mean what you want it to mean, you are stacking the deck in favor of your presumptions, just as was Humpty Dumpty in the excerpt above.

They have all been troubled people. Most were bullied. We have a problem but its not something that can be dealt with after. It has to be done before. How many knew this man had problems? What kind of help was he getting? His age is similar to my son with the ptsd. Was he a soldier? Something was wrong and something could have been done most likely to have prevented all this. We need to work harder on prevention.

This is all speculation, at best.

As had been cited many times in this thread, we do not know why this man committed this horrific crime.

If it is premature to judge him, it is equally premature to exonerate him by claiming "mental illness".

Anne points out a very core difference between people. Some folks just can't imagine a sane person committing acts of evil. Others can. I'm in the latter camp. Of course there are sane people who choose to commit acts of great evil.

That someone cannot conceive of a world that is not flat, in no way obliges the rest of us to listen to lectures about why those of us who prefer to live on a globe are somehow close-minded and judgemental.

I was bullied. I won't be harming innocent people any time soon. My wife has ptsd - she won't either.

Likewise.

I do want to say two things:

First, I agree with Margin of Error that we should be mourning the senseless and needless deaths of twenty-eight people (apparently, the shooter killed his brother at his home in addition to those killed at the school).

That does not mean, however, that we should place reason or justice in abeyance while we mourn.

Second, it is human nature to seek for rational explanations for senseless tragedy. As humans, we crave a world that is orderly, reasonable, and sensible.

Tragedies such as this- the inexplicable, the injustifiable, and the insensible are hard to pigeon hole into nice, neat mathematical equations with nothing left over.

In my opinion, the impulse to declare the shooter "irrational" or "insane" (particularly when doing so well ahead of the evidence) says less about the perpetrator's state of mind than it does about our own- particularly that we need the shooter to be crazy so as to avoid confronting the reality that there are things we can neither comprehend nor control.

Does anybody remember the hoax about a state legislature arbitrarily redefining pi to 3 so as to bring it in line with Biblical precepts?

To my mind, declaring the shooter "crazy" is exactly the same phenomenon of pigeonholing someone (or something) to avoid having our assumptions and prejudices challenged.

Edited December 14, 2012 by selek

[Bini]

Hopefully over time they can use Thanksgiving as a day to be thankful for the time they had with those loved ones and use it as a day of remembering.

Bingo.

But that's easier said than done.

[Backroads]

Hopefully over time they can use Thanksgiving as a day to be thankful for the time they had with those loved ones and use it as a day of remembering.

Reminds me of a line from "Pushing Daisies". The situation was the use of a birdhouse to describe painful memories of the [un]dead niece. Yes, the bird house was a very sad birdhouse, but with the suggestion of good memories...

"It will be the happiest little birdhouse when you're ready."

I always thought it to be a very powerful thought.

[MorningStar]

My mom was wondering what it would be like if principals were allowed to keep a weapon.

Yet would that ever backfire?

I am pro-gun, but there are no quick solutions. I am in favor of prevention and doing all we can in regards to prevention, but I don't think in this imperfect world there will be enough prevention possible to make the world go smoothly.

I wonder what it would be like if they knew every teacher carried a gun.

[NeuroTypical]

Allowing trained, responsible and engaged citizens to arm and defend themselves may prevent more tragedies like this, but I don't think your average citizen meets all those criteria.

Could you explain why you think that? I mean, I know a lady who used to work at the conceal carry permit desk here in Colorado. We're a 'shall issue' state. She spent 8 hours a day serving average citizen after average citizen. Some fun stories - one time a group of nuns got their permits. Some scary looking extreme-hairstile-and-piercings people. Absolutely none of them ever went on to commit any violent felonies. And as a demographic group, they had lower rates of any sort of trouble with the law than non-permit holders.

On what data do you base your belief, that average citizens don't have what it takes to carry concealed?

[NeuroTypical]

I wonder what it would be like if they knew every teacher carried a gun.

No need to wonder. Go ask the Israelis. Violent crime is nearly nonexistant in their schools - despite no shortage of people willing to strap bombs onto themselves and find innocent groups of people and make some headlines.

[jerome1232]

On what data do you base your belief, that average citizens don't have what it takes to carry concealed?

Based on people leaving their loaded guns within reach of their own children, on people carrying it loaded and then wondering how it accidentally went off and shoot their child (actual story).

It's clear people could use more education. I believe that at least people who display this kind of negligence should have their licenses revoked.

[Just_A_Guy]

I homeschool, but my first thought when the news first broke was "Thank God I have my kids next to me." Even though I know we could still be the victims of a home invasion or whatever, I think there's a visceral "circle the wagons" reaction that comes with news like this. I imagine the schools are/will close because so many parents will be wanting to keep their children close until the feelings associated with the tragedy aren't so raw any more.

Very late reaction to this, I know, but . . . I completely agree. Our house backs against the field for the school where Just_A_Kid#1 is a first-grader (she just walks through our back gate onto the field each morning), and I still was tempted to call Just_A_Girl and have her bring Just_A_Kid#1 home today.

[annewandering]

I wonder what it would be like if they knew every teacher carried a gun.

If my kids were younger and went to a school with that policy we would be home schooling for sure.

[Wingnut]

Twelve facts about guns and mass shootings in the United States

[NeuroTypical]

On what data do you base your belief, that average citizens don't have what it takes to carry concealed?

Based on people leaving their loaded guns within reach of their own children, on people carrying it loaded and then wondering how it accidentally went off and shoot their child (actual story).

It's clear people could use more education. I believe that at least people who display this kind of negligence should have their licenses revoked.

This is a timely opinion. New data was recently released from the US Consumer Product Safety commission.

The report shows 41 people were killed in 2011, an increase from 31 in 2010, and 27 in 2009.

The data shows that the majority of those killed were under the age of nine.

2010 US Unintentional Firearms Deaths for ages 0-9: 28

So tell me jerome - since more children die each year from having a TV fall on them, than from accidental gun discharge - do your beliefs about education and revoking licenses also apply to families who own televisions? Do you believe the average citizen doesn't have what it takes to safely own one?

Is seems a little silly, doesn't it...

Edited December 15, 2012 by Loudmouth_Mormon

[jerome1232]

This is a timely opinion. New data was recently released from the US Consumer Product Safety commission.

2010 US Unintentional Firearms Deaths for ages 0-9: 28

So tell me jerome - since more children die each year from having a TV fall on them, than from accidental gun discharge - do your beliefs about education and revoking licenses also apply to families who own televisions? Do you believe the average citizen doesn't have what it takes to safely own one?

Is seems a little silly, doesn't it...

I actually agree with you, and was merely showing a counterpoint that there are indeed boneheads who own weapons. I wasn't aware of the statistics, and am glad they are so low. I meant to highlight I'm argueing against my own viewpoint put didn't have time to find the post you quoted in context.

I do however stick by revoking a license (just an example) from someone who leaves their loaded sig in a sock drawer.

[NeuroTypical]

Has anyone heard what stopped the shooter? I can't find mention of it anywhere. This is the worst event of it's kind in our lifetimes, but usually when there's a mass shooting, you can at least find news sources speculating and guessing about what stopped the shooter. Did the police stop him? Did he end his own life? Why aren't we hearing something?