Amen to what Donna said. Guns are so easy to get, and a lot of unstable kids out there. Why can’t the polls be shown as they used to be? This current method is awful.
Security measures are continually having to be beefed up — and what do we find? It is never enough. As one who is hearing about the grade school level from the "inside" each and every day, the greatest investment we can make is for school psychologists at the yungest levels. Those that are being turned out now - for the most part - are inadequate to deal with the problems, more often than not stemming from the home environments that breed the problems occurring in the classrooms.
I happen to know one grade school well. The worst weeks for problems in the classrooms are the weeks right before vacation time. Why? Because the children find it is the school that provides the "safe haven", and they act out because they are afraid to go home. While this is little talked about, it is more and more widespread. Abuse of small children in the home- who are afraid or do not understand enough to tell - is reflected in their actions in the class. For some reasons not completely understood, autistic children and others who act out in the classroom prevent the teachers from giviing the classroom as a whole the educational needs it should have.
Specialists - good psychologists - are able to pull those children, help the teachers deal at times - and hopefully nip some of the worst problems in the bud with the help of other professionals and parents. The results - when done correctly !!! - are remarkable. Gun control I agree with — but I also believe that guns are the tail end of getting control of problems - the core - early.
The basics that don’t seem to be addressed are that something is happening to our children - mostly at the home level - with abusive parents, parents leaving small children alone and unsupervised — and a variety of problems that stem from this. We can’t cure the problems with locking down our schools. We cure the problems by getting to the base of them and what is causing the children to become completely out of hand.
Investment placed in school psychologists — who will move up to futher levels if needed - have a good chance of turning individual children around. And isn’t that far better than having to make schools a prison of sorts because the initial problems aren’t addressed????
I think the focus on security is the wrong focus. Where were the parents when the two boys were assembling arsenals, how to teenagers get ahold of all the weapons they had, how are their detailed plans of a year missed, and their statements in many venues of how they hated life, were suicidal, wanted to kill etc, overlooked? The mother of Eric was at the beauty salon getting her hair done the following day. That is evidence enough that something was seriously wrong in the family dynamic. Both sets of parents were sued for wrong death actions and paid out claims of over $1.6M each.
I say the focus should be what elements of society contributed to this…because if kids have massive quantities of weapons, intent, and carefully laid plans at the school they attend no amount of security is going to stop this. Do we want our culture to turn into an armed camp, or do we want to resolve the problems in our violent society that contribute. Like the NRA and it’s control of ‘lawmakers.’
Dave Cullen’s book, "Columbine" has just come out and addresses much of what you comment on, Suzanne. Here’s an excerpt from the book review:
Had Dave Cullen capitulated to cliché while writing “Columbine,” he would have started his tale 48 hours before Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold’s notorious killing spree, stopped the frame just before they fired their guns, and then spooled back to the very beginning, with the promise of trying to explain how the two boys got to this twisted pass. But he doesn’t. As Cullen eventually writes, “there had been no trigger” — at least none that would be satisfying to horrified outsiders, grieving parents or anyone in between. Eric Harris was a psychopath, simple as that. Dylan Klebold was a suicidally depressed kid who yoked his fate to a sadist. Instead, what intrigues the author are perceptions and misperceptions: how difficult a shooting spree is to untangle; how readily mass tragedies lend themselves to misinformation and mythologizing; how psychopaths can excel at the big con.
Phyllis - Thank you for posting the excerpt from the Dave Cullen book Columbine. Just by reading that one paragraph I am intrigued and will order the book today. I will read the book when I am in a good state of mind and will not dampen the pages with tears. We all know the tragic outcome.
As for the schools and security … I just do not have an answer. How can a school Principal protect his students from a psychopathic student? Especially if the crazed student is able to hide his intent or his anger. I hate to even suggest it, but it is probably through the efforts of other students through their observations that will protect more students than all the alarms or security devices taken by the Principal to protect the student body.
Don’t read Dave Cullen’s book. It’s full of inaccuracies.
A review of the book from Randy Brown, whose son knew both the shooters:
The author has a responsibility.
I have just read the book by Dave Cullen on Columbine. I was angry at first, and then just disappointed.
I read it knowing that this was not a novel, not fictional, but a story about a real tragedy, with real people involved. I read it knowing that the story is so complicated that some errors are expected. I read it with the expectation of imperfection, but with the assumption that the author would research his story, and try to get as close to the truth as possible.
What I have found is just the opposite. The author relied on two main sources for his book, a police officer from Jefferson County and the lead FBI Agent for the investigation. Both are not reliable sources without some corresponding research into the other facts that exist, and they both certainly have a biased agenda.
The police officer and the FBI Investigator both have slanted agendas, biased by the Law Officers point of view, and both should have been kept out of any objective story about Columbine. At the very least they should have been interviewed, and their interviews weighted with the real facts as they were revealed years later. I am not saying they are dishonest, just that they have such specific agendas that the story shouldn’t rely on their input for its soul. Unfortunately it does.
The bullying, which is such a large part of Columbine, is dismissed by the FBI agent and the author, and that glaring omission changes the story of Columbine to a work of fiction. So many students from the school have told us about the bullying, and so many interviews by the police during the tragedy mention the bullying that it is inconceivable to me that this was left out of the book and dismissed in its entirety. There is actually a report made during the Governors investigation with Chief Justice Erickson that mentions and explains the bullying, from the constant fear to the persecution of a Jewish student by the school athletes. Perhaps the author should have read the Regina Huerter Report. To leave this major part of the tragedy out of the story is to rewrite history.
That is what this book is, a revisionist version of the Columbine Tragedy, which leads the reader to believe so many falsehoods that, upon completion of the book, I even questioned all of the things I know to be facts. I even questioned my knowledge of Columbine, and I lived it. In fact, I not only lived it, I researched it for years. This book, and the stories in it, will change the way people look at Columbine, and it will forever confuse researchers and lead them down false paths that are not the real truth.
Yes, I know that some truths can be perceptions, and can be discussed by experts for many years. I understand that some theories are going to vary about the two killers, and about the way Columbine is perceived.
As an example, the failure of the police to go into the school for hours is seen by many as cowardice. It is the glaring example of the failure of the police to protect children and citizens, and the failures at Columbine led to drastic and serious changes to first responder methods. That is basically a truth. But, the book makes light of this failure, and doesn’t clearly show the terror and the abandonment of the children left alive in the library that were rescued many hours later. The name Lisa Kreutz is barely a footnote, and she is the best example of the failure of the Sheriff’s department. Ignored are the wounded children who may have died while waiting for the police. Ignored is the complete absolvement of the SWAT team by the D.A. before the ballistics report was returned from the CBI, a most questionable and suspicious situation.
In addition to the failure to police mistakes, is the absurd way he gives the two killers emotional responses and feelings of regret, when no evidence exists to support this. It is akin to a WW2 reporter saying that the Nazis’ were sorry, and that they didn’t really mean it. Really?
As a Columbine parent, I find this book repulsive, for the main reason that it rewrites the Columbine tragedy.
The author doesn’t owe me anything, even though I was interviewed for the book. The author owes the public an attempt to tell the true story about Columbine, not an agenda influenced version based on the stories of two policemen and some incomplete research.
I am disgusted, discouraged, and disappointed… and sorry that this book fails the people of Columbine in so many ways.
I am mostly sad that some reader will read it in 3 years or 25 years, and think that this is the truth. They will be very wrong.
The people who lived through Columbine know parts of the truth. Everyone knows a different story, and every story is painful and sad. It is better not to tell the story of Columbine if the truth about bullying, the environment at the school, and the causes for the murders are diminished by pseudo-experts who use the tragedy to further their own career or to rewrite history to make the police look good.
Anyone who watched the police response at Columbine for hours, and saw staging but no activity, knows the truth about the police response. It is described in one word: Failure. In fact, the police failed us before, during and after Columbine. In their defense, the new first-responder policies are a direct result of brave policemen watching the failure at Columbine and correcting the problem with new policies designed for a quick, direct and effective response to a school shooter situation.
But, the biggest problem I have with the book is the easy summary that the author and his expert arrive at: There was no bullying, Eric was just crazy. That is so easy it is banal. That is so easy and so convenient.
If the one of the killers was crazy, then we can all relax. It is beyond our power to change it. It is an act of God, and craziness stands as the panacea for all of the worried parents.
“Crazy“ means that we do not need to acknowledge our part in this tragedy. We do not need to acknowledge our violent world, the environment of bullying and humiliation in the school, the alienation, the loneliness, the depression, the failures of the psychologists and counselors before Columbine and the pain. We do not have to change. We do not have to try to stop the next school shooting, because you can’t stop “crazy.”
Crazy is easy. Self analysis and acknowledging our failures is very difficult and very painful.
How will we ever learn from this, and stop the next school shooter, if crazy is the final analysis? That is the source of my disgust. This is a revisionist story about Columbine that does not acknowledge the many truths about the Columbine tragedy, which actually dismisses the real cause of the tragedy, in print for the parents, principals, psychologists, counselors and others to read. This Columbine story, told by an outsider without the complicated and multiple causative factors explained, leaves the reader with a misconception that will last forever.
It was a real tragedy. If the author can’t tell the truth, he should have written a fictional novel.
Randy Brown
A Columbine Parent"
Wow. I think you are completely wrong. Both families had an older son, who turned out just fine. Eric’s father had kept a detailed journal about his son, took him to anger management classes, and had him see a psychologist. Eric compained that the Zoloft he was prescribed was making him violent. What did the psychologist do? Gave him another brand name, Luvox. Eric’s mother did not go to the beauty salon the next day. Dylan’s mother had an appointment the day of the shooting, but cancelled it. I don’t know where you got that about Eric’s mother. The boys had four guns. Dylan Klebold grew up in a home that banned guns, even TOY guns. They both had to go to a juvenile diversion program for breaking into a van, but were released early with excellent reports. Before the shooting, Dylan had planned to go to the University of Arizona and study computers. His family had traveled to Arizona, where he picked out his dorm and his mother was about to make a payment to the school. Eric had applied to the marines. With plans for the future like that, what kind of parent would expect that they were planning a massacre that would end in their own death? Read time magazine’s article about the basement tapes, stop making up things…www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,992873,00.html
I don’t think it’s about guns, it’s about bullying. In my community, there is a police officer dedicated to the schools, whose main purpose is to deflect bullying, drug possession and violence. This apparently helps, because we have a reasonably safe and stable school environment… not perfect, of course.
Studies have been made of the various school massacres, and it often comes down to a perpetrator who feels abused by classmates. Finding the wherewithal to destroy becomes the obsession… weapons are not difficult to find or to make.
The primary cause has to be dealt with… there needs to be zero tolerance for bullying, even if the bully is the mayor’s son/daughter, head cheerleader or captain of the football team. These kids should be moved out of the system, or given long-term behavior modification sessions.
Marjorie…I think you are so right…it is about bullying!!! The Golden Rule is no longer preached anymore….how sad….I think teachers now are more aware of signs to watch for and I am hoping they are addressing problems immediately when they arise in their classrooms. It is a different world out there and we can’t keep up with all the changes taking place….to raise children now is not easy like it was in our days….no easy answers…
It’s about BOTH. Yes, the Golden Rule should be carried on, but there will still ALWAYS be people (i.e., bullies) who don’t grasp that concept…and when that happens, they do have far too easy access to guns. So why not do a little bit of something about both to ensure as MUCH safety as is possible?
It really depends on the area and the school and district policies. Columbine was essentially about a sociopath and a sadly depressed kid who was easily led.
99 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment
Security measures are continually having to be beefed up — and what do we find? It is never enough. As one who is hearing about the grade school level from the "inside" each and every day, the greatest investment we can make is for school psychologists at the yungest levels. Those that are being turned out now - for the most part - are inadequate to deal with the problems, more often than not stemming from the home environments that breed the problems occurring in the classrooms.
I happen to know one grade school well. The worst weeks for problems in the classrooms are the weeks right before vacation time. Why? Because the children find it is the school that provides the "safe haven", and they act out because they are afraid to go home. While this is little talked about, it is more and more widespread. Abuse of small children in the home- who are afraid or do not understand enough to tell - is reflected in their actions in the class. For some reasons not completely understood, autistic children and others who act out in the classroom prevent the teachers from giviing the classroom as a whole the educational needs it should have.
Specialists - good psychologists - are able to pull those children, help the teachers deal at times - and hopefully nip some of the worst problems in the bud with the help of other professionals and parents. The results - when done correctly !!! - are remarkable. Gun control I agree with — but I also believe that guns are the tail end of getting control of problems - the core - early.
The basics that don’t seem to be addressed are that something is happening to our children - mostly at the home level - with abusive parents, parents leaving small children alone and unsupervised — and a variety of problems that stem from this. We can’t cure the problems with locking down our schools. We cure the problems by getting to the base of them and what is causing the children to become completely out of hand.
Investment placed in school psychologists — who will move up to futher levels if needed - have a good chance of turning individual children around. And isn’t that far better than having to make schools a prison of sorts because the initial problems aren’t addressed????
I think the focus on security is the wrong focus. Where were the parents when the two boys were assembling arsenals, how to teenagers get ahold of all the weapons they had, how are their detailed plans of a year missed, and their statements in many venues of how they hated life, were suicidal, wanted to kill etc, overlooked? The mother of Eric was at the beauty salon getting her hair done the following day. That is evidence enough that something was seriously wrong in the family dynamic. Both sets of parents were sued for wrong death actions and paid out claims of over $1.6M each.
I say the focus should be what elements of society contributed to this…because if kids have massive quantities of weapons, intent, and carefully laid plans at the school they attend no amount of security is going to stop this. Do we want our culture to turn into an armed camp, or do we want to resolve the problems in our violent society that contribute. Like the NRA and it’s control of ‘lawmakers.’
Dave Cullen’s book, "Columbine" has just come out and addresses much of what you comment on, Suzanne. Here’s an excerpt from the book review:
Had Dave Cullen capitulated to cliché while writing “Columbine,” he would have started his tale 48 hours before Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold’s notorious killing spree, stopped the frame just before they fired their guns, and then spooled back to the very beginning, with the promise of trying to explain how the two boys got to this twisted pass. But he doesn’t. As Cullen eventually writes, “there had been no trigger” — at least none that would be satisfying to horrified outsiders, grieving parents or anyone in between. Eric Harris was a psychopath, simple as that. Dylan Klebold was a suicidally depressed kid who yoked his fate to a sadist. Instead, what intrigues the author are perceptions and misperceptions: how difficult a shooting spree is to untangle; how readily mass tragedies lend themselves to misinformation and mythologizing; how psychopaths can excel at the big con.
Phyllis - Thank you for posting the excerpt from the Dave Cullen book Columbine. Just by reading that one paragraph I am intrigued and will order the book today. I will read the book when I am in a good state of mind and will not dampen the pages with tears. We all know the tragic outcome.
As for the schools and security … I just do not have an answer. How can a school Principal protect his students from a psychopathic student? Especially if the crazed student is able to hide his intent or his anger. I hate to even suggest it, but it is probably through the efforts of other students through their observations that will protect more students than all the alarms or security devices taken by the Principal to protect the student body.
Don’t read Dave Cullen’s book. It’s full of inaccuracies.
A review of the book from Randy Brown, whose son knew both the shooters:
The author has a responsibility.
I have just read the book by Dave Cullen on Columbine. I was angry at first, and then just disappointed.
I read it knowing that this was not a novel, not fictional, but a story about a real tragedy, with real people involved. I read it knowing that the story is so complicated that some errors are expected. I read it with the expectation of imperfection, but with the assumption that the author would research his story, and try to get as close to the truth as possible.
What I have found is just the opposite. The author relied on two main sources for his book, a police officer from Jefferson County and the lead FBI Agent for the investigation. Both are not reliable sources without some corresponding research into the other facts that exist, and they both certainly have a biased agenda.
The police officer and the FBI Investigator both have slanted agendas, biased by the Law Officers point of view, and both should have been kept out of any objective story about Columbine. At the very least they should have been interviewed, and their interviews weighted with the real facts as they were revealed years later. I am not saying they are dishonest, just that they have such specific agendas that the story shouldn’t rely on their input for its soul. Unfortunately it does.
The bullying, which is such a large part of Columbine, is dismissed by the FBI agent and the author, and that glaring omission changes the story of Columbine to a work of fiction. So many students from the school have told us about the bullying, and so many interviews by the police during the tragedy mention the bullying that it is inconceivable to me that this was left out of the book and dismissed in its entirety. There is actually a report made during the Governors investigation with Chief Justice Erickson that mentions and explains the bullying, from the constant fear to the persecution of a Jewish student by the school athletes. Perhaps the author should have read the Regina Huerter Report. To leave this major part of the tragedy out of the story is to rewrite history.
That is what this book is, a revisionist version of the Columbine Tragedy, which leads the reader to believe so many falsehoods that, upon completion of the book, I even questioned all of the things I know to be facts. I even questioned my knowledge of Columbine, and I lived it. In fact, I not only lived it, I researched it for years. This book, and the stories in it, will change the way people look at Columbine, and it will forever confuse researchers and lead them down false paths that are not the real truth.
Yes, I know that some truths can be perceptions, and can be discussed by experts for many years. I understand that some theories are going to vary about the two killers, and about the way Columbine is perceived.
As an example, the failure of the police to go into the school for hours is seen by many as cowardice. It is the glaring example of the failure of the police to protect children and citizens, and the failures at Columbine led to drastic and serious changes to first responder methods. That is basically a truth. But, the book makes light of this failure, and doesn’t clearly show the terror and the abandonment of the children left alive in the library that were rescued many hours later. The name Lisa Kreutz is barely a footnote, and she is the best example of the failure of the Sheriff’s department. Ignored are the wounded children who may have died while waiting for the police. Ignored is the complete absolvement of the SWAT team by the D.A. before the ballistics report was returned from the CBI, a most questionable and suspicious situation.
In addition to the failure to police mistakes, is the absurd way he gives the two killers emotional responses and feelings of regret, when no evidence exists to support this. It is akin to a WW2 reporter saying that the Nazis’ were sorry, and that they didn’t really mean it. Really?
As a Columbine parent, I find this book repulsive, for the main reason that it rewrites the Columbine tragedy.
The author doesn’t owe me anything, even though I was interviewed for the book. The author owes the public an attempt to tell the true story about Columbine, not an agenda influenced version based on the stories of two policemen and some incomplete research.
I am disgusted, discouraged, and disappointed… and sorry that this book fails the people of Columbine in so many ways.
I am mostly sad that some reader will read it in 3 years or 25 years, and think that this is the truth. They will be very wrong.
The people who lived through Columbine know parts of the truth. Everyone knows a different story, and every story is painful and sad. It is better not to tell the story of Columbine if the truth about bullying, the environment at the school, and the causes for the murders are diminished by pseudo-experts who use the tragedy to further their own career or to rewrite history to make the police look good.
Anyone who watched the police response at Columbine for hours, and saw staging but no activity, knows the truth about the police response. It is described in one word: Failure. In fact, the police failed us before, during and after Columbine. In their defense, the new first-responder policies are a direct result of brave policemen watching the failure at Columbine and correcting the problem with new policies designed for a quick, direct and effective response to a school shooter situation.
But, the biggest problem I have with the book is the easy summary that the author and his expert arrive at: There was no bullying, Eric was just crazy. That is so easy it is banal. That is so easy and so convenient.
If the one of the killers was crazy, then we can all relax. It is beyond our power to change it. It is an act of God, and craziness stands as the panacea for all of the worried parents.
“Crazy“ means that we do not need to acknowledge our part in this tragedy. We do not need to acknowledge our violent world, the environment of bullying and humiliation in the school, the alienation, the loneliness, the depression, the failures of the psychologists and counselors before Columbine and the pain. We do not have to change. We do not have to try to stop the next school shooting, because you can’t stop “crazy.”
Crazy is easy. Self analysis and acknowledging our failures is very difficult and very painful.
How will we ever learn from this, and stop the next school shooter, if crazy is the final analysis? That is the source of my disgust. This is a revisionist story about Columbine that does not acknowledge the many truths about the Columbine tragedy, which actually dismisses the real cause of the tragedy, in print for the parents, principals, psychologists, counselors and others to read. This Columbine story, told by an outsider without the complicated and multiple causative factors explained, leaves the reader with a misconception that will last forever.
It was a real tragedy. If the author can’t tell the truth, he should have written a fictional novel.
Randy Brown
A Columbine Parent"
Wow. I think you are completely wrong. Both families had an older son, who turned out just fine. Eric’s father had kept a detailed journal about his son, took him to anger management classes, and had him see a psychologist. Eric compained that the Zoloft he was prescribed was making him violent. What did the psychologist do? Gave him another brand name, Luvox. Eric’s mother did not go to the beauty salon the next day. Dylan’s mother had an appointment the day of the shooting, but cancelled it. I don’t know where you got that about Eric’s mother. The boys had four guns. Dylan Klebold grew up in a home that banned guns, even TOY guns. They both had to go to a juvenile diversion program for breaking into a van, but were released early with excellent reports. Before the shooting, Dylan had planned to go to the University of Arizona and study computers. His family had traveled to Arizona, where he picked out his dorm and his mother was about to make a payment to the school. Eric had applied to the marines. With plans for the future like that, what kind of parent would expect that they were planning a massacre that would end in their own death? Read time magazine’s article about the basement tapes, stop making up things…www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,992873,00.html
I don’t think it’s about guns, it’s about bullying. In my community, there is a police officer dedicated to the schools, whose main purpose is to deflect bullying, drug possession and violence. This apparently helps, because we have a reasonably safe and stable school environment… not perfect, of course.
Studies have been made of the various school massacres, and it often comes down to a perpetrator who feels abused by classmates. Finding the wherewithal to destroy becomes the obsession… weapons are not difficult to find or to make.
The primary cause has to be dealt with… there needs to be zero tolerance for bullying, even if the bully is the mayor’s son/daughter, head cheerleader or captain of the football team. These kids should be moved out of the system, or given long-term behavior modification sessions.