School shooting in Jokela

[LivePsy]

Here's a little different take on shootings: Be nice to everyone or they might get angry enough to shoot you. I'm serious. If you f*ck someone off so much that they are angry enough to kill, then you deserve to die.

You're all missing the message. Isolated nutters don't cause shootings, people cause shootings. You, me, everyone. We all deserve it.

Cheers,
B

[AlexHall74]

LivePsy wrote:
"Be nice to everyone or they might get angry enough to shoot you. I'm serious. If you f*ck someone off so much that they are angry enough to kill, then you deserve to die."

I think I get your drift, but I can't completely agree with the statement above. What if the person you are dealing with is significantly irrational and disturbed? Then you, me, or anyone else might do something considered normal, or maybe just a little bit harsh, but the other party considers the act enough ot kill. So should we all act in such a way that we are not prone to upset everyone in the whole world? I guess the thing to do is be observant of those you associate with, and not naive, and to be careful if you get a bad vibe for any reason. Just my .02.

[LivePsy]

I think that society creates its killers. If we were supportive and connected, this wouldn't happen. Utopian dream maybe, but my view.

A common theme in similar situations is that others notice suspicious behaviour but do nothing. Sort of like "well yes, he was very quiet and kept to himself and had a lot of guns in his bedroom". I think society fails when someone goes on a rampage. Ignoring this aspect and marginalising the killer doesn't stop it happenning again - to makes it even more likely.

Cheers,
B

[Old Vantaa Man]

It's a good point psy, and as Marilyn Manson said in reply to the question:

What would you have said to Harris and Klebold?

He said:

I wouldn't have said anything. I would have listened.

But the fact remains that there are millions of disaffected teenagers - surprise, surprise - around and unfortunately the internet has given these people the perfect environment to grow totally obsessive. When I was that age we got electric guitars and played rock and roll and that's how we dealt with not having a girlfriend or any money.

I'm sure there were times when my parents despaired, wondering what to do about this dysfunctional arsehole who wanted to do nothing else but play guitar and ride a skateboard. They didn't have a fucking clue.

Now I'm a parent myself of two kids not far away from their teens, I just hope that they'll always know I'll support them through whatever they want to do and I'll fucking do my best to ensure that they actually do what they want to do.

I blame this lad's parents for their singular lack of interest and allowing him to get a gun.

[LivePsy]

Originally Posted by Old Vantaa Man

Now I'm a parent myself of two kids not far away from their teens, I just hope that they'll always know I'll support them through whatever they want to do and I'll fucking do my best to ensure that they actually do what they want to do.

I blame this lad's parents for their singular lack of interest and allowing him to get a gun.

Hi OVM. Because you admit to being a parent, I'm surprised you consider that parents can be at fault. Good for you

But really, no 1 or 2 people are responsible. Peers, technology companies and marketeers now have more influence on teenagers than their parents. There's lifestyles that are cool to buy into, although as a 50 year old I would call it gullible and conformist (even though this is paraded as individuality). Teenagers are so easy to target in marketing because they demand to be identified and branded. The hippies were supposed to be about freedom and a better world, but their children are creating a self imposed authoritarian state. This authoritarian state is abhorrent to me and many young people quite rightly seek to rebel against it.

I was always an individual and got loads of crap over it, so I never felt connected to peers. Grew up with a self identity and I feel it made me a better person than I might have been. I think that the odd madman with a gun is me, but expressing rage against the system in the wrong way.

Thanks for listening,
B

[Old Vantaa Man]

I'd hardly blame the children of hippies for today's marketing strategies.

When TV came along in the 50's we had the first instance of mass teen hysteria with Elvis. Frank Sinatra was also a teen star, but was never as shocking as those evil rock and rollers, nor could he be sold on such a scale. It didn't take long for marketeers to realise that tapping into teen angst using this all pervading new technology was a great opportunity. Ripping off kids with the promise of a lifestyle is nothing new.

The 60's had to be the biggest buy in ever. How many kids got sucked into all that? Sure there was Vietnam and a draft which did focus a rebellious cause, but the marketing machine was unstoppable by now. Whilst thousands rolled in the mud of Woodstock, the superstar bands were flown in by helicopter.

Despite the Great Rock and Roll Swindle, most kids of the 60's survived and did not become mass murderers. The notable exception was Charlie Manson. His childhood sucked big time:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Manson

[LivePsy]

Originally Posted by Old Vantaa Man

Ripping off kids with the promise of a lifestyle is nothing new.

True, Rock and Roll was a scam before the "young people" figured it out. But today school leavers have credit card debt because of the mobile phone plan. This is far worse consumerism-gone-mad than in my day. Also, the new young people think they are too clever to be sucked in with marketing, but my post was trying to say that it is the young people themselves who impose a uniformity. Must-have gadgets and clothing so you can be included in the cool group. This is not the same as my youth, or maybe that is just my skewed experience. Perhaps I was supposed to conform but was too stupid to think it was important

You would not blame the children of hippies for today's marketing strategies, but I do

Cheers,
B