I'm taking bets

hippiemom

surferdude wrote:

If Che and others believe in the equality of sexes then he must believe that women are just as capable of this tyoe behavior. This is evidenced by the majority of child abuse being committed by the mother.

Then to choose an incident involving an asian and hold white males accountable just makes no sense.

They may be capable of it, but for whatever reason they're choosing not to do it. You just don't hear about females gunning people down by the dozens. It's exceedingly rare for a female to kill a single stranger, much less a huge group of them.

I agree it didn't make much sense to single out white males after an incident in which an Asian male was the shooter.

gue_barium

Confucius says: Che need to find guitar with more than one string.

soulsinging

Ms. Haiku wrote:

Yes, but this isn't permanent.

Actually, I think I'm more connected with people I wouldn't have been since the internet. The community is redefined, and can include people one hasn't met in person.

Ok, here's an example, kindof quirky, but bear with me. Say, PJ would like to start this type of mindset for just 1 minute. During a concert Eddie would say, "Ok, every person in an odd-numbered seat turn to your left, and every person in an even numbered seat turn to your right. Say "HI" you can say your name if you want, but at least say HI. Next everyone in an odd numbered seat turn to your right, and everyone in an even numbered seat turn to your left. Say "HI", you can say your name if you want, but at least say HI. Ok, on with the concert . . . It may seem forced, big-brothering, etc, but ultimately, it's just a hello.

Not too hard, eh?

no, it's not. and i like the idea, but i dont think it will happen. and yes, we're more connected to people here we never woulda met, but we also get very connected to people we will never meet. we're all sitting here on our computers, who's knocking on their neighbors door to say hi? would we do it even if we weren't here? how would we respond if they knocked on our doors?

the meeting in person is important. no amount of typing and reading can recreate the connection of shaking someone's hand or looking them in the eye. it's humanizing. furthermore, in terms of spotting tragedies like this, we can control how we are perceived on here. we can write people off as just acting out, just like they do out there. we cannot see their faces to gauge all those visual cues that tell us when someone is being sarcastic or angry or troubled. even if we do, what could we do to stop someone from losing it? who do you contact? would the police even respond to an email saying "this guy i know on a message board lives in your town and said he might hurt someone." who? how do you stop it? it's not the same thing. and even then, some people find communities that reinforce how disturbed they are... child porn rings, white supremacist message boards, etc. the internet community cannot replace our communities in the real world. we cannot ignore flesh and blood for digital screens... it's dehumanizing. yes, great relationships can be formed online, but that is not enough to replace what we've lost with respect to knowing our neighbors or simply saying hello to people on the street.

mdigenakis

mutual respect, responsibility, accountability for ones actions, and a sort of universal values are just a few things that we need to focus on in the classroom. Not the statistically driven nightmare we have now where student learning depends on test results. I'm in grad school right now and this form of democratic learning is like nothing i've experienced before, it blows my mind. From 1-12 we track students through constant testing. The students see this and give up rather early, and some of them reach higher levels and then it all comes crashing down. At the high school level we should focus on the aformentioned respect, responsibility, etc, as well as critical thinking, because once these students are out of High school they are adults. Pressures outside the school are what demand these results or the schools suffer financial penalties. their needs to be a fundamental change in the school system. i got through high school and college with little learning, just plain memorization. I knew that the tests were the only factor that mattered to these places of "higher learning".
i can't make any assumptions how the school system might of let down this kid in va tech at an earlier age. To make it to the va tech engineering school which i think he was a part of is impressive. This guy was obviously disturbed mentally throughout his college years and maybe from an earlier age. Instead of focusing on his grades and getting him to the next level, maybe his teachers could helped him earlier in his academic career if there was more of an emphasis on student development outside of academics at the high school level.

soulsinging

mdigenakis wrote:

mutual respect, responsibility, accountability for ones actions, and a sort of universal values are just a few things that we need to focus on in the classroom. Not the statistically driven nightmare we have now where student learning depends on test results. I'm in grad school right now and this form of democratic learning is like nothing i've experienced before, it blows my mind. From 1-12 we track students through constant testing. The students see this and give up rather early, and some of them reach higher levels and then it all comes crashing down. At the high school level we should focus on the aformentioned respect, responsibility, etc, as well as critical thinking, because once these students are out of High school they are adults. Pressures outside the school are what demand these results or the schools suffer financial penalties. their needs to be a fundamental change in the school system. i got through high school and college with little learning, just plain memorization. I knew that the tests were the only factor that mattered to these places of "higher learning".
i can't make any assumptions how the school system might of let down this kid in va tech at an earlier age. To make it to the va tech engineering school which i think he was a part of is impressive. This guy was obviously disturbed mentally throughout his college years and maybe from an earlier age. Instead of focusing on his grades and getting him to the next level, maybe his teachers could helped him earlier in his academic career if there was more of an emphasis on student development outside of academics at the high school level.

i dont know about that. he was an english major. and if you read his plays, i have no idea how.

gue_barium

soulsinging wrote:

i dont know about that. he was an english major. and if you read his plays, i have no idea how.

Those are just two writings. I've just read them and they are not entirely without at least some technical merit.

mdigenakis

soulsinging wrote:

i dont know about that. he was an english major. and if you read his plays, i have no idea how.

ok, my mistake, i just found out about the plays and all.

hippiemom

soulsinging wrote:

i dont know about that. he was an english major. and if you read his plays, i have no idea how.

Are you serious? :eek:

This REALLY speaks poorly for the English program at V-Tech. Seriously, that was some of the worst writing I've ever seen.

gue_barium

hippiemom wrote:

Are you serious? :eek:

This REALLY speaks poorly for the English program at V-Tech. Seriously, that was some of the worst writing I've ever seen.

i think that's what ss was saying.

hippiemom

gue_barium wrote:

i think that's what ss was saying.

I know he was, I just had to express my shock that the guy was an English major. When I read those, I assumed he was in an engineering program or something. It's beyond comprehension how he got into a college-level English program.

gue_barium

hippiemom wrote:

I know he was, I just had to express my shock that the guy was an English major. When I read those, I assumed he was in an engineering program or something. It's beyond comprehension how he got into a college-level English program.

I don't think you should judge on just two writings. I'm guessing these are the ones he turned in that alerted his professor to recommend him to counseling.

hippiemom

gue_barium wrote:

I don't think you should judge on just two writings. I'm guessing these are the ones he turned in that alerted his professor to recommend him to counseling.

I'm not even talking about the content. If they'd been about flowers and puppy dogs, the writing would still have been horrible.

meme

Cheguevara6 wrote:

Nothing is ever done. We pump the kids full of more Ritalin, and think that will solve their anger. We see kids acting out and say, lets give them more medication or drugs. We ignore the warning signs.

We ignore the flat our RAGE of young white males, who take out their anger on fellow classmates and especially young girl classmates.

We ignore our childrens pleas, and comments, we berate them, abuse them, taunt them, kill them, and brutalize them, we jail them and beat them, then give them tablets and think it will solve something

You really think ANY of the school shooters can take tablets and magically all their rage, their anger, their feelings will disappear and they will smile and say everything is alright.

The Virginia shootings will happen again, unfortunatly. More kids will die needlessly because no one chooses to listen to our kids.

I don't know...

I am now the mother of a 7 year old child who seems to be having anger issues. I am really trying to do my best. Sometimes I find myself drifting back to the way I was brought up, the moms in "Why Go", or "Daughter".

It is so damn difficult to be a parent. It surely does take a village.

deadnote

this stuff isnt something you can keep from happening
the only solution is cameras inside homes and lots of new jobs having people watch people live and reading what they think in privacy

theres always gonna be vulnerable people in quarters suceptable to some phsycotic mind planning out someone wrong

so lets get cameras everywhere , youll get used to being watched its no big deal

gue_barium

hippiemom wrote:

I'm not even talking about the content. If they'd been about flowers and puppy dogs, the writing would still have been horrible.

Give it a rest. If you want to target the English department of VT, write them a letter for Christ's sake.

Vedderlution_Baby

For those blaming video games....


Blame the parents who allow those video games to get into the hands of the immature gamer. On each and every video game that is sold and advertised, there is a rating that an easily been seen on the front cover listing the intended audience the game was created for, and why it's rated as it is. You can also blame the stores who have a very lax policy when it comes to selling the video games. Each and every retailer that sales video games is supposed to ID the customer who is purchasing a game that is rated Mature 17+ (most games that contain shooting and violence are rated Mature 17+). Unfortunately, this does not happen and a 13 year old can obtain a copy of the latest shoot em up. But this leads back to the parent. Sure, the adolescent can obtain a copy of the game, but the parents are the ones responsible for deciding whats allowed and whats crossing the line when it comes to their house. By ignoring the activities that the adolescent is partaking in, the parents leave that adolescent open for media that they are not possibly mature enough for. People looks at video games as kiddy devices, intended for young kids and nerds. People don't understand that video games, like movies, have levels of intensity and matureness that coincide with the matureness of the person watching them. In fact, video games are even more intense because you interact with them and make choice that affect your player and characters in the game. Yet, people pay no attention to the 13 year old thats playing a violent game. It seems that the only ones that do pay attention are the people who want them gone, and taken away. Why is it disgusting that these games are created? They are a form of entertainment. They are a form of stress relief for many, many people including myself. I play violent games such as Grand Theft Auto, yet I'm a very easy going, peaceful person. I dont want a gun, nor will i own one. I'm emotional about violence. Video games, once again, are a form of entertainment. Such is the same about a person singing about a person who was forced into incest at a young ago becoming violent. Or about a bus driver that happens to be a cannibal.

hippiemom

gue_barium wrote:

Give it a rest. If you want to target the English department of VT, write them a letter for Christ's sake.

I'll post what I want to post. If you don't care to read it, don't.

gue_barium

hippiemom wrote:

I'll post what I want to post. If you don't care to read it, don't.

Ahem. Fair enough.

meme

Vedderlution_Baby! wrote:

For those blaming video games....


Blame the parents who allow those video games to get into the hands of the immature gamer. On each and every video game that is sold and advertised, there is a rating that an easily been seen on the front cover listing the intended audience the game was created for, and why it's rated as it is. You can also blame the stores who have a very lax policy when it comes to selling the video games. Each and every retailer that sales video games is supposed to ID the customer who is purchasing a game that is rated Mature 17+ (most games that contain shooting and violence are rated Mature 17+). Unfortunately, this does not happen and a 13 year old can obtain a copy of the latest shoot em up. But this leads back to the parent. Sure, the adolescent can obtain a copy of the game, but the parents are the ones responsible for deciding whats allowed and whats crossing the line when it comes to their house. By ignoring the activities that the adolescent is partaking in, the parents leave that adolescent open for media that they are not possibly mature enough for. People looks at video games as kiddy devices, intended for young kids and nerds. People don't understand that video games, like movies, have levels of intensity and matureness that coincide with the matureness of the person watching them. In fact, video games are even more intense because you interact with them and make choice that affect your player and characters in the game. Yet, people pay no attention to the 13 year old thats playing a violent game. It seems that the only ones that do pay attention are the people who want them gone, and taken away. Why is it disgusting that these games are created? They are a form of entertainment. They are a form of stress relief for many, many people including myself. I play violent games such as Grand Theft Auto, yet I'm a very easy going, peaceful person. I dont want a gun, nor will i own one. I'm emotional about violence. Video games, once again, are a form of entertainment. Such is the same about a person singing about a person who was forced into incest at a young ago becoming violent. Or about a bus driver that happens to be a cannibal.

I'll admit to being squeamish, but the Lego Star Wars and the ones made for general audience are violent enough for me. Whenever someone on the screen goes up in a puff as a consequence of a kid pushing a button, I think there's something wrong.

rybes

Vedderlution_Baby! wrote:

For those blaming video games....

Blame the parents who allow those video games to get into the hands of the immature gamer. ...You can also blame the stores who have a very lax policy when it comes to selling the video games... But this leads back to the parent. ...By ignoring the activities that the adolescent is partaking in, the parents leave that adolescent open for media that they are not possibly mature enough for. ...Video games, once again, are a form of entertainment.

Thank you! Well put.. video games are always a scapegoat. As mentioned above... movies, music, video games anything of the genre, its not reality, its entertainment.

Being able to make that distinction is key.