![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 |
Does anyone know if the town is doing anything special on the ten year aniversary tomorrow and can that get posted? And, in any special way, can someone get a photo that could get posted if there is an event that day? Thank you, and I know we're not supposed to be emotional here, but I had a friend loose three friends in this shooting, and I'd really appreciate it if we had something up that's recent to the day for them... No Stahr ( talk) 22:21, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi, could someone please add Kauhajoki school shooting to the See also section? Btw, tragic. :( -- Jepa ( talk) 10:06, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
1. Eric Harris did not break his nose. Some one that can needs to correct that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.90.134.40 ( talk) 19:12, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
2. In this article, under "Long-term results -> Police tactics" it is stated that: "David Cullen, author of the 2009 book Columbine, said that, "The active protocol has proved successful at numerous shootings during the past decade. At Virginia Tech alone, it probably saved dozens of lives."
I belive the statement: "At Virginia Tech alone, it probably saved dozens of lives" is not founded.
This statement is based on a journalist article, where the journlist states this fact, but does support it in any way, except by making reference to David Cullen, who made that claim in his book.
Earlier in the same section, the "Immediate Action Rapid Deployment tactic [also called the active protocal]" is described in this way: "That approach [the traditinal approach] has been replaced by a tactic which takes into account the presence of an active shooter whose interest is to kill, not to take hostages. This tactic calls for a four-person team to advance into the site of any ongoing shooting, optimally a diamond-shaped wedge, but even with just a single officer if more are not available. Police officers in this tactic are trained to move toward the sound of gunfire and neutralize the shooter as quickly as possible.[62] Their goal is to stop the shooter at all costs, and they are to walk past wounded victims, as the aim is to prevent the shooter from killing or wounding more."
Now according the the wiki entry for Virginia Tech massacre ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Tech_massacre), section "Responses to the incidents -> Emergency services response", it is said that: "Police took nearly six minutes to enter the barricaded building. When they could not break the chains, an officer shot out a deadbolt lock leading into a laboratory; they then moved to a nearby stairwell.[11] As police reached the second floor, they heard Cho fire his final shot;[11][38] Cho's body was discovered in Jocelyne Couture-Nowak's classroom, room 211."
Given that the main purpose of the Immediate Action Rapid Deployment tactic [active protocol] is basically to neutralize the shooter at any cost, and as soon as possible, it does it not appear that the active protocol helped saves lives in the viginia Tech massacre. The police forces that entered building in the Tech massacre did not neutralize the killer (hence preventing further death), as he killed himself before they could kill him.
Here's what Marlyn Manson actually said on Bowling for Columbine:
Michael Moore: "If you were to talk directly to the kids at Columbine and the people in that community, what would you say to them if they were here right now?"
Manson: "I wouldn't say a word to them; I would listen to what they had to say... and that's what no one did."
Trust me. I'm watching it right now and paused to make this notation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Phattimmy ( talk • contribs) 19:41, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
It is correct. It's on youtube if you look for it. I'm not quite sure, but it was not taken down when youtube cracked down on copywrighted stuff, it was referenced, so could the link be used? I am telling you though, that is the correct quote and it is worded correctly. I can dig up the link, but can someone tell me if it's okay or not. Thank you No Stahr ( talk) 22:17, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
"On April 30, 1999, high-ranking officials of Jefferson County and the Jefferson County Sheriff's Office met to decide if they should reveal that Investigator Guerra knew of the Harris website two years prior to the massacre. They decided not to disclose this information at a press conference held on April 30, nor did they mention it in any other way. Over the next two years the original Guerra documents were lost. Their existence was not revealed to the public until September 24, 2001"
Neither "Investigator Guerra" nor "the Harris website" are mentioned previously. IP99.237.123.46 10:22, March 8, 2009
Suggested addition:
One theory on the common denominators among school shooters notes that a map of incidents across the United States shows they overwhelming occur in the South and West. Studies done by psychologists before Columbine show higher levels of violence in the South and West, namely when people feel their honor has been disgraced. School shooters in turn believe they have been placed at the bottom of the social ladder feel their honor has been violated, and retaliate with violence. There are other historical threads as to why the South and West are considered more violent regions, such as the tradition of solving your own problems - shown by the Southern saying of being a sheriff in your own hearth. The shootings also tend to occur in suburbs and small towns, where high school is the only game in town. Outcasts - or those who see themselves as outcasts - have few, if any, alternative locales to establish an identity outside of high school. That parallel can also be seen in the Winnenden, Germany school shooting that took place in a small town.
sources:
http://www.exam iner.com/x-5048-Columbine-and-School-Violence-Examiner~y2009m3d11-Germany-school-shooting
http://www.jeffkassauthor.com/index.html
Lance1875 ( talk) 18:29, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
What is your source on the percentage that live in "big cities"? And if one or both theories helps explain Columbine and other school shootings, that does not diminish the value of the information, it increases the value. Lance1875 ( talk) 05:17, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Beyond that, it isn't within the scope of an encyclopedia article to present a sociological theory on the relative violence of a given geographic area, or try to explain why this would happen in Columbine. It borders on synthesis and we really couldn't present such material in context of this event. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 06:46, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
I think one of the rationales that should be used is the fact that these 2 boys were believers in evolution and everything associated with it. It was their belief in higher races and their disbelief in God that gave them the guts to do this. They were quoted as saying, "If there was a God, he would not let me feel the way I do. There is no God, only hate." I think this play a huge role in this massacre. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryanincabo ( talk • contribs) 16:24, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
'Then at approximately 12:08 p.m, they moved over to the bookshelves near the set of tables where Matthew Kechter and Isaiah Shoels lay; there, they shot themselves, committing suicide. ... At 2:38 p.m., he attempted to exit.[4] He fell out the library window and was caught by SWAT team members, in a famously televised scene. Lisa Kreutz remained injured in the library. In an interview she recalled hearing something like "You in the library." around the time when Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold were getting ready to commit suicide. She was lying injured in the library until police entered at 3:22 p.m.'
So at 12:08 the shooters commit suicide - what actually happened for the next 2 - 3 hours until SWAT entered the building. Why did that take so long? What was happening in the intervening time? Presumably there was later criticism of this delay. Macgroover ( talk) 05:52, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
I removed a link to The Memory Hole for a few reasons. The first, and the best, is that it is a blog, and according to Wikipedia:Blogs_as_sources suggests avoiding self-published blogs that can't be verified by other sources. I doubt the previously cited page because it doesn't match up with published facts in Columbine by Dave Cullen. The site lists the document for Eric Harris' Juvenile Detention Program, but it does not have his name, just the site claiming the document belongs to him. Such a document does exist, according to Cullens, but would be 8-10 pages. Pages 217-8 of Columbine describe what was on the documents, and some parts are different, namely the questions where he claims he uses and wishes to stop using drugs other than alcohol. Cullens claims Harris lied about his pot use on the forms, but took credit for drinking alcohol 3 times. A lot of The Memory Hole's document is echoing statements in the book, but little innacuracies like this, as well as a lack of an actual name other than "Dr. Albert" on the papers makes me reluctant to believe it. If you disagree, dandy, I just had to express my concern. The book has a blueprint for making a fake, so little off bits make me suspicious. See what you think on Amazon reader Penguinwithin ( talk) 22:37, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-04-13-columbine-myths_N.htm?se=yahoorefer
Thought this was interesting, as a contrast to the whole "they were bullied outcasts" thing, since it mentions THEM picking on other kids. 75.107.254.11 ( talk) 03:06, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Here is a link to a summary story where much of the motivation of the killers is corrected:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-04-13-columbine-myths_N.htm?se=yahoorefer
Namely:
They were not bullied but in fact bullied freshment and people they called 'fags' Were not in the trench coat 'mafia' Were NOT obsessed with video games They did not target specific groups based on race or religion They did not ask a student if she was a christian before shooting her.
And many more.
Here is another recent article with lots of new information. I think the article should mention that their main goal was not to shoot people - their main goal was to have a bombing that would break the previous mass murder record that had been set by the Oklahoma City Bombing. If these bombs had worked as planned, they would have killed hundreds of people. Grundle2600 ( talk) 00:26, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
The second paragraph of the article lists Columbine as the "fourth-deadliest school shooting" in US history. This needs to be revised, as the 1927 Bath massacre consisted of two separate bombings (planted bombing and suicide car bombing), not shooting. It should either be changed to "fourth-deadliest school massacre" or "third-deadliest school shooting" with the reference to the Bath massacre removed. I know it may seem nitpicky, but the article should be as accurate as possible. Battleax86 ( talk) 04:45, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
This message was left on my talk page by LaVidaLoca. I'm moving it here so other editors can read it and join in if they wish...
Hi. I just had a couple remarks on the edits you've made to the article. I'm glad you changed back the image sizing, it wouldn't help the article to be overwhelmed with too-large images. I'm kind of ambivalent about breaking out so many subsections. I'm a little concerned with it appearing too chopped up. I moved the portion regarding Cassie Bernall a little further up. While I know that the Christian focus on her does have longer reaching effects, I think it really needs to be closer to the more immediate aftermath. Also, I took out the subsectioning of it for a couple reasons. There has been a lot of controversy over time about the "memorial" aspect of how the article treats the victims. Like it or hate it, Wikipedia sometimes takes a hard line against things appearing memorialized. The other point is that if we have a complete section for only one of 13 victims, it puts more weight on that person than the other 12, who all have a story that could (and maybe should) be told, although we can't do that. I moved the short section discussing music just after the goth subsection and removed the word "dark" from the section heading. The two sections seems to be a bit connected, while "dark" is kind of a POV description. Thanks for looking at it. I've tried to watch the article closely today because of the potential for vandalism, which has been a lot more frequent in the last few days than usual. LaVidaLoca ( talk) 19:18, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
I can't edit because of the lock. But there is a change I think should be made:
"A rifle and the two shotguns were bought in what was perhaps a straw purchase in December, 1998 by a friend, Robyn Anderson, who had purchased the shotguns at the Tanner Gun Show in December, in private sales from individual(s)"
- "perhaps" is offering a theory rather than stating a fact. - The extensive details of where Anderson got the guns isn't relivant.
The problem with the existing text is that its an attempt to attach a political argument about gun control issues (gun shows, straw purchases at gun shows) via wording, theory and excessive information. I would suggest it should be:
"A rifle and the two shotguns were bought from a friend, Robyn Anderson, in December, 1998."
66.226.193.82 ( talk) 19:55, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
I added very little. I removed very little. I reorganized a lot. I hope no one minds. -- Blue Tie ( talk) 17:51, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
doesn't this need a citation given that it the information these outlets have disseminated is false- he had therapeutic levels of Luvox in his blood per the coroner's report. So many things like this on Wikipedia, unchallenged statements contrary to rock-solid evidence, yet doubt is seeded... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.227.227.214 ( talk) 04:03, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
This statement needs to be removed, as the source that it points to no longer exists: "Despite the nature of the Columbine incident, some social science experts feel the zero tolerance in schools has gone overboard.[48]" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.103.139.109 ( talk) 06:05, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
There are a number of new facts that have come to light from the release of police reports after Colombine (years later in fact).Plus the many missconceptions about bullying and the boys' place at the school. Many things that where not avaliable have been brought together in "Colombine" by David Cullen. After reading this book I feel the wikipedia article needs revisions. His book is extremely informative about Colombine and the events leading up to it and the reactions afterwards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.165.242.2 ( talk) 19:06, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
Twice now, an editor has added the {{ dubious}} tag to a sourced and cited statement. The statement is "At the Virginia Tech massacre, it probably saved dozens of lives" and is cited with "The Four Most Important Lessons of Columbine", written by a noted author of a book and myriad articles on the Columbine events, Dave Cullen. The relevant paragraph from that article is:
And the final practical lesson of Columbine is a revolution in police response tactics. Cops followed the old book at Columbine: surround the building, set up a perimeter, contain the damage. That approach has been replaced by the "active shooter protocol." Optimally, it calls for a four-person team to advance in a diamond-shaped wedge. (If there isn't time to gather four officers, a single officer should charge in alone.) They're trained to move toward the sound of gunfire and neutralize the shooter. Their goal is to stop him at all costs. They will walk past a dying child if they have to, just to prevent the shooter from killing more. The active protocol has proved successful at numerous shootings during the past decade. At Virginia Tech alone, it probably saved dozens of lives.
Noted expert on the case? Reliable source properly cited?
Accurately reflects source content?
The first time stated "Dubious tag. Article should not make speculations." I reverted that, stating "the article doesn't, this is reliably sourced". He tagged it again, stating "again, wikipedia is not a place for speculation, not properly sourced". Note first that the tag comes up stating "Dubious-discuss". I'm not seeing a post here that outlines exactly what the editor thinks is speculation on the part of the editors of this page and thus Wikipedia. The article sourcing the statement is by an expert in this field and the source is accurate. There is no explanation for how the editor thinks this is speculation or how he considers the statement "not properly source". I changed the wording to "It was credited with saving dozens of lives during the Virginia Tech massacre." At this point, the editor in question is going to have to comment here and not return the tag unless he can present reasonable and compelling reasons why a statement by an knowledgeable and reliable editor and source equates to speculation and not being properly sourced. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 05:33, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
This is a cross-post with the same Talk post under the Virginia Tech Massacre article discussion. I removed some links as they aren't relevant here.
I want to put this out there for consideration. With each additional, tragic mass shooting that occurs around the world, a very relevant question emerges for the editorial members of the Wikipedia community. Namely, why this event and the Virginia Tech shooting are considered "massacres" while other events (Fort Hood, etc.) are called "shootings?"
Sadly, it would appear to me that Wikipedia writers are making "body count" a determination when titling articles like this one. Who determines what level of body count gets the "massacre" title? Why? Is it objective? Unbiased? Seems not.
And it's not how it's referred to in the local and national media/press coverage. Nor is it how official documents from government/state accounts, panels and reports refer to these events. In the Virginia Tech case, the Governor's office refers to it simply as "April 16" or "April 16 incident" in the key findings. The University calls it a "Tragedy." The media in the state call it simply the "April 16th shooting" or "April 16, 2007" or "Tragedy." Attorneys for the victim's families, victim's families, and living victims refer to it as a "shooting" or "tragedy."
I'd like to see an explanation and recommendation regarding future titling for active shooter / mass killing articles. I think that it's important for Wikipedia to develop a clear taxonomy for these events. A taxonomy that also makes it easier to research all events would be helpful -- a single phrase or term that would rank higher in search engines and also support end-user phraseology is critical, I think. Calling one event a "massacre" and another a "shooting" isn't objective. Especially if based solely on body count.
In the case of this article, it appears to need a different title so that one could aggregate it with all the other coverage and reports from media, the state and government sources and courts.
( Possum4all ( talk) 15:27, 25 November 2009 (UTC))
If there are not objections (probably won't be), I'll take this to Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(events). ( Possum4all ( talk) 07:14, 26 November 2009 (UTC))
One of the on-going thrills that serial murderers get, is that their names will be mentioned when ever the incident itself is mentioned. Their names will be nominated and they will live on through notoriety.
The obvious way to take away this "thrill" from such killers, is to not mention their names in any online websites or at memorials etc. This is exactly what they want. They want their names to exist in infamy. I'm not even American and i have nothing to do with this massacre, but please try to keep the use of the murderers names to a minimum. I would be asking that their names be deleted entirely from this article, but i know that is asking too much - there will always be people who want to know their names.
Serial murderers such as this come from social situations where they crave notoriety. Through the article attributing the massacre to them, you are post-humously glorifying them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jusau ( talk • contribs)
Most stories and pictures say that one of the killers was at the foot of the out side steps. THAT IS NOT TRUE!!! Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold killed themselves in the library. If you don't believe me look up the pictures on youtube!!!! —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
66.211.127.123 (
talk)
04:47, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
"The entries contained blurbs about ways to escape to Mexico, hijacking an aircraft at Denver International Airport and crashing into a building in New York City" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.212.25.32 ( talk) 17:33, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
Just checking, seemed like someone tried to slide in a 9/11 or terrorism reference. ( 98.212.25.32 ( talk) 12:24, 16 February 2010 (UTC))
wow. she stood up for her beliefs in this tradgedy. EVERYONE check the song "Cassie" by Flyleaf. —Preceding unsigned comment added by His Baaby Girl ( talk • contribs) 22:53, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
I think it would be helpful to expand quite considerably the section which deals with bullying at columbine and to what extent it was or was not a motivating factor. Bullying has dominated discussion of columbine for years and a variety of differing opinions have emerged about it. I think this needs to be expanded on the wikipedia page. You could quote from those who recount their being bullied, those who studied the shooting in the early years and placed the blame almost solely on bullying and newer research which tries to downplay bullying. Finally a small discussion of the legacy of columbine with regard to bullying and popular culture. I don’t think it is unfair to say that columbine is as famous as it is in America in large part due to the issue of bullying. Thoughts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.106.89.48 ( talk) 20:24, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
{{editsemiprotected}} Eric Harris shot himself in the mouth, not in the head. His autopsy showed a bullet hole in the roof of his mouth
Soxfan2k4 ( talk) 17:43, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
I am currently reading David Cullen's book Columbine, which describes it as a failed terrorist attack rather than a simple school shooting. See this news story which quotes the book. Given the scope of the planning, the randomness of the targets, and the desire for mass casualties, I think a mention of terrorism is appropriate here. Someone recently added the terrorist attack category but was reverted here with the comment "Got a reliable source for that?" -- in fact, yes, there is. Cullen writes extensively about the motivations and planning of Harris, and he concludes that this was a botched terrorist act that became a school shooting when the bombs failed to go off. Cullen also debunks many myths about Harris, i.e. that he was a bullied outcast (he actually had many friends and if anything was known to be a bully himself at times).
I'm not going to jump in and edit right away because this is probably a sensitive issue. But I believe the terrorism claim is supportable. Thoughts? ATren ( talk) 17:34, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
{{editsemiprotected}} I would like to suggest that the following link be added to this page under external links:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96oF-iepPOs
This is a virtual tour (video) of the permanent Columbine Shooting Memorial in Littleton, Colorado. It provides a way for people, who otherwise might not be able to experience the memorial because of limitations in their ability to travel there, to get a glimpse of what the memorial is all about. It also serves to make the existence of the memorial more widely known. This memorial is an important, permanent record of the way in which the victims and those close to them were affected by the tragedy. It displays the commitment and depth of emotion that enveloped the community so deeply that a committee of local residents spent the time and resources necessary to ensure that the victims will be "Never Forgotten" by building the memorial. For this reason the memorial represents a cornerstone of the ongoing meaning of what happened at Columbine. Therefore, any media that expands "access" to the memorial -- even if only in a virtual manner -- is an important addition to the narrative of Columbine.
71.56.202.154 ( talk) 04:16, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Weren't the offenders relying on two improvised explisive devices, that they had set-up, as well as the shotgun, pistols etc.?-- Cymbelmineer ( talk) 00:44, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Why is the library picture of Klebold's and Harris's corpses not in this article? Lazy writing or another reason?
Doktordoris ( talk) 01:13, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
The word moral panic is really unacceptable as a word in the lede. The essential impression this gives off is an entirely inappropriate one, that people were either right or wrong about this event. Whilst clearly no sane person would condone the shootings, it appears that moral panic is condemnatory of people's impression of the degree to which certain cultures had an effect on this event. I propose something like "the shootings provoked intellectual moral and ethical qualms, related to the scholastic situation in America." This sounds less POV. Thoughts, anyone? Zucchinidreams ( talk) 15:21, 11 November 2010 (UTC).
{{edit semi-protected}}
110.224.250.194 (
talk)
17:19, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
{{edit semi-protected}} There should be a mention Micheal Moore's documentry "BOWLING FOR COLUMBINE". 110.224.250.194 ( talk) 17:25, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
> At this point, several witnesses heard Harris and Klebold comment on how they no longer found a thrill in shooting their victims. Klebold was quoted to have said "Maybe we should start knifing people, that might be more fun."
I can't find a source for this anywhere -- Googling it just brings up people quoting the article. Anyone know where it's from? It's a good quote, if true, as it really shows their mental state and motivation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.156.190.32 ( talk) 19:22, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
Can this link be added? http://columbinefamilyrequest.org/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.0.59.233 ( talk) 21:03, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
The first mention of Brooks Brown has a link that goes to the article for a jazz player of the same name. Link needs to be removed. 216.137.237.110 ( talk) 01:41, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
The following has been unsourced for more than a year, and i cannot at this moment find any refs to verify it. There are others but i will leave them for now Monkeymanman ( talk) 14:45, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
The bombs had enough explosive power to destroy the entire cafeteria and bring the library above crashing down citation needed, though they failed to detonate.
Hi everybody! I am an italian boy and I'd like to correct an information on the page, but I can't. Just a little thing to say, the uninjured students who left the library after the shootings were 27 (or 28), not 34. And Austin Eubanks was not shot in the head, but in the hand (he was treated in the hospital and released the same day). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.47.195.23 ( talk) 13:14, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Uh...at Columbine, I'd like to put "Klebold taunted her (Valeen Schnurr), saying 'God is gay', reloaded, then walked away." You know, basic facts. Get this, I met a library survivor!! Can you believe that?! AOCJedi ( talk) 11:15, 30 March 2011 (UTC) AOCJedi ( talk) 11:15, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Actually, it's written about the Columbine High School shootings from the 90s. When in the library, the gunman came and asked a couple of kids if they believe in God. I can't remember, but I believe he told them up front that if they said yes, he would kill them. Cassie Bernall said she did and so the kid shot her in the face. Look at the video on youtube called cassie by flyleaf. refactored by The Interior (Talk) 23:07, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, what do you guys mean they never asked them if they believed in God!!!? There were survivord that were asked!!! Not only is it a lie, it's disrespectful to the martyrs!!!!!!!! — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Don jaun triumphant (
talk •
contribs)
03:07, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I already wrote that in the discussion board. Some things should be corrected: -Austin Eubanks was shot "in the hand", not "in the head". Sources: http://evanlong.net/columbine-shooting/LibraryInjuredA-I.pdf , http://acolumbinesite.com/ -After the shootings in the library, 28 (not 34) uninjured students left the library (I wrote 27 but I was wrong) along with ELEVEN injured students and not ten. In fact, Brian Anderson was NOT rescued by SWAT team after 3.00 pm but he went outside with the others at approximately 11.40 am. The people rescued by swat were Patti Nielson, Lisa Kreutz and the three library staff. So you should include Brian Anderson among those who escaped immediately and remove his name from the paragraph "Suicide of the shooters". Source: http://evanlong.net/columbine-shooting/LibraryWitnesses.pdf , specifically the accounts of Peggy Dodd, Ryan Barrett and Jennifer Matthews. Thanks :)
95.247.227.22 ( talk) 21:50, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Speculation by a high-profile personality is still speculation. Besides, by the corresponding Wikipedia entry, Dr. Breggin's opinions are not mainstream within the profession. It would be better to insert references to clinical trials related to these drugs and if there is indeed medical or forensic (i.e scientific) evidence supporting the claims. Aldo L ( talk) 19:17, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
I completely agree. This is not main stream scientific or mediation professional has come to this conclusion. This remains a highly speculative statement. There is no scientific proof that antidepressants lead to violence. This belongs under a different wiki article. -- Jps213 ( talk) 23:06, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
Brooks Brown links to the wrong person. Just thought I should let someone know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.151.130.26 ( talk) 18:47, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
There's a picture of the shooters at the top of the page, but none of the victims anywhere. And people wonder why kids do this kind of crap. KevinLuna ( talk) 00:40, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
I'm Italian and forgive me if my english is not good enough. Anyway, I want to bring to your attention another time an incoherence showed in the section about the shooting in the library. At the beginning it says there were 52 students in the library and in the adjacent rooms; at the end, it says that 34 uninjured and 10 injured students fled immediately, except for Lisa Kreutz, Brian Anderson and Patrick Ireland who stayed in the library for a while. There must be something wrong, because if you count you have 34 uninjured students + 10 injured students + 10 dead students + 3 other students = 57 students. In my opinion, some sources are uncorrect; hope you will check them soon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.52.234.142 ( talk) 18:19, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
Oh, and there is also John Savage who left the library before the others, so the number is 58 and not 57. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.52.234.142 ( talk) 18:22, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
-- MrNdolo ( talk) 06:44, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the third paragraph under the Firearms sections the term "discharged" is misspelled and accompanied by a redundancy in the use of the word "fired." If you could please correct this it would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you! MrNdolo ( talk) 06:44, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Done —
UncleBubba (
T
@
C )
07:37, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Another small error concerns the ammunition the killers purchased at KMART. The entry states they purchased their "bullets" at KMART. Unless Klebold and Harris were manufacturing their own ammunition from components they had purchased(they didn't), the term "bullets" is incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.141.154.118 ( talk) 02:12, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Why is there no discussion of the parents? Has this been censored in an attempt to whitewash the story?
2.25.214.118 ( talk) 16:44, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
http://denver.rockymountainnews.com/shooting/report/columbinereport/pages/diagram_toc.htm
This has a list of reports from the JeffCo authorities WhisperToMe ( talk) 13:04, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
The article is excellent but misleading about the motives of the killers. Dave Cullen's extensive research and publications about the massacre, especially "The Depressive and the Psychopath," maintain that neither revenge nor bullying caused Eric Harris' and Dylan Klebold's actions. The young men wanted, according to Cullen, to commit a world-historical massacre on a huge scale [Cullen deplores the face that the killings are called a "school massacre"]. As Cullen notes, psychopaths lack elements in various parts of their brains that prohibit them from committing crimes. On this point, see the extensive information about psychopathy in the "Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders." MacLennan123 Maclennan123 ( talk) 00:39, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change Motive: Revenge for bullyine
Source: Columbine by Dave Cullen devotes some 400 pages to proving that the motive was not bullying. The perpetrators were actually pretty well liked at their school, and it has been proven that one perp was a psychopath, where the other was manic depressive. It was purely random; it was not meant to settle any scores. Lizzieshouv ( talk) 23:40, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
First, mattbuck, your response to my post is rude. Second, someone more knowledgeable about the massacre than I has been asked to furnish information about it from David Cullen's highly regarded book, "Columbine." I don't own a copy of the volume. The knowledgeable person does. MacLennan123 Maclennan123 ( talk) 22:56, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
I've noticed that the cause of death concerning Daniel Rohrbough are not consistent. In the main article it is stated that he was shot in the back while walking down a staircase. In the section about initial injuries and deaths however, it says Rohrbough was shot in the chest. SantiDaVincio ( talk) 16:34, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
Before I start, I shall add that what these people did was terrible, and I am in no way trying to excuse or lessen it, however I believe the word 'massacre' has partial connotations. Surely an encyclopaedia should stay as impartial as possible, and replace the title with 'Columbine High School Shootings'. Just a thought... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.54.127.74 ( talk) 17:52, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Why is this article still locked? There hasnt been any problems as most editors are fooling with the olypics right now, isn't this an old event? 184.98.143.25 ( talk) 09:09, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello
The list of weapons in the inset text box 'Columbine High School Massacre' is highly disturbing and should be removed.
I feel this strongly glorifies the nature of mass shootings such as Columbine, and whether this is the case or not, the user who wrote it gives the appearance that they are relishing in writing the list. It appears to be setting a bench mark for others to aspire to upstage, and it's difficult to interpret why such a list is necessary, or what good can come of it.
While naming the weapons in the main body of the article might be constructive, presenting the list of equipment in such a venerated way seems distasteful, and it should be removed.
Kind regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Latmiller80 ( talk • contribs) 15:13, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Grammar: In section "Immediate aftermath", there is a typo in the sentence "However, Lapp was unable to correctly point out the where Bernall was located, and was himself closer to Schnurr during the shootings."
The word "the" is unnecessary; please delete it so the sentence reads: "However, Lapp was unable to correctly point out where Bernall was located, and was himself closer to Schnurr during the shootings." AMU10 ( talk) 22:06, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 |
Does anyone know if the town is doing anything special on the ten year aniversary tomorrow and can that get posted? And, in any special way, can someone get a photo that could get posted if there is an event that day? Thank you, and I know we're not supposed to be emotional here, but I had a friend loose three friends in this shooting, and I'd really appreciate it if we had something up that's recent to the day for them... No Stahr ( talk) 22:21, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi, could someone please add Kauhajoki school shooting to the See also section? Btw, tragic. :( -- Jepa ( talk) 10:06, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
1. Eric Harris did not break his nose. Some one that can needs to correct that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.90.134.40 ( talk) 19:12, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
2. In this article, under "Long-term results -> Police tactics" it is stated that: "David Cullen, author of the 2009 book Columbine, said that, "The active protocol has proved successful at numerous shootings during the past decade. At Virginia Tech alone, it probably saved dozens of lives."
I belive the statement: "At Virginia Tech alone, it probably saved dozens of lives" is not founded.
This statement is based on a journalist article, where the journlist states this fact, but does support it in any way, except by making reference to David Cullen, who made that claim in his book.
Earlier in the same section, the "Immediate Action Rapid Deployment tactic [also called the active protocal]" is described in this way: "That approach [the traditinal approach] has been replaced by a tactic which takes into account the presence of an active shooter whose interest is to kill, not to take hostages. This tactic calls for a four-person team to advance into the site of any ongoing shooting, optimally a diamond-shaped wedge, but even with just a single officer if more are not available. Police officers in this tactic are trained to move toward the sound of gunfire and neutralize the shooter as quickly as possible.[62] Their goal is to stop the shooter at all costs, and they are to walk past wounded victims, as the aim is to prevent the shooter from killing or wounding more."
Now according the the wiki entry for Virginia Tech massacre ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Tech_massacre), section "Responses to the incidents -> Emergency services response", it is said that: "Police took nearly six minutes to enter the barricaded building. When they could not break the chains, an officer shot out a deadbolt lock leading into a laboratory; they then moved to a nearby stairwell.[11] As police reached the second floor, they heard Cho fire his final shot;[11][38] Cho's body was discovered in Jocelyne Couture-Nowak's classroom, room 211."
Given that the main purpose of the Immediate Action Rapid Deployment tactic [active protocol] is basically to neutralize the shooter at any cost, and as soon as possible, it does it not appear that the active protocol helped saves lives in the viginia Tech massacre. The police forces that entered building in the Tech massacre did not neutralize the killer (hence preventing further death), as he killed himself before they could kill him.
Here's what Marlyn Manson actually said on Bowling for Columbine:
Michael Moore: "If you were to talk directly to the kids at Columbine and the people in that community, what would you say to them if they were here right now?"
Manson: "I wouldn't say a word to them; I would listen to what they had to say... and that's what no one did."
Trust me. I'm watching it right now and paused to make this notation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Phattimmy ( talk • contribs) 19:41, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
It is correct. It's on youtube if you look for it. I'm not quite sure, but it was not taken down when youtube cracked down on copywrighted stuff, it was referenced, so could the link be used? I am telling you though, that is the correct quote and it is worded correctly. I can dig up the link, but can someone tell me if it's okay or not. Thank you No Stahr ( talk) 22:17, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
"On April 30, 1999, high-ranking officials of Jefferson County and the Jefferson County Sheriff's Office met to decide if they should reveal that Investigator Guerra knew of the Harris website two years prior to the massacre. They decided not to disclose this information at a press conference held on April 30, nor did they mention it in any other way. Over the next two years the original Guerra documents were lost. Their existence was not revealed to the public until September 24, 2001"
Neither "Investigator Guerra" nor "the Harris website" are mentioned previously. IP99.237.123.46 10:22, March 8, 2009
Suggested addition:
One theory on the common denominators among school shooters notes that a map of incidents across the United States shows they overwhelming occur in the South and West. Studies done by psychologists before Columbine show higher levels of violence in the South and West, namely when people feel their honor has been disgraced. School shooters in turn believe they have been placed at the bottom of the social ladder feel their honor has been violated, and retaliate with violence. There are other historical threads as to why the South and West are considered more violent regions, such as the tradition of solving your own problems - shown by the Southern saying of being a sheriff in your own hearth. The shootings also tend to occur in suburbs and small towns, where high school is the only game in town. Outcasts - or those who see themselves as outcasts - have few, if any, alternative locales to establish an identity outside of high school. That parallel can also be seen in the Winnenden, Germany school shooting that took place in a small town.
sources:
http://www.exam iner.com/x-5048-Columbine-and-School-Violence-Examiner~y2009m3d11-Germany-school-shooting
http://www.jeffkassauthor.com/index.html
Lance1875 ( talk) 18:29, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
What is your source on the percentage that live in "big cities"? And if one or both theories helps explain Columbine and other school shootings, that does not diminish the value of the information, it increases the value. Lance1875 ( talk) 05:17, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Beyond that, it isn't within the scope of an encyclopedia article to present a sociological theory on the relative violence of a given geographic area, or try to explain why this would happen in Columbine. It borders on synthesis and we really couldn't present such material in context of this event. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 06:46, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
I think one of the rationales that should be used is the fact that these 2 boys were believers in evolution and everything associated with it. It was their belief in higher races and their disbelief in God that gave them the guts to do this. They were quoted as saying, "If there was a God, he would not let me feel the way I do. There is no God, only hate." I think this play a huge role in this massacre. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryanincabo ( talk • contribs) 16:24, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
'Then at approximately 12:08 p.m, they moved over to the bookshelves near the set of tables where Matthew Kechter and Isaiah Shoels lay; there, they shot themselves, committing suicide. ... At 2:38 p.m., he attempted to exit.[4] He fell out the library window and was caught by SWAT team members, in a famously televised scene. Lisa Kreutz remained injured in the library. In an interview she recalled hearing something like "You in the library." around the time when Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold were getting ready to commit suicide. She was lying injured in the library until police entered at 3:22 p.m.'
So at 12:08 the shooters commit suicide - what actually happened for the next 2 - 3 hours until SWAT entered the building. Why did that take so long? What was happening in the intervening time? Presumably there was later criticism of this delay. Macgroover ( talk) 05:52, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
I removed a link to The Memory Hole for a few reasons. The first, and the best, is that it is a blog, and according to Wikipedia:Blogs_as_sources suggests avoiding self-published blogs that can't be verified by other sources. I doubt the previously cited page because it doesn't match up with published facts in Columbine by Dave Cullen. The site lists the document for Eric Harris' Juvenile Detention Program, but it does not have his name, just the site claiming the document belongs to him. Such a document does exist, according to Cullens, but would be 8-10 pages. Pages 217-8 of Columbine describe what was on the documents, and some parts are different, namely the questions where he claims he uses and wishes to stop using drugs other than alcohol. Cullens claims Harris lied about his pot use on the forms, but took credit for drinking alcohol 3 times. A lot of The Memory Hole's document is echoing statements in the book, but little innacuracies like this, as well as a lack of an actual name other than "Dr. Albert" on the papers makes me reluctant to believe it. If you disagree, dandy, I just had to express my concern. The book has a blueprint for making a fake, so little off bits make me suspicious. See what you think on Amazon reader Penguinwithin ( talk) 22:37, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-04-13-columbine-myths_N.htm?se=yahoorefer
Thought this was interesting, as a contrast to the whole "they were bullied outcasts" thing, since it mentions THEM picking on other kids. 75.107.254.11 ( talk) 03:06, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Here is a link to a summary story where much of the motivation of the killers is corrected:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-04-13-columbine-myths_N.htm?se=yahoorefer
Namely:
They were not bullied but in fact bullied freshment and people they called 'fags' Were not in the trench coat 'mafia' Were NOT obsessed with video games They did not target specific groups based on race or religion They did not ask a student if she was a christian before shooting her.
And many more.
Here is another recent article with lots of new information. I think the article should mention that their main goal was not to shoot people - their main goal was to have a bombing that would break the previous mass murder record that had been set by the Oklahoma City Bombing. If these bombs had worked as planned, they would have killed hundreds of people. Grundle2600 ( talk) 00:26, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
The second paragraph of the article lists Columbine as the "fourth-deadliest school shooting" in US history. This needs to be revised, as the 1927 Bath massacre consisted of two separate bombings (planted bombing and suicide car bombing), not shooting. It should either be changed to "fourth-deadliest school massacre" or "third-deadliest school shooting" with the reference to the Bath massacre removed. I know it may seem nitpicky, but the article should be as accurate as possible. Battleax86 ( talk) 04:45, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
This message was left on my talk page by LaVidaLoca. I'm moving it here so other editors can read it and join in if they wish...
Hi. I just had a couple remarks on the edits you've made to the article. I'm glad you changed back the image sizing, it wouldn't help the article to be overwhelmed with too-large images. I'm kind of ambivalent about breaking out so many subsections. I'm a little concerned with it appearing too chopped up. I moved the portion regarding Cassie Bernall a little further up. While I know that the Christian focus on her does have longer reaching effects, I think it really needs to be closer to the more immediate aftermath. Also, I took out the subsectioning of it for a couple reasons. There has been a lot of controversy over time about the "memorial" aspect of how the article treats the victims. Like it or hate it, Wikipedia sometimes takes a hard line against things appearing memorialized. The other point is that if we have a complete section for only one of 13 victims, it puts more weight on that person than the other 12, who all have a story that could (and maybe should) be told, although we can't do that. I moved the short section discussing music just after the goth subsection and removed the word "dark" from the section heading. The two sections seems to be a bit connected, while "dark" is kind of a POV description. Thanks for looking at it. I've tried to watch the article closely today because of the potential for vandalism, which has been a lot more frequent in the last few days than usual. LaVidaLoca ( talk) 19:18, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
I can't edit because of the lock. But there is a change I think should be made:
"A rifle and the two shotguns were bought in what was perhaps a straw purchase in December, 1998 by a friend, Robyn Anderson, who had purchased the shotguns at the Tanner Gun Show in December, in private sales from individual(s)"
- "perhaps" is offering a theory rather than stating a fact. - The extensive details of where Anderson got the guns isn't relivant.
The problem with the existing text is that its an attempt to attach a political argument about gun control issues (gun shows, straw purchases at gun shows) via wording, theory and excessive information. I would suggest it should be:
"A rifle and the two shotguns were bought from a friend, Robyn Anderson, in December, 1998."
66.226.193.82 ( talk) 19:55, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
I added very little. I removed very little. I reorganized a lot. I hope no one minds. -- Blue Tie ( talk) 17:51, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
doesn't this need a citation given that it the information these outlets have disseminated is false- he had therapeutic levels of Luvox in his blood per the coroner's report. So many things like this on Wikipedia, unchallenged statements contrary to rock-solid evidence, yet doubt is seeded... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.227.227.214 ( talk) 04:03, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
This statement needs to be removed, as the source that it points to no longer exists: "Despite the nature of the Columbine incident, some social science experts feel the zero tolerance in schools has gone overboard.[48]" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.103.139.109 ( talk) 06:05, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
There are a number of new facts that have come to light from the release of police reports after Colombine (years later in fact).Plus the many missconceptions about bullying and the boys' place at the school. Many things that where not avaliable have been brought together in "Colombine" by David Cullen. After reading this book I feel the wikipedia article needs revisions. His book is extremely informative about Colombine and the events leading up to it and the reactions afterwards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.165.242.2 ( talk) 19:06, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
Twice now, an editor has added the {{ dubious}} tag to a sourced and cited statement. The statement is "At the Virginia Tech massacre, it probably saved dozens of lives" and is cited with "The Four Most Important Lessons of Columbine", written by a noted author of a book and myriad articles on the Columbine events, Dave Cullen. The relevant paragraph from that article is:
And the final practical lesson of Columbine is a revolution in police response tactics. Cops followed the old book at Columbine: surround the building, set up a perimeter, contain the damage. That approach has been replaced by the "active shooter protocol." Optimally, it calls for a four-person team to advance in a diamond-shaped wedge. (If there isn't time to gather four officers, a single officer should charge in alone.) They're trained to move toward the sound of gunfire and neutralize the shooter. Their goal is to stop him at all costs. They will walk past a dying child if they have to, just to prevent the shooter from killing more. The active protocol has proved successful at numerous shootings during the past decade. At Virginia Tech alone, it probably saved dozens of lives.
Noted expert on the case? Reliable source properly cited?
Accurately reflects source content?
The first time stated "Dubious tag. Article should not make speculations." I reverted that, stating "the article doesn't, this is reliably sourced". He tagged it again, stating "again, wikipedia is not a place for speculation, not properly sourced". Note first that the tag comes up stating "Dubious-discuss". I'm not seeing a post here that outlines exactly what the editor thinks is speculation on the part of the editors of this page and thus Wikipedia. The article sourcing the statement is by an expert in this field and the source is accurate. There is no explanation for how the editor thinks this is speculation or how he considers the statement "not properly source". I changed the wording to "It was credited with saving dozens of lives during the Virginia Tech massacre." At this point, the editor in question is going to have to comment here and not return the tag unless he can present reasonable and compelling reasons why a statement by an knowledgeable and reliable editor and source equates to speculation and not being properly sourced. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 05:33, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
This is a cross-post with the same Talk post under the Virginia Tech Massacre article discussion. I removed some links as they aren't relevant here.
I want to put this out there for consideration. With each additional, tragic mass shooting that occurs around the world, a very relevant question emerges for the editorial members of the Wikipedia community. Namely, why this event and the Virginia Tech shooting are considered "massacres" while other events (Fort Hood, etc.) are called "shootings?"
Sadly, it would appear to me that Wikipedia writers are making "body count" a determination when titling articles like this one. Who determines what level of body count gets the "massacre" title? Why? Is it objective? Unbiased? Seems not.
And it's not how it's referred to in the local and national media/press coverage. Nor is it how official documents from government/state accounts, panels and reports refer to these events. In the Virginia Tech case, the Governor's office refers to it simply as "April 16" or "April 16 incident" in the key findings. The University calls it a "Tragedy." The media in the state call it simply the "April 16th shooting" or "April 16, 2007" or "Tragedy." Attorneys for the victim's families, victim's families, and living victims refer to it as a "shooting" or "tragedy."
I'd like to see an explanation and recommendation regarding future titling for active shooter / mass killing articles. I think that it's important for Wikipedia to develop a clear taxonomy for these events. A taxonomy that also makes it easier to research all events would be helpful -- a single phrase or term that would rank higher in search engines and also support end-user phraseology is critical, I think. Calling one event a "massacre" and another a "shooting" isn't objective. Especially if based solely on body count.
In the case of this article, it appears to need a different title so that one could aggregate it with all the other coverage and reports from media, the state and government sources and courts.
( Possum4all ( talk) 15:27, 25 November 2009 (UTC))
If there are not objections (probably won't be), I'll take this to Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(events). ( Possum4all ( talk) 07:14, 26 November 2009 (UTC))
One of the on-going thrills that serial murderers get, is that their names will be mentioned when ever the incident itself is mentioned. Their names will be nominated and they will live on through notoriety.
The obvious way to take away this "thrill" from such killers, is to not mention their names in any online websites or at memorials etc. This is exactly what they want. They want their names to exist in infamy. I'm not even American and i have nothing to do with this massacre, but please try to keep the use of the murderers names to a minimum. I would be asking that their names be deleted entirely from this article, but i know that is asking too much - there will always be people who want to know their names.
Serial murderers such as this come from social situations where they crave notoriety. Through the article attributing the massacre to them, you are post-humously glorifying them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jusau ( talk • contribs)
Most stories and pictures say that one of the killers was at the foot of the out side steps. THAT IS NOT TRUE!!! Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold killed themselves in the library. If you don't believe me look up the pictures on youtube!!!! —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
66.211.127.123 (
talk)
04:47, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
"The entries contained blurbs about ways to escape to Mexico, hijacking an aircraft at Denver International Airport and crashing into a building in New York City" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.212.25.32 ( talk) 17:33, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
Just checking, seemed like someone tried to slide in a 9/11 or terrorism reference. ( 98.212.25.32 ( talk) 12:24, 16 February 2010 (UTC))
wow. she stood up for her beliefs in this tradgedy. EVERYONE check the song "Cassie" by Flyleaf. —Preceding unsigned comment added by His Baaby Girl ( talk • contribs) 22:53, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
I think it would be helpful to expand quite considerably the section which deals with bullying at columbine and to what extent it was or was not a motivating factor. Bullying has dominated discussion of columbine for years and a variety of differing opinions have emerged about it. I think this needs to be expanded on the wikipedia page. You could quote from those who recount their being bullied, those who studied the shooting in the early years and placed the blame almost solely on bullying and newer research which tries to downplay bullying. Finally a small discussion of the legacy of columbine with regard to bullying and popular culture. I don’t think it is unfair to say that columbine is as famous as it is in America in large part due to the issue of bullying. Thoughts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.106.89.48 ( talk) 20:24, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
{{editsemiprotected}} Eric Harris shot himself in the mouth, not in the head. His autopsy showed a bullet hole in the roof of his mouth
Soxfan2k4 ( talk) 17:43, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
I am currently reading David Cullen's book Columbine, which describes it as a failed terrorist attack rather than a simple school shooting. See this news story which quotes the book. Given the scope of the planning, the randomness of the targets, and the desire for mass casualties, I think a mention of terrorism is appropriate here. Someone recently added the terrorist attack category but was reverted here with the comment "Got a reliable source for that?" -- in fact, yes, there is. Cullen writes extensively about the motivations and planning of Harris, and he concludes that this was a botched terrorist act that became a school shooting when the bombs failed to go off. Cullen also debunks many myths about Harris, i.e. that he was a bullied outcast (he actually had many friends and if anything was known to be a bully himself at times).
I'm not going to jump in and edit right away because this is probably a sensitive issue. But I believe the terrorism claim is supportable. Thoughts? ATren ( talk) 17:34, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
{{editsemiprotected}} I would like to suggest that the following link be added to this page under external links:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96oF-iepPOs
This is a virtual tour (video) of the permanent Columbine Shooting Memorial in Littleton, Colorado. It provides a way for people, who otherwise might not be able to experience the memorial because of limitations in their ability to travel there, to get a glimpse of what the memorial is all about. It also serves to make the existence of the memorial more widely known. This memorial is an important, permanent record of the way in which the victims and those close to them were affected by the tragedy. It displays the commitment and depth of emotion that enveloped the community so deeply that a committee of local residents spent the time and resources necessary to ensure that the victims will be "Never Forgotten" by building the memorial. For this reason the memorial represents a cornerstone of the ongoing meaning of what happened at Columbine. Therefore, any media that expands "access" to the memorial -- even if only in a virtual manner -- is an important addition to the narrative of Columbine.
71.56.202.154 ( talk) 04:16, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Weren't the offenders relying on two improvised explisive devices, that they had set-up, as well as the shotgun, pistols etc.?-- Cymbelmineer ( talk) 00:44, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Why is the library picture of Klebold's and Harris's corpses not in this article? Lazy writing or another reason?
Doktordoris ( talk) 01:13, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
The word moral panic is really unacceptable as a word in the lede. The essential impression this gives off is an entirely inappropriate one, that people were either right or wrong about this event. Whilst clearly no sane person would condone the shootings, it appears that moral panic is condemnatory of people's impression of the degree to which certain cultures had an effect on this event. I propose something like "the shootings provoked intellectual moral and ethical qualms, related to the scholastic situation in America." This sounds less POV. Thoughts, anyone? Zucchinidreams ( talk) 15:21, 11 November 2010 (UTC).
{{edit semi-protected}}
110.224.250.194 (
talk)
17:19, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
{{edit semi-protected}} There should be a mention Micheal Moore's documentry "BOWLING FOR COLUMBINE". 110.224.250.194 ( talk) 17:25, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
> At this point, several witnesses heard Harris and Klebold comment on how they no longer found a thrill in shooting their victims. Klebold was quoted to have said "Maybe we should start knifing people, that might be more fun."
I can't find a source for this anywhere -- Googling it just brings up people quoting the article. Anyone know where it's from? It's a good quote, if true, as it really shows their mental state and motivation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.156.190.32 ( talk) 19:22, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
Can this link be added? http://columbinefamilyrequest.org/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.0.59.233 ( talk) 21:03, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
The first mention of Brooks Brown has a link that goes to the article for a jazz player of the same name. Link needs to be removed. 216.137.237.110 ( talk) 01:41, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
The following has been unsourced for more than a year, and i cannot at this moment find any refs to verify it. There are others but i will leave them for now Monkeymanman ( talk) 14:45, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
The bombs had enough explosive power to destroy the entire cafeteria and bring the library above crashing down citation needed, though they failed to detonate.
Hi everybody! I am an italian boy and I'd like to correct an information on the page, but I can't. Just a little thing to say, the uninjured students who left the library after the shootings were 27 (or 28), not 34. And Austin Eubanks was not shot in the head, but in the hand (he was treated in the hospital and released the same day). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.47.195.23 ( talk) 13:14, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Uh...at Columbine, I'd like to put "Klebold taunted her (Valeen Schnurr), saying 'God is gay', reloaded, then walked away." You know, basic facts. Get this, I met a library survivor!! Can you believe that?! AOCJedi ( talk) 11:15, 30 March 2011 (UTC) AOCJedi ( talk) 11:15, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Actually, it's written about the Columbine High School shootings from the 90s. When in the library, the gunman came and asked a couple of kids if they believe in God. I can't remember, but I believe he told them up front that if they said yes, he would kill them. Cassie Bernall said she did and so the kid shot her in the face. Look at the video on youtube called cassie by flyleaf. refactored by The Interior (Talk) 23:07, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, what do you guys mean they never asked them if they believed in God!!!? There were survivord that were asked!!! Not only is it a lie, it's disrespectful to the martyrs!!!!!!!! — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Don jaun triumphant (
talk •
contribs)
03:07, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I already wrote that in the discussion board. Some things should be corrected: -Austin Eubanks was shot "in the hand", not "in the head". Sources: http://evanlong.net/columbine-shooting/LibraryInjuredA-I.pdf , http://acolumbinesite.com/ -After the shootings in the library, 28 (not 34) uninjured students left the library (I wrote 27 but I was wrong) along with ELEVEN injured students and not ten. In fact, Brian Anderson was NOT rescued by SWAT team after 3.00 pm but he went outside with the others at approximately 11.40 am. The people rescued by swat were Patti Nielson, Lisa Kreutz and the three library staff. So you should include Brian Anderson among those who escaped immediately and remove his name from the paragraph "Suicide of the shooters". Source: http://evanlong.net/columbine-shooting/LibraryWitnesses.pdf , specifically the accounts of Peggy Dodd, Ryan Barrett and Jennifer Matthews. Thanks :)
95.247.227.22 ( talk) 21:50, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Speculation by a high-profile personality is still speculation. Besides, by the corresponding Wikipedia entry, Dr. Breggin's opinions are not mainstream within the profession. It would be better to insert references to clinical trials related to these drugs and if there is indeed medical or forensic (i.e scientific) evidence supporting the claims. Aldo L ( talk) 19:17, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
I completely agree. This is not main stream scientific or mediation professional has come to this conclusion. This remains a highly speculative statement. There is no scientific proof that antidepressants lead to violence. This belongs under a different wiki article. -- Jps213 ( talk) 23:06, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
Brooks Brown links to the wrong person. Just thought I should let someone know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.151.130.26 ( talk) 18:47, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
There's a picture of the shooters at the top of the page, but none of the victims anywhere. And people wonder why kids do this kind of crap. KevinLuna ( talk) 00:40, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
I'm Italian and forgive me if my english is not good enough. Anyway, I want to bring to your attention another time an incoherence showed in the section about the shooting in the library. At the beginning it says there were 52 students in the library and in the adjacent rooms; at the end, it says that 34 uninjured and 10 injured students fled immediately, except for Lisa Kreutz, Brian Anderson and Patrick Ireland who stayed in the library for a while. There must be something wrong, because if you count you have 34 uninjured students + 10 injured students + 10 dead students + 3 other students = 57 students. In my opinion, some sources are uncorrect; hope you will check them soon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.52.234.142 ( talk) 18:19, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
Oh, and there is also John Savage who left the library before the others, so the number is 58 and not 57. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.52.234.142 ( talk) 18:22, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
-- MrNdolo ( talk) 06:44, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the third paragraph under the Firearms sections the term "discharged" is misspelled and accompanied by a redundancy in the use of the word "fired." If you could please correct this it would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you! MrNdolo ( talk) 06:44, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Done —
UncleBubba (
T
@
C )
07:37, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Another small error concerns the ammunition the killers purchased at KMART. The entry states they purchased their "bullets" at KMART. Unless Klebold and Harris were manufacturing their own ammunition from components they had purchased(they didn't), the term "bullets" is incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.141.154.118 ( talk) 02:12, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Why is there no discussion of the parents? Has this been censored in an attempt to whitewash the story?
2.25.214.118 ( talk) 16:44, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
http://denver.rockymountainnews.com/shooting/report/columbinereport/pages/diagram_toc.htm
This has a list of reports from the JeffCo authorities WhisperToMe ( talk) 13:04, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
The article is excellent but misleading about the motives of the killers. Dave Cullen's extensive research and publications about the massacre, especially "The Depressive and the Psychopath," maintain that neither revenge nor bullying caused Eric Harris' and Dylan Klebold's actions. The young men wanted, according to Cullen, to commit a world-historical massacre on a huge scale [Cullen deplores the face that the killings are called a "school massacre"]. As Cullen notes, psychopaths lack elements in various parts of their brains that prohibit them from committing crimes. On this point, see the extensive information about psychopathy in the "Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders." MacLennan123 Maclennan123 ( talk) 00:39, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change Motive: Revenge for bullyine
Source: Columbine by Dave Cullen devotes some 400 pages to proving that the motive was not bullying. The perpetrators were actually pretty well liked at their school, and it has been proven that one perp was a psychopath, where the other was manic depressive. It was purely random; it was not meant to settle any scores. Lizzieshouv ( talk) 23:40, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
First, mattbuck, your response to my post is rude. Second, someone more knowledgeable about the massacre than I has been asked to furnish information about it from David Cullen's highly regarded book, "Columbine." I don't own a copy of the volume. The knowledgeable person does. MacLennan123 Maclennan123 ( talk) 22:56, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
I've noticed that the cause of death concerning Daniel Rohrbough are not consistent. In the main article it is stated that he was shot in the back while walking down a staircase. In the section about initial injuries and deaths however, it says Rohrbough was shot in the chest. SantiDaVincio ( talk) 16:34, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
Before I start, I shall add that what these people did was terrible, and I am in no way trying to excuse or lessen it, however I believe the word 'massacre' has partial connotations. Surely an encyclopaedia should stay as impartial as possible, and replace the title with 'Columbine High School Shootings'. Just a thought... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.54.127.74 ( talk) 17:52, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Why is this article still locked? There hasnt been any problems as most editors are fooling with the olypics right now, isn't this an old event? 184.98.143.25 ( talk) 09:09, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello
The list of weapons in the inset text box 'Columbine High School Massacre' is highly disturbing and should be removed.
I feel this strongly glorifies the nature of mass shootings such as Columbine, and whether this is the case or not, the user who wrote it gives the appearance that they are relishing in writing the list. It appears to be setting a bench mark for others to aspire to upstage, and it's difficult to interpret why such a list is necessary, or what good can come of it.
While naming the weapons in the main body of the article might be constructive, presenting the list of equipment in such a venerated way seems distasteful, and it should be removed.
Kind regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Latmiller80 ( talk • contribs) 15:13, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Grammar: In section "Immediate aftermath", there is a typo in the sentence "However, Lapp was unable to correctly point out the where Bernall was located, and was himself closer to Schnurr during the shootings."
The word "the" is unnecessary; please delete it so the sentence reads: "However, Lapp was unable to correctly point out where Bernall was located, and was himself closer to Schnurr during the shootings." AMU10 ( talk) 22:06, 14 December 2012 (UTC)