Would our mass murder rate be even half what it is if Columbine hadn't happened? (case, murders)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Even 15 years later, you still hear about people copycatting Columbine on a semi regular basis, like the recent shootings in Vegas and Seattle and the attempted one in Minnesota. Not only that, you never hear about people copycatting Virginia Tech, or Isla Vista, or (thank God) Sandy Hook. I think it's safe to assume that pretty much every single mass shooting/attempted mass shooting in the past 15 years was inspired by Columbine. At this point, those boys probably have had more followers than Jim Jones. Would it happen as much, or at all, if that first act had never occurred? Did Charles Whitman or the "going postal" phenomenon ever kick off a wave of copycats like this? Has there EVER been a crime of any kind with far reaching repercussions like this one?
A doesn't lead to B in this case. I mean, the first mass shooting in this country was likely the Boston Massacre in 1770. Are all shootings copycats of that? Of course not.
Columbine wasn't the first school shooting, it was just the most.. successful and publicized, for lack of better terms.
School shootings in the United States have been documented since the 1850s (I don't count the murders by the Lenape Indians during the French and Indian War, as I consider that a wartime atrocity instead of a school shooting). So yes, school shootings would still occur because they occured on a semi regular basis almost 150 years before Columbine. There are several European school shooting that predate the Columbine shooting and have a higher body count.
In the aftermath of the mountie deaths in Moncton this past week, some commentator pointed out that mass shootings happen in "clusters" nowadays. Not in a random pattern. Copycats are, unfortunately, a big part of the problem.
Did Charles Whitman or the "going postal" phenomenon ever kick off a wave of copycats like this?
As most respondents have pointed out, these kinds of incidents are nothing new. What is different now is the coverage of such events. At the time I graduated from high school in 1973, the only perpetrators of bizarre, big-news, random murders I had ever heard of included one serial killer (the Boston Strangler), two guys who did one-time mass killings (Whitman and Richard Speck), and the Manson family. With no cable television, and half an hour of nightly national news on the three major over-the-air networks that existed at the time, news reporters had to be a lot more selective about the stories they covered, and how much coverage they gave each story. The public just didn't have all the awful details of these kinds of stories pounded into their heads any time they turned on television or glanced at a newspaper.
Now, each time such an incident occurs, several 24-hour news channels on cable will provide nonstop coverage and minute analysis around the clock. This kind of analysis, by several channels with varying political leanings, has its uses when it comes to the opportunity to thoroughly understand a variety of big news events, but the kind of coverage these mass killings get does cause the risk of copycatting. We may actually already be experiencing, or be at risk of seeing in the future, a chilling fad of mass killings, as unstable people get the idea that this is the accepted (among those on the psychological edge) way to gain their moment in the limelight.
With the reality of today's saturated news coverage, and the effect this may have on those just about to snap, if it had not been Columbine they looked back to as the big one they wanted to emulate, it would be another mass killing. So I'd have to guess that this would still be happening if Columbine had never occurred.
I think the publication and "fame" it brought the shooters as certainly a downfall for public media. I was a sophmore in high school myself when Columbine happened, to this day I can remember more about the shooters than I can about any victim. The most recent shooting with the fellow in CA got more publicity than any of the two girls and guy that he killed. We lift these murderers to a certain level of fame that people crave. For some it doesn't matter how the fame s attained , just that it is, and that is the root problem with a handful of these crimes.
Mass shooting are somewhat copycat indeed, down to the obligatory useless "costume" of camaflauge outfits, Rambo knife strapped to the side, and semi-automatic weapons of a certain model (usually misidentified by the press as "assault rifles", which are never used). They get huge coverage in the media because it feeds on fears, stereotypes, and for political reasons.
However, in terms of crime rate, these mass shootings are statistically insignificant...since the same number of people get murdered every single day in disadvantaged neighborhoods in huge cities such as Chicago and Detroit.
What is strange is NRA gets put on trial but the school and cops that herded all the students into a locked room and left them there unguarded for the awaiting turkey shoot -- they get a medal
Columbine wasn't the first school shooting, it was just the most.. successful and publicized, for lack of better terms.
School shootings are not unique at all. They've been happening for a very long time.
But as you point out, Columbine was the most publicized, and that is exactly what led to all the copycatting if you ask me. Why did Harris and Klebold's act lead to so much imitation? Because it has been discussed, written about, taught in classes and had movies made about it for YEARS. When you treat a crime that way, it makes the criminals look interesting and important, especially to unbalanced people who are less capable of making good decisions than others and who are looking anywhere at all for a way to feel important.
Why did the Thurston High shooting spawn no copycat crimes? Because you've never heard much about it. Name three books written about Kip Kinkel. Name one.
Why did the Thurston High shooting spawn no copycat crimes? Because you've never heard much about it. Name three books written about Kip Kinkel. Name one.
Without looking it up.. I'm thinking Kip Kinkel killed his parents then went to an elementary school and hid in the woods taking shots at people? Arkansas?
or was he the one in Pearl, MS?
Time to look it up to remember.. Oh.. Swing and a miss.. He was Oregon. Pearl, MS was Luke Woodham.. The other one I was thinking of was Jonesboro, Arkansas, and that was done by Mitchell Johnson and Andrew Golden.
Now.. What's the difference between all three of those and Columbine?
The three I mentioned above, which.. I couldn't tell you the specifics about so far as names of perps, exactly the scenario that happened, etc.. All three of those, the killers lived. Columbine.. I can tell you alot of specifics. perhaps because of the publicity, but..
Perhaps, and I've said before, I disagree with the term 'copycat' on this.. But.. One of the reasons the above three got less publicity is that we had a killer or killers in custody, and there aren't necessarily tons of unanswered questions. When the shooters die, as was the case with Columbine.. There's rumors, speculation, innuendo that the killers can't answer. And the media LOVES rumor, speculation and innuendo.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
