What will it take to end school violence?

[LSN80]

http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/09/justice/texas-college-stabbing/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

I guess it shouldn't surprise me anymore, but it always rocks me to the core when I go to CNN and see another incident of violence on a college campus. Despite the technology and preventative measures that most schools employ, incidents of serious violence on college campuses have doubled from the 1980's to today, according to a recent study done by the FBI. Today's stabbing of 14 students at Lone Star College in Houston is just the latest in a long line of recent incidents.

A suspect has been detained, although police are unsure whether it was one person acting alone, or if the suspect had a partner. A 911 call was placed around 12 Eastern time noting that a "male was on the lose stabbing people." Of the 14 stabbed, 4 were flown out in hospitals, and 2 are being listed in critical condition. A spokesman for the local sheriff's department said the following regarding the incident:

"It's possible other people were running away, and were injured that way. The four flown to a hospital were in a dire enough situation that they were taken out on helicopters. I do believe the confrontation was limited to a few (classrooms) or just one classroom -- not anybody roaming around and getting into a large number of areas.

I started college in 2000 and finished the last of my degrees in 2008. Virginia Tech had happened during that time frame, but to me, it almost seemed like an isolated incident rather then a trend. I never felt fear or the possibility of "this could happen here", even after the VT shootings. Call me naive, perhaps, because since that time, there have been an astounding 83 incidents of serious violence(severe aggravated assault to murder) across campuses in the United States. I didn't fear it when I was in school, but were I attending today, I just might well.

I know many of the people on the forums here are college students, so I'm curious as to your reactions more then anyone else's when it comes to these incidents. Most of these incidents, as was Virginia Tech's, and appears to be today, are those of targeted violence. These are incidents where the attacker knows or picks his victim(s) ahead of time, and the rest who are injured or killed are simply collateral damage. The fact that the violence was confined to a few classrooms and not just someone running around stabbing people appears to confirm that.

Schools have taken more preventative measures then ever in today's day and age, and yet, violence continues to be on the increase. Why do you believe that is?

As a student today(or if you were a student), do you fear the possibility of violence occurring on your campus(or would you if you were a student)?

Even at the cost to the University/College, I believe that any preventative measure that can be attempted, should be. If that means psychological evaluations for students entering college or for those with grades below a certain GPA(a big trigger), so be it. The increase in violence I noted doesn't include spontaneous incidents such as fights, they're premeditated attacks.


Are there measures not being taken by schools that should be that could lead to a decrease in violence?

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Violence is just woven into part of what makes humans...well....human. In spite of all our proclamations as to how far we've come in terms of technology, civilization and evolving social norms; we really haven't changed all that much in terms of how things are done.

Any history book is filled with examples of how humans have generally used violence to shape the world in one way or another. Whether it be the ancient empires of Rome, Persia, medieval Europe, feudal Japan & China, etc. up through the more modern age, extreme violence & brutality is a tool we use for various means.

It's become all the more unsettling when you hear about all these violent acts taking place in schools or on college campuses. While there's probably no such thing as a perfect solution to such a problem, the closest I can think of would be to, essentially, transform school grounds into something resembling an armed camp in which there are large numbers of armed guards. Even then, how often would the required expenditure of funds, which would be considerable, be justified? Much of the time, nothing would happen. So, of course, schools won't be taking such extreme and expensive action.

If I had to point to the biggest problem when it comes to violence in schools, I'd say it has to do with both major flaws in the system and the flaws of people themselves. Far, far too often, kids who are violently disturbed slip through the cracks and are time bombs waiting to go off. Some of it is due to teachers who are unable or unwilling to take notice of warning signs or parents themselves. It's very often that parents refuse to accept reality when it comes to their troubled children because they ultimately believe its a reflection of their own failure. A great many people hate to admit that they're wrong about something, even admitting it to themselves. They take the focus and ultimately put it on themselves, refusing to believe that something disturbing is wrong with their kids.

Then, there are those who have serious personality issues but are able to generally hide them from everyone. These are the ones you generally hear about after they've already done something terrible. By then, all that can be done is to pick up the pieces and wonder why they did whatever it was they did.

Life is kind of a crap shoot. You just have to roll the dice, hope for the best and see what happens. There's simply no simple solution to this problem, there never really has been. On top of that, it seems that every potential solution has as many possible drawbacks & negatives as the positives. With that come all the various experts giving their opinions, then you have the politicians taking sides with one solution or the other in hopes of ultimately gaining an advantage over political rivals. As a result, all we usually get is little more than arguments that do nothing other than burn people out, arguments which usually wind up solving nothing, the talk soon starts to die down and the whole thing starts all over again eventually when another tragedy takes place that garners national media attention.

 

[Cena's Little Helper]

Schools have taken more preventative measures then ever in today's day and age, and yet, violence continues to be on the increase.

I've quoted and bolded this sentence because it lies at the heart of the matter. If anything, institutions of higher education do MUCH LESS than what they used to. Sure, proponents of the contemporary American campus will tell you that the doctrine of in loco parentis that many college and universities used to adhere to did nothing more than allow college/university officials to police the social lives of students, but it did much more than that. Theoretically and practically speaking, colleges and universities are a HOTSPOT for violent acts such as these since they're not only institutions of learning but they're also usually the context in which an American kid transition into early adulthood. Unfortunately, colleges and universities refuse to accept this latter reality.

For example, let's take a student with mental health problems. American colleges and universities nowadays want fuck-all to do with these types of kids when they're at their lowest points (this position preceded the VT massacre, by the way, although it could be argued that it may have had something to with the occurrence of the massacre). They usually either recommend that they take a leave of absence to sort themselves out at home or that they should look for alternate forms of education. Instead of stigmatizing such people, why doesn't the school vigiliantly manage them and gradually give them more and more leeway until they're able to effectively cope with the pressures of college by themselves?

I'm glad that I didn't have curfew or that I could fuck whomever I wanted in my dorm room whenever I wanted while I was at school, but American colleges and universities essentially threw the baby out with the bathwater when they did away with in loco parentis. Why not find a middle ground that allows them to oversee those who really need oversight to flourish?

 

[Mustang Sally]

Whatever steps we take to try and protect....well, everyplace....there will be gaps, and the nut cases who perpetrate these atrocities will find their way in. The tiny school in Newtown CT where the tragedy occurred is a few miles from my home; I visited and counted 8 points of entry, not to mention any unlocked windows. That's at this one small school. Larger schools have many more entry points.

What are the authorities supposed to do? Post armed guards at every point? Every day? Forever? .....If I asked this in a courtroom, the opposing attorney would address the court: "Ladies and gentleman of the jury.....she doesn't care about children!" and the jury members would recoil in horror, as would the nation as a whole. But it isn't a case of not caring; it's a matter of asking what realistically can be done? Even turning schools and colleges into military bases isn't going to keep out the occasional nut who's bound and determined to wreak havoc.

To further the problem, we are a society that "blames." Even if an incident was just an unfortunate combination of events, we have to find someone to blame. Courts, police and insurance companies lead the way on this. In the Newtown shooting, the license to sell weapons was rescinded from the gun store that sold Adam Lanza's mother the gun used in the massacre. Get it? She bought the damn thing a few years ago.....and her son had nothing to do with it.....yet authorities lifted the store's license under the premise that the store "should have known" what might happen. It was scapegoating, plain and simple. It was an effort by the authorities to show they're "doing something" about violence, although it didn't solve a thing. Since Mrs. Lanza did nothing wrong (except manage to get killed herself) the store is wondering what they did to deserve this punishment. But it's obvious: they were someone to blame, someone to satisfy the public that measures were being taken to curb the violence. We'll sacrifice the blameless to show that we're taking definitive action: damn right we will.

As horrific as these incidents are, they are few in number. Far more students will be killed in car accidents or in a hundred other ways than will lose their lives through high-profile tragedies like school shootings.

What can we do? We do what can realistically be done.....but stop looking for scapegoats around every corner. If society can find a way to identify the lunatics before they act, that's great. But how to get guns out of the hands of the shooters (Lanza, in this case) when the guns were, in fact, not purchased by the shooter, is something you'll have to explain to me because I sure as hell don't know the answer. Connecticut just enacted a massive reform plan for purchasing guns, one that wouldn't have had any effect in stopping Adam Lanza. Still, this is seen as doing something, and the NRA brigade is having a shitfit over it.

Bad things happen. Someday in the future, maybe every human being will have a capsule injected into his/her body at birth.....one which causes them to die on the spot they're standing if they're about to do something violent. Yeah, the civil rights people will howl over that, but short of it, there will always be nutbars who's purpose is to destroy.

 

[Mustang Sally]

In the Newtown shooting, the license to sell weapons was rescinded from the gun store that sold Adam Lanza's mother the gun used in the massacre. Get it? She bought the damn thing a few years ago.....and her son had nothing to do with it.....yet authorities lifted the store's license under the premise that the store "should have known" what might happen. It was scapegoating, plain and simple. It was an effort by the authorities to show they're "doing something" about violence, although it didn't solve a thing.

While it's obnoxious to quote my own entry, this is a follow-up to the last post.

To me, it illustrates the policy of scapegoating; an attempt by authorities to show: "Look at all we're doing to protect you." Meanwhile, in reading the article, I'm wondering how the authorities managed to ignore "hundreds of violations" that came before they finally swooped in to lift the store's license. If the violations were so serious, why didn't authorities act before? And if they aren't serious, why did they act now?

In the end, it's all for nothing, anyway. If a lunatic like Adam Lanza intended to procure a gun, he would have found a way to do it.....gun shop or not.