Hint: they are more likely to be bullies themselves, as their aggression is raising prior the attack.
> 76% posted disturbing content of guns and threatening messages.
This is them provably being bullies as judged by their own social media accounts.
> 60% reported being bullied in-person or online
This is them claiming to be bullied at some point in their life. Elliot Roger claimed to be rejected by women while what happened was that he self isolated entirely for whole his life. This was similar to other guys - a person with track record of violence or threats feeling bullied by other people basically existing.
Compare the two claims, really.
edit: The Secret, not The Present
He socialized basically exclusively online before going to the college.
Really, show me some that were primary bullying victims string back.
Adam Lanza and Elliot Rogers had both mental health issues and family that allowed them to isolate themselves. Adam Lanza mom was reported to be afraid of him before the end and basically in abusive relationship with him (where he was the abusers) before being killed. In case of Nikolas Jacob Cruz, you see volatile boy threatening and attacking others including a girl that school assigned to tutor him. She stopped because he was bullying her. He WAS ostracized and lonely as a results ... but that is the kids avoiding the bully who mistreats them rather then him anything else. He had host of mental health problems for sure too.
I guess you are writing that as some unreasonable position reduction ad absurdum?
But people breaking down from not reaching some zero level goal is a problem. It is some sort of shooting the messenger. Black and white etc.
No guns were taken away and no-one said anything about no action necessary.
The article explains in great lengths the various actions that were taken with the victim, the bullies and the classmates.
The article also explained, that the guns were put behind a lock -- they were not taken away. Get over yourself.
If you think you did, would you mind pointing out what made you think I am pro-gun?
I grew up at a time where school principals had monopoly on violence at schools. I think it’s an improvement that we don’t accept school staff to beat kids anymore. But, whose brilliant idea was to accept that students will just bully each other and nothing can be done? I see many comments on this thread that just accept it. Why not accept all kinds of violence everywhere then? It’s impossible to prevent it so just let go of trying at all.
Society has rules. Every institution has an authority figure. There are virtually no spaces without rules or an authority. Enforcement usually happens at varying degrees, from warnings to punishments. Back in the day beatings were warnings, punishments were suspensions and expulsions. We don’t want beatings, and if we are not resourced enough to rehabilitate, we have to aggressively suspend and expel.
It really isn’t rocket science. We don’t owe bullies anything.