columbine events


My Top Ten School Revenge/School Shooting Movies

Honorable Mentions: State’s Evidence (2006)  and White Rabbit (2013)

10. The Life Before Her Eyes (2007)

“A woman’s survivor’s guilt from a Columbine-like event twenty years ago causes her present-day idyllic life to fall apart.“

9. Home Room (2002)

“A high school shooting has repercussions on the town and students.“

8. Duck! The Carbine High Massacre (1999)

“Derwin and Derick, Neo-Nazis, plan to commit a school shooting and kill themselves after a sick joke by the school jocks.“

7. The Dirties (2013)

“Two best friends are filming a comedy about getting revenge on the bullies at their high school. One of them isn’t joking.“

6. Klass (2007)

“An average guy of an Estonian high-school decides to defend his bullied classmate. This starts war between him and the informal leader of the class. As teenagers’ honour is a touchy thing, everything ends in bloodshed.“

5. We Need To Talk About Kevin (2011)

“Kevin’s mother struggles to love her strange child, despite the increasingly vicious things he says and does as he grows up. But Kevin is just getting started, and his final act will be beyond anything anyone imagined.“

4. Elephant (2003)

“Several ordinary high school students go through their daily routine as two others prepare for something more malevolent.“

3. Zero Day (2003)

“Two troubled adolescents chronicle the events that ultimately lead up to a terrifying assault on their school.“

2. April Showers (2009)

“A look inside a tragedy through the eyes of a survivor. Based on actual events, April Showers is about picking up the pieces in the direct aftermath of school violence.“

1. Bang Bang You’re Dead (2002)

“Trevor is a troubled high school student, thanks to the effects of bullying. This is the story of his fight to break free.“

You know what pisses me off?

I understand Columbine was a tragic event, but it will always anger me when I think about how JeffCo destroyed all the evidence from 04/20/1999. Those are pieces of history. At least donate it to a museum or something. I mean doesn’t someone out there still have Bundys car or something????

Event - the Columbine High School massacre
  • date: 20 April, 1999
  • time beginning: 11:19
  • time ending: 12:08
  • fatalities: 15 people
  • injuries: 24 people (21 were shot)
  • attackers: Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold


Saturn square Neptune:

Neptune is considered to be the planet of delusion, and Saturn is negative thoughts. The two attackers, mostly Eric Harris, had mental problems, and both had an obsession with a movie where someone is considered to be superior to the human race, and they were bullied by the jocks of the high school. On the date of the event, they decided their plan to rule the world would start - going to target the school first. They thought they were superior to everyone, and they planned to blow up the canteen with bombs they created. Luckily, the bombs did not go off. They did have this god complex, where they considered themselves to be better to everyone else - they stated they were after jocks - identified with white baseball caps - but they did not primarily impact jocks, but rather people who had nothing to really do with them. A lot of the injuries took place in the library - unfortunately where a LOT of people were located at the time. By the end of their massacre, they killed themselves in the library.

Neptune sextile Pluto:

Neptune is, as I have stated, considered the delusional planet, and Pluto is the darker, more controversial planet. Sextiles are positive aspects, but with these two planets going hand in hand, the aspect can be just as bad as a square. Before the event, both of the attackers were mentally ill, and both of them were bullied for looking different - trench coats. However, Eric Harris was reported several times for sending death threats to a girl that also attended the high school. This was likely building up into the massacre, as they were also people who enjoyed shooting and making videos with friends where they would kill them at the end, or were implying an inanimate object was a human. At the time of the event, Jupiter also trined Pluto - this would have made the impact of Pluto significantly larger.

Other interesting factors:

none of the houses were intercepted. I also compared this to other events, and two of them were the same - no intercepting houses.

Retrograding planets = Pluto and Mars. When you compare the two, you can conclude that both of these aspects could also have made the impact just that much worse - more violent and immoral.

Another thing I did find was that all of the events I analysed to do with terrorist attacks and massacres like this one is that the sign of the ascendant and the midheaven were both in the same modality. This may be a coincidence, but I still find this interesting. In this situation, the signs were Cancer ascendant in the 2nd decan (Scorpio influenced to an extent) and Aries midheaven in the 1st decan (in a way pure Arian energy). In another, more recent event I will not name, the rising sign was 1st decan aries (pure arian energy) and Capricorn midheaven ,1st decan (pure Capricornian energy).

Mars dominant (15%).

A T-square was also seen in the chart, between Neptune, mars and Saturn. This would have joined the trio of planets together to make an event as terrible as this take place (delusion, destruction and negative energy).

anonymous asked:

No hate, I'm just genuinely curious. I'm very interested in the Columbine events and I do feel empathy for the boys... but I sort of feel as though perhaps shipping them adorably could be disrespectful to those they murdered. That's only my opinion and I know everybody is different, and entitled to that, so I'm curious about your opinion, and how you see it and what you think!

sit down n get ready folks cause here’s a long one.

here’s my opinion:
dylric has nothing to do with the victims unless people choose to make it have something to do with the victims, therefore, it’s not disrespectful to the victims, but it IS disrespectful to eric and dylan. keep in mind that the boys murdered innocent children in cold blood, so do they actually deserve any respect? no, absolutely not. they were racist fuckwads. it makes sense to not give them respect even if we relate to their feelings. nothing changes the fact that they are mass murderers, even if people think they’re attractive and sympathize them, blah blah blah, etc.

see, if someone were to write a dylric fic DIRECTLY including any victims, that would be not only disgusting but disrespectful to the victim(s) in general, and shame on the person who wrote that fic ‘cause- do i really need to explain?

now, given that dylric is already kinda gross on it’s own, i don’t exactly full on ship it and i don’t think the boys were actually dating, or gay, or anything for that matter, ‘cause they weren’t. i joke about the idea that they were, but no matter what i say, they were not a thing. if they were, dylan most likely wouldn’t have went to prom with robyn and would’ve went with eric instead or something, and dylan also wouldn’t have groaned about his “halcyon girl”. another reason is the fact that eric kept going on and on about trying to get laid before the massacre, and the way he talked about girls in his journal. assuming the boys were actually gay for each other is inaccurate and i think we all know that, even the dylric shippers.

now you may ask,
wHy dO yOu wRiTe dYlrIc fIcS iF yOu tHiNk iT’s dIsGuStInG?!?!!
‘cause i want to, nothing more, nothing less. i’ve studied columbine for a lil while now and for some reason writing dylric keeps me entertained and helps me learn more about the boys and the case at the same time, plus it helps me improve my own writing by reading things other dylric accounts write. it’s not because i actually think the boys were gay.

ps, thank you anon for not coming off as a total asshole about the subject like most people would. made my day a lil better, and i hope this helped you understand.

anonymous asked:

If columbine happened today, it would not have made such a big impact as t did in 1999

strongly agree | agree| neutral | disagree | strongly disagree

Part of why the world is numbed out by all these mass shootings is in part due to Columbine Effect.   Had Columbine not happened in the late nineties  inspiring others to commit mass shootings then an event like this happening today would likely not have the potential to spark a big impact.   But since Columbine happened two decades ago, and all other terrorist-like events have occurred since that time, people are now conditioned to it and the media does not treat the event as quite the spectacle that was Columbine. There can be no similar big impact like Columbine since everything thereafter is the continue ‘fall out’ or domino effect from it.. Even with large impact events having occurred since: Virginia Tech, Sandy Hook, Aurora Theater, Boston Bombing, the Orlando night club and now the Manchester Bombing.  It is all just ‘more of the same’.  Columbine was a one time event, a time in history that has come and gone. It was the end to a time of innocence in which the world had a rude awakening and it shook the foundation of our sense of security in public places that always seemed to be ‘safe’ in the past.  We are all acutely aware now that there really is no public places that can be assumed to have an illusion of safety. No longer our institutions of learning, where even our own student youth are suspect, even our places of entertainment where our guard should be down as we’re supposed to be relaxing and enjoying in the moment. The enemy is no longer only just ‘somewhere else’ but it’s now about coming to terms with the fact that the enemy is within, WE our the enemy, and confronting why that is now A Thing, a regular occurrence in today’s self destructing society since profound events like Columbine and 9/11 too.. 

You see this photo? This is the perpetrator and gunmen of America’s latest school shooting. This is how bad it has gotten. Look at this child. People want to say its disrespectful and inappropriate to talk about Columbine and events like it, they want to put it under the rug and move on.

The longer you look away, the larger the fire grows my friends. Mental illness is not a problem that will treat its self and demonizing those they actively try to understand these events makes you part of the issue.
Columbine Shooter's Mother: I Carry Him 'Everywhere I Go, Always'
Sue Klebold says she wishes she'd asked her son Dylan "the kinds of questions that would've encouraged him to open up." Published 17 years after the massacre, her new memoir is A Mother's Reckoning.

From NPR: 

In her new memoir, A Mother’s Reckoning, Sue describes the guilt, despair, shame and confusion that have plagued her in the 17 years since the Columbine massacre. She hopes that her book will honor the memories of the people her son killed, and perhaps help other parents whose children may be struggling with mental health issues. (All of the author revenues from the book, minus expenses, will be donated to research and charitable foundations focusing on mental health issues).

Anyone interested in reading this memoir for Term 2? You can also read or listen to this news report and use as a current event for extra credit. 

Perhaps the most frustrating thing about investigating the events of Columbine and the minds and motives of Eric and Dylan is that the material available perfectly reflects the exact culture which cultivated and facilitated their decision to embark upon “NBK” as they called it.

The two most prevailing cries from every corner are “Why didn’t anybody see it coming?”, and “What could have brought them to do this?”. The inability of supposed experts, journalists and investigators to understand the latter question despite the mounds of material available on Eric/Dylan’s lives, activities, and inner thoughts, provides the perfect answer to the former question. After all this, with so much evidence available you still are too blinded by your own agendas to understand their motives, just as everybody at the time was too blinded by their own agendas to notice Eric and Dylan’s plans.

I have yet to find a single documentary, news report, article, expert testimony, or investigation, (including the psych reports from the FBI) which actually seems to have made an honest and earnest attempt to understand the matter. Every one of these sources starts with an agenda. The media are peddling entertainment, with shock, appeals to emotion, and drumming up fear/controversy to drive ratings. The “experts” are con-artists latching onto a phenomena which is topical and while not widely understood is widely feared (Not unlike the touring “experts” on witchcraft/satanism who make a living by giving seminars to police, schools and churches), their agenda is to offer easy answers and the illusion of power over the object of fear. The FBI investigation was the phoned in, half arsed work of bureaucrats, their only priority was to cross the t’s and dot the i’s on the paperwork, and convince the men upstairs that the situation was under control by showing them how well they could document evidence, the investigation of the minds and motives of Eric and Dylan were perfunctory at best. The independent investigations inevitably foisted responsibility on whatever societal ill concerned the organization in question (Violence in music, film or video games, easy access to firearms, not enough firearms, etc).

The culture of social elitism, conformity, cultivated inadequacy, and bullying is ignored, just as it was at Columbine.The boys are ignored or disparaged by all but a quiet few who have made the genuine attempt to connect with and understand them as human beings, just as it was at Columbine.

If I had a single point, it is this: It is easy to dehumanize people, whether they are the weirdo in your class or a murderer, but the moment you strip them of their humanity you also remove your ability to understand them. To understand that the same emotions and thoughts which populate their minds can populate the minds of anybody, as you are all products of the same culture. If they are an inhuman monster then no reflection on the responsibility of the culture you take part in maintaining is required, you can rest assured that their actions stem from their inherent evil, something have no hand in.

And while comforting to you, that conclusion does nothing to help avert future tragedies,

anonymous asked:

Do you believe in spirits? If so, do you think CHS is haunted?

Yes. But, I wouldn’t quite call Columbine ‘haunted’ per say.    I feel as though there is residual energy in the backdrop of that intense event that took place and that the energy is still there but the daily hustle and bustle of positive activity that goes on regularly there with the flux of students impresses over it and sort of overrides the historical imprint of that event.  It’s like when you cut a tree and you see all the rings in the fabric of the trunk that represent an event of time and growth. ‘The Columbine Event’ would still be a huge, thick dark ring in the fabric of the fiber of that schools being as well as the grounds. However, I don’t feel that earth bound ghosts of the victims or the boys are stuck or damned haunting the school  - though crossed-over spirits can certainly visit when/if they choose to do so. Mind you..I don’t think the boys, or the victims for that matter, want to be in those environs at all.  I know some have mentioned haunting experiences from Eric and Dylan on here specifically of the two messing with locker doors and slamming them, etc.  All I can say to is that level of haunting activity was certainly not my impressions during the time I was  However, I do believe the sort of experience that Devon’s had in 2000 with Dylan in the theater is the type of thing that would happen once in a blue moon. Obviously that is an intelligent spirit visit in which Dylan was responding to his friend Devon. 

Columbine in Academic Literature

I have access to many academic journal databases through my university, here are some papers from various psychology and sociology journals which examine Eric/Dylan and the events at Columbine. I don’t always agree with the conclusions of the authors, but it makes for interesting reading.

These are all I have time to put up at the moment, but as I find more I’ll make subsequent posts.

  • “In this article, the author attempts to provide a rationale that supports the position that the violence at Columbine was driven by the attempt of Harris and Klebold to choose violence, suicide, and death as an alternative to the pain and confusion caused by a lack of meaning and a state of identity confusion. The lack of meaning was equated with failed attempts to establish a consistent set of personal values and to resolve questions of self-acceptance and identity.”
  • “This essay attempts to place the shootings… and the initial media response, in some kind of historical perspective. … Moral panic assumptions that media violence or the availability of guns are the immediate causes of shootings in middle‐class, white American suburbs are questioned. The institutionalization of adolescence in American high schools is proposed as a more direct predpitant, while new evidence suggests that the trigger for the Littleton shootings should be located in harassment of outcast students ...“
  • This paper explores narcissistic rage, particularly stemming from the vulnerable form of narcissism as opposed to the grandiose form of narcissism. It doesn’t focus specifically on Columbine, but quotes and takes direction from the writings of Dylan Klebold.
  • This paper looks at the culture of hegemonic masculinity in the US and how it relates to aggrieved entitlement and suicide through mass violence in the form of school shootings. The columbine shootings are one of the three incidences the paper examines.

I don’t think he’s wrong. Although some of the terms are not necessarily equal, gamers are being treated by certain parts of the media really does remind me how some people are treated after certain crises. Muslims and Middle Eastern people after 9/11, gamers after Columbine, etc. Events such as those were horrible and monstrous acts of violence, but the insistence to portray an entire group of people as “evil” or “terrorists” is, in my opinion, extremely unfair and disproportionate. 

I’ve seen people, such as Sam Biddle, act no better than your schoolyard bully, treating gamers as “no-life nerds” who “deserve to be bullied.” As someone that had been bullied constantly while I was younger, I don’t want to put up with this shit anymore. As someone that had been bullied most of my school life, I don’t want anyone to put up with this shit anymore.

What Mass Killers Want

Rampage shooters cast themselves as the stars of a public spectacle. They crave the media spotlight – which is why we should do everything possible to deprive them of it.

9 Nov 2013 | Ari N. Schulman, Wall Street Journal

Public shootings have become a familiar American spectacle in recent years, and two more occurred in recent weeks … Someday soon, we are likely to awake to news of yet another rampage shooting, one that perhaps will rival the infamous events at Columbine, Virginia Tech, Aurora and Newtown. As unknowable as the when and who and where of the next tragedy is the certainty that there will be one, and of what will follow: the tense initial hours as we watch the body count tick higher. The ashen-faced news anchors with pictures of stricken families. Stories and images of the fatal minutes. Reports on the shooter’s journals and manifestos. A weary speech from the president. Debates about guns and mental health.

Underlying this grim national ritual, and the pronouncements from all quarters that mass shootings are “senseless,” is the disturbing feeling that these acts are beyond our understanding. As the criminologist and forensic psychiatrist Park Dietz writes, we talk about these acts as if they arise from “alien forces.” So we focus our efforts on thwarting future mass shooters – catching them through the mental health system, or making it harder for them to get guns, or making it easier for others with guns to stop them. Some enterprising minds have even suggested that schoolchildren be trained to gang-rush them.

But the criminologists and psychologists who study mass killings aren’t so baffled. While news reports often define mass shootings solely by body count, researchers instead look at qualitative traits like the psychology of the perpetrator, his relationship to the victims and how he carries out the crime. Building on Dr. Dietz’s seminal 1986 article on mass murder in the Bulletin of the New York Academ of Medicine, researchers have used these characteristics to develop a taxonomy of mass killing outside of warfare. The major types include serial, cult, gang, family and spree killings.

But it is another kind that dominates the headlines: the massacre or rampage shooting. Whereas the other types of mass murder usually occur in multiple incidents or in a concealed manner, massacres occur as a single, typically very public event.

In 2004, Paul E. Mullen, then the director of the Victorian Institute of Forensic Mental Health, wrote an illuminating study based in part on his personal interviews with rampage shooters who survived their acts. He notes that rampage shootings tend to follow a definite pattern, what he called a “program for murder and suicide.” The shooter, almost always a young man, enters an area filled with many people. He is heavily armed. He may begin by targeting a few specific victims, but he soon moves on to “indiscriminate killings where just killing people is the prime aim.” He typically has no plan for escape and kills himself or is killed by the police.

Among the more pervasive myths about massacre killers is that they simply snap. In fact, Dr. Mullen and others have found that rampage shooters usually plan their actions meticulously, even ritualistically, for months in advance. Like serial killers, massacre killers usually don’t have impulsive personalities; they tend to be obsessive and highly organized. Survivors typically report that the shooters appear to be not enraged but cold and calculating.

Central to the massacre pattern is the killer’s self-styling. James L. Knoll IV, the director of forensic psychiatry at the State University of New York’s Upstate Medical University, describes in a 2010 article how perpetrators often model themselves after commandos, wearing military dress or black clothing. Investigators usually find they had a lifelong fascination with weaponry, warfare, and military and survivalist culture. Their methodical comportment during the act is part of this styling.

Contrary to the common assumption, writes author Michael D. Kelleher in his 1997 book “Flash Point,” mass killers are “rarely insane, in either the legal or ethical senses of the term,” and they don’t typically have “debilitating delusions and insidious psychotic fantasies of the paranoid schizophrenic.” Dr. Knoll affirms that “the literature does not reflect a strong link with serious mental illness.”

Instead, massacre killers are typically marked by what are considered personality disorders: grandiosity, resentment, self-righteousness, a sense of entitlement. They become, says Dr. Knoll, “’collectors of injustice’ who nurture their wounded narcissism.” To preserve their egos, they exaggerate past humiliations and externalize their anger, blaming others for their frustrations. They develop violent fantasies of heroic revenge against an uncaring world.

Whereas serial killers are driven by long-standing sadistic and sexual pleasure in inflicting pain, massacre killers usually have no prior history of violence. Instead, writes Eric W. Hickey, dean of the California School of Forensic studies, in his 2009 book “Serial Murderers and Their Victims,” massacre killers commit a single and final act in which violence becomes a “medium” to make a “’final statement’ in or about life.” Fantasy, public expression and messaging are central to what motivates and defines massacre killings.

Mass shooters aim to tell a story through their actions. They create a narrative about how the world has forced them to act, and then must persuade themselves to believe it. The final step is crafting the story for others and telling it through spoken warnings beforehand, taunting words to victims or manifestos created for public airing.

What these findings suggest is that mass shootings are a kind of theater. Their purpose is essentially terrorism – minus, in most cases, a political agenda. The public spectacle, the mass slaughter of mostly random victims, is meant to be seen as an attack against society itself. The typical consummation of the act of suicide denies the course of justice, giving the shooter ultimate and final control.

We call mass shootings senseless not only because of the gross disregard for life but because they defy the ordinary motives for violence – robbery, envy, personal grievance – reasons we can condemn but at least wrap our minds around. But mass killings seem like a plague dispatched from some inhuman realm. They don’t just ignore our most basic ideas of justice but assault them directly.

The perverse truth is that this senselessness is just the point of mass shootings: It is the means by which the perpetrator seeks to make us feel his hatred. …

Part of this calculus of evil is competition. Dr. Mullen spoke to a perpetrator who “gleefully admitted that he was ‘going for the record.’” Investigators found that the Newtown shooter kept a “score sheet” of previous mass shootings. He may have deliberately calculated how to maximize the grotesqueness of his act. …

Aside from the wealth of qualitative evidence for imitation in massacre killings, there are also some hard numbers. A 1999 study by Dr. Mullen and others in the Archives of Suicide Research suggested that a 10-year outbreak of mass homicides had occurred in clusters rather than randomly. This effect was also found in a 2002 study by a group of German psychiatrists who examined 132 attempted rampage killings worldwide. There is a growing consensus among researchers that, whether or not the perpetrators are fully aware of it, they are following what has become a ready-made, free-floating template for young men to resolve their rage and express their sense of personal grandiosity.

Whatever the witch’s brew of influences that produced this grisly script, treating mass killings as a kind of epidemic or contagion largely frees us from having to understand the particular causes of each act. Instead, we can focus on disrupting the spread.

There is a precedent for this approach in dealing with another form of violence: suicides. A 2003 study led by Columbia University psychiatrist Madelyn Gould found “ample evidence” of a suicide contagion effect, fed by reports in the media. A 2011 study in the journal BMC Public Health found, unsurprisingly, that this effect is especially strong for novel forms of suicide that receive outsize attention in the press.

Some researchers have even put the theory to the test. In 1984, a rash of suicides broke out on the subway system in Vienna. As the death toll climbed, a group of researchers at the Austrian Association for Suicide Prevention theorized that sensational reporting was inadvertently glorifying the suicides. Three years into the epidemic, the researchers persuaded local media to change their coverage by minimizing details and photos, avoiding romantic language and simplistic explanations of motives, moving the stories from the front page and keeping the word “suicide” out of the headlines. Subway suicides promptly dropped by 75%.

This approach has been recommended by numerous public health and media organizations world-wide, from the U.K., Australia, Norway and Hong Kong to the U.S., where in 2001 a similar set of reporting guidelines was released jointly by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institute of Mental Health and the surgeon general. It is difficult to say whether these guidelines have helped, since journalists’ adherence to them has been scattered at best, but they might still serve as a basis for changing the reporting of massacres.

How might journalists and police change their practices to discourage mass shootings? First, they need to do more to deprive the killer of an audience:

Never publish a shooter’s propaganda. Aside from the act itself, there is no greater aim for the mass killer than to see his own grievances broadcast far and wide. Many shooters directly cite the words of prior killers as inspiration. In 2007, the forensic psychiatrist Michael Welner told “Good Morning America” that the Virginia Tech shooter’s self-photos and videotaped ramblings were a “PR tape” that was a “social catastrophe” for NBC News to have aired.

Hide their names and faces. With the possible exception of an at-large shooter, concealing their identities will remove much of the motivation for infamy.

Don’t report on biography or speculate on motive. While most shooters have had difficult life events they were rarely severe, and perpetrators are adept at grossly magnifying injustices they have suffered. Even talking about motive may encourage the perception that these acts can be justified.

Police and the media also can contain the contagion of mass shootings by withholding or embargoing details:

Minimize specifics and gory details. Shooters are motivated by infamy for their actions as much as by infamy for themselves. Details of the event also help other troubled minds turn abstract frustrations into concrete fantasies. There should be no play-by-play and no descriptions of the shooter’s clothes, words, mannerisms or weaponry.

No photos or videos of the event. Images, like the security camera photos of the armed Columbine shooters, can become iconic and even go viral. Just this year, the FBI foolishly released images of the Navy Yard shooter in action.

Finally, journalists and public figures must remove the dark aura of mystery shrouding mass killings and create a new script about them.

Talk about the victims but minimize images of grieving families. Reports should shift attention away from the shooters without magnifying the horrified reactions that perpetrators hope to achieve.

Decrease the saturation. Return the smaller shootings to the realm of local coverage and decrease the amount of reporting on the rest. Unsettling as it sounds, treating these acts as more ordinary crimes could actually make them less ordinary.

Tell a different story. There is a damping effect on suicide from reports about people who considered it but found help instead. Some enterprising reporters might find similar stories to tell about would be mass shooters who reconsidered.

Rampage shootings are fed by many other sources that also must be addressed, of course. Many shooters have suffered bullying, which inflicts a sense of powerlessness that their actions aim to overcome. Some (though not most) shooters have had prior contact with mental health services, and many give recognizable warnings beforehand to friends, family or teachers. Institutionally and individually, we must learn to take these signs seriously and report them to authorities. Massacres also would not be nearly so lethal without the widespread availability of guns and high-capacity magazines designed more for offense than for defense.

But, guns aside, these factors are more or less perennial problems of human life and cannot, alone, bear the blame for rampage shootings. In coverage of these events, the focus on insanity particularly risks playing into the need of potential future shooters to convince themselves that the world rejects them, rather than the other way around. The minority who really are psychotic, or just act impulsively, are even more likely to draw their ideas from the cultural ether.

Even in the U.S., with our fierce commitment to a free and open press, there are precedents for voluntary media restrictions. Courts and journalists usually recognize an overriding public interest in protecting the privacy of sexual assault victims and minors involved in crimes, and sometimes even the reputations of the accused. Safety, too, can trump the public right to know. Few media outlets would publish the instructions for making a bomb. Promulgating the template for rampage shootings is in similar need of restriction.

In the days after the Newtown shooting, the blogger Rod Dreher pointed to the closing lines of Albert Camus’s “The Stranger,” about an alienated young man who commits a senseless murder: “As if that blind rage had washed me clean, rid me of hope…For everything to be consummated, for me to feel less alone, I had only to wish that there be a large crowd of spectators the day of my execution and that they greet me with cries of hate.”

The massacre killer chooses to believe it is not he but the world that is filled with hatred – and then he tries to prove his dark vision by making it so. If we can deprive him of the ability to make his internal psychodrama a shared public reality, if we can break this ritual of violence and our own ritual response, then we might just banish these dreadful and all too frequent acts to the realm of vile fantasy.