School Violence

[Coral Rhedd]

I think its time to get back to school violence before we start comparing real estate agents

 

Actually, I think power, racism, and who was where first, and how others came to be here may have something to do with violence in the U.S. Americans are more violent over all. They have a much higher murder rate for instance than most nations.

 

Is the reason (culture and history): Environment

 

Or genes: Heredity.

 

That is an appropriate question if one assumes there is a reason for everything.

 

The modern term real estate may have nothing to do with it, but territoriality may.

[ed84c]

Enivronment i would say for the aforementioned allowance of guns.

 

However maybe the US being such a powerful country has an influence? I was waching a phycological programme about how people become evil, when they have power, maybe a watered down effect towards Americans?

[Coral Rhedd]

Enivronment i would say for the aforementioned allowance of guns.

 

However maybe the US being such a powerful country has an influence? I was waching a phycological programme about how people become evil' date=' when they have power, maybe a watered down effect towards Americans?[/quote']

 

I think there is a connection between power and evil. However, this has been a pretty violent continent as a whole going back to conquest of the Aztecs by the Spaniards. And prior, there were many native tribes which essentially live by war.

 

My history is a little sketchy, but I believe the Cherokees instituted a constitutional-type government to avoid war.

 

We will have to mostly exempt the Canadians however. Although they were intially pretty barbaric -- I believe scalping was a French contribution to their history -- they seem to have been a peaceful exemplar in recent years. Someone good at statistics and demographics has no doubt compared Canadian violence to U.S. violence.

 

Can Canadians own guns?

[ed84c]

Scalping?

[Coral Rhedd]

Scalping?

 

Oops, seems I did not phrase things well. That pop history you read here and there dies hard. What I should have said is the the French and English introduced bounty scalping to the North American Continent.

 

Here is a link by the expert that will give you the skinny:

 

http://college.hmco.com/history/readerscomp/naind/html/na_034800_scalpsandsca.htm

[Lance]

Lance, I wonder if you have a better house than I do? Because if you do, I would like to move in. However, once I move in, I will deem you to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. I trust you can pack quickly.

 

If you have bigger guns than be my guest.

[Lance]

Oops' date=' seems I did not phrase things well. That pop history you read here and there dies hard. What I should have said is the the French and English introduced bounty scalping to the North American Continent.

 

Here is a link by [b']the[/b] expert that will give you the skinny:

 

http://college.hmco.com/history/readerscomp/naind/html/na_034800_scalpsandsca.htm

 

If I started killing jews would you blame Hilter?

[Skye]

I think that school violence is often learned. Most school kids see fist fights and think that's the right way to go about violence. Elite schools have often had their own peculiar hidden violent traditions. Gangs even have signature ways of shooting people, it's very stylised violent behaviour, often with initiations and other violent traditions. The school shootings have been very similar and point to outright copying.

 

If I were to write about it, I would take that view, that it is learned behaviour that people take on from other school kids they relate to.

[Dak]

i heard a thery that its psycologically easyer to kill someone with a gun. to do it with your fists, you actually have to kill them, and you get their blood on you. with a knife, it slightly removes you from the act -- its the knife killing them, not you -- but with a gun, you are almost completely detached from the act. all you have to do is point and squeeze the trigger, you dont even have to touch them.

 

this might partially account for the fact that there arent a number of stabbings in british schools comparable to the number of shootings in american schools. after all, british kids can get knifes, but i dont think that there are that many instances of people 'going postal' in schools with a knife in the uk. guns make it easyer, both physically and psycologicaly, to kill someone.

[Coral Rhedd]

If you have bigger guns than be my guest.

 

357, but it kicks!

[Coral Rhedd]

If I started killing jews would you blame Hilter?

 

Lance, what is this relevant to?????

 

I haven't made any definitive statements about this because I am not sure what causes school violence.

 

You didn't actually read the link about scalping did you?

[Coral Rhedd]

i heard a thery that its psycologically easyer to kill someone with a gun. to do it with your fists' date=' you actually have to kill them, and you get their blood on you. with a knife, it slightly removes you from the act -- its the knife killing them, not you -- but with a gun, you are almost completely detached from the act. all you have to do is point and squeeze the trigger, you dont even have to touch them.

 

this might partially account for the fact that there arent a number of stabbings in british schools comparable to the number of shootings in american schools. after all, british kids can get knifes, but i dont think that there are that many instances of people 'going postal' in schools with a knife in the uk. guns make it easyer, both physically and psycologicaly, to kill someone.[/quote']

 

Interesting. Knives aren't as lethal. I like "true crime" nonfiction and also wanted to write a murder mystery once, so I tend to read up on these things. Knives take quite a bit of force and can hit a rib, deflecting the force and injury.

[Dak]

Knives take quite a bit of force and can hit a rib, deflecting the force and injury

not if you stab someone in the stomach.

 

but yeah, guns are both phisically and psycologically easier to kill with. with a gun, you only have the persons blood on your hands metaphorically...

[ski_power]

Do you people agree that culture is non -existent in the US?

Like take a country with a rich past heritage, legends, mythology etc etc. when the students are kids, they do have some one to look up to(in legends). Eg. Ram was idolized as good in Ramayana, and Pandavas in Mahabharat, so on and so forth. Over there they dont have any thing to look up to, and so go off-track at a very young age. How about the don't care it's your life attitude?

 

Please don't take this an an anti-US post, but here people live with their parents till they die or they move abroad. There's a proper and cohesive family system. Take greece for example, a country with mytho and all, I dont hear anything about murders from there.

 

If I've hurt somebody I'm sorry. I dont hate US, coz. all our fellowmen work there.

 

P.S. By now you must have guessed the country where I live.

[BenSon]

Australian culture has a extreemly short history (unless indigenous) the only contacts to a past "heretage" or "legendary" history is less then perfect. It includes a civilisation started by criminals and soldiers and the attemted (and somewhat sucessful) genecide of indigenous peoples. We have a terrible history and a rapidly evolved culture with barely any links to this land but we don't have school shootings? I don't think a poor historical backround is the cause of excessive school violence in american schools.

 

~Scott

[JohnB]

It includes a civilisation started by criminals and soldiers and the attemted (and somewhat sucessful) genecide of indigenous peoples.

Scott, there was no policy of genocide in the early history of Australia.

 

There could be something to the idea of cultural history having an effect. Australia, New Zealand, the US and part of Canada all sprang from english colonies. Free settlers or convicts, the colonies brought with them english history and traditions.

 

In Oz, our system of government, our courts, even many of our laws have antecedents in British Law. The Magna Carta is still part of our laws. All these colonies gained their independence from the Empire, but only in the US was this by revolution.

 

After the revolution there seemed to be a conscious effort in the US to break free of the traditions inherited from Britain. This would in effect leave the US without a set of cultural traditions.

 

This could lead to a situation as ski-power suggests. It's a thought anyway. For some reason the US is different, this could be part of the reason why.

[BenSon]

Scott, there was no policy of genocide in the early history of Australia

That is highly debateable but that is not the topic so i won't go into that..

 

However, My argument is more socialy we don't have many hiostorical links (that go past a couple of hundred years). Sure our parliment and law systems have many links to a older heritage but i mean socialy we are not linked to comonwealth.

That being said you do have a point perhaps the difference in laws could be the deciding factor in this case. But i would suggest that it is how these laws are implimented are recieved by the country in current times rather then their historical content.

BTW- I like your sig

 

~Scott

[JohnB]

socialy we are not linked to comonwealth.

Not really sure I can agree with that. The Irish and Scots made up a large part of the original immigrants and still feel linked to their past.It's hard to describe what I mean here.

 

During the formative years of Oz, Kiwiland and Canada, we were part of the "Empire", with all the mental pros and cons that go with that idea. We could and did look to "The Mother Country" for guidance in many areas. I suppose it was a case of "Well, they've been a democracy longer that we have and had more experience, so they might have some good ideas."

 

For example, there are few rules about how our Governor General can do things, but there are many unwritten conventions about what he/she can and cannot do. These conventions shape the actions of the GG.

 

After the American Revolution, the US had neither the rules or conventions to guide the actions of their President or their Government. They made it up as they went. With no great historical and cultural roots, this may be a reason why they are different.

 

On the "other" topic, have a read about the debates surrounding Prof. Windschuttle, they are quite interesting. I'm waiting for the dust to settle, but some of our history books may need to be rewritten.

 

Thanks for the sig comment, it turned up in an email along witth a number of other words and their definitions, but I thought it to be most appropriate for here.

 

BTW, I was down in Sydney last week, what are you jokers going to do with Homebush? The place is like a bloody ghost town, even the Maccas closes at 5pm.

[BenSon]

Not really sure I can agree with that. The Irish and Scots made up a large part of the original immigrants and still feel linked to their past.It's hard to describe what I mean here.

I get what your saying, but I think that these realationships with the "mother country" are more contemperary rather then historical/ledgendary. But i will agree with you that these links are a defining factor in our diferences to America. Care to suggest how they will effect school shooting though? I think our schools are such a multicultural environment that we can rule out the everyone has the same heritage so are less violent to one another argument.

What are we going to do with Homebush eh? Well I say ship it down to tazzy it'll fit right in down there

 

~Scott

[JohnB]

Well I say ship it down to tazzy it'll fit right in down there

Only if we move Hobart to Kangaroo Island.