And how could one become one of those 1000? Even if just 56% of them become rich that's good enough a chance for me.
I can actually blame the "victims" of that round of violence. Without their prior actions, this violence would not occur.
Don't listen to your markedroids is enough.
Actually it's a wonder there's not more kids deciding the only way out is to eliminate those that bully them, both teachers and other students.
Because there is precious little recourse a kid has in this scenario:
1. He cannot escape. He can't simply avoid going to school because he is being forced to do so.
2. He cannot avoid them. He cannot not cross their path. He can't put space between his tormentors and himself because he has to go to his classes.
3. He has no way to get aid. Anyone who could come to his aid has an interest in not aiding him.
The only logical choices are to endure it or to put an end to the situation. And the way for that is to end the life of those bullying him. It's actually very reasonable, considering the lack of other options...
People don't choose being a victim. Saying that him "deciding" to be docile and not resorting to violence is essentially the same argument as blaming the rape victim for the rape 'cause she decided to dress "too sexily".
Because the US is the bully of the international schoolyard. But that's besides the scope of this thread.
The point is that this is not part of the whole scenario the revenge seeking bully target plays out in his head. He's not going "Hmm... I'll do it in the school, 'cause they might be armed in the movie theater". Not only 'cause it's even less likely that someone might be armed in a movie theater.
He's doing it at his school, because that's where he was hurt, that's where he was bullied, that's where he was wronged, that's where he was humiliated. He wants to settle the score, nothing else.
I've had my share of fights against windmills. I'm old. My generation has lost the war. My hope is that at some point the younger generation will learn that it's their country and that they have the right to take it back.
The difference is that it's heaps easier to get out of a base. Not only can you easily avoid getting in, it's also fairly easy to get out again.
It's not as easy with schools. Especially if you're a kid and your parents force you to go.
Ask the average rape victim how happy he/she is to be alive. And whether they think that their rapist dying a horrible, slow, painful and preferably gruesome death is something they could enjoy.
Yeah, the threat that there might be someone with a gun would sure work as a deterrent for someone who plans to off himself in the end anyway...
They do? You happen to know who is innocent and who is not?
I can't really tell guilty from innocent just by looking at a face. I don't know who is the bully. I have to trust the judgement of those that go after them.
A school is like a mushroom farm. You're being kept in the dark and you're fed shit, and as soon as some bright little head shows itself, it gets chopped off.
Really? How so? Because it's a foot note in a blog?
Pffft. In a week, nobody talks about it anymore.
To make this happen, far too many things have to come together to actually make it at the very least not impossible. First of all, you'd have to find someone who is willing and able to be a suitable candidate, then you have to fund him. And convince a sizable portion of the people that voting for him makes sense. Especially that latter part is near impossible due to the first-past-the-post system in place. The only way this could possibly happen is if neither candidate from The Party looks like the lesser evil or, rather, when they have finally become so identical that it doesn't take looking at them from the distance the big pond affords me to not see a difference between them and people finally realize that either of them is useless, and that the only choice left is actually voting for neither of them and instead trying it with a third option.
That is the big problem. The third option is usually seen as simply not viable, unable to possibly win. So the only votes such a candidate will ever get is from those that are firm believers in his cause or those that simply don't give a shit anymore who of the two Party candidates wins and just want to make a statement.
And to avoid the latter (because the handful of people who actually believe in something a politician offers), the whole spectacle around the election exists. The effects can even be seen here on
But it works. People get riled up and feel the need to vote for "their" candidate, even though, when they took a moment and pondered over it, they would probably realize that they're just going to support that guy because they fear that the other one would implement/avoid $issue they were hyped up about, something they really don't care about that much if they gave it a moment of thought.
And now again: Do you think that in such an air of manipulation and hype a third candidate has a fighting chance?