San Diego: School Shooting

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Grassroots Information Coordination Center (GICC) : One Thread

BBC

Thursday, 22 March, 2001, 22:17 GMT 'Two shot' at San Diego school

Two people are reported shot at a high school near San Diego in California.

A suspect has reportedly been taken into custody.

Local television reports said that two teachers were injured at Granite Hills High School in El Cajon, when seven shots were fired just before 1300 Pacific time (2100GMT).

People have been asked to stay out of the area while police search for a second suspect, who is reportedly armed with a shotgun.

"It sounded like an explosion, like in a chemistry class or something," said student Ryan Carrillo.

Witnesses told KFMB-TV that a suspect, armed with a rifle and handgun, was wrestled to the ground by police.

Granite Hills High School has 2,900 students.

The incident comes less than three weeks after a student shot dead two people and injured 13 at a high school in the nearby San Diego suburb of Santee.

-- Rachel Gibson (rgibson@hotmail.com), March 22, 2001

Answers

Wow this is really WAY off subject~ Not y2k Related & not anymore interesting than any other shooting to me.

-- Geno-Calif (headturbo@hotmail.com), March 22, 2001.

Wow this is really WAY off subject~ Not y2k Related & not anymore interesting than any other shooting to me.

You are so right, GC. You really should request of the moderator (if you are not one under an assumed identity) that all non-y2k-related posts of mine be removed immediately. You might also consider the removal of non-y2k-related posts of others while you're at it. I am assuming you carry much weight on this board to be able to voice your judgment of not only the off-topicness of a post but of even the degree of off-topicness. Such immeasurable skill comes from one far more erudite and discerning than I.

You go on to say that the post ranks of no more importance than any other shooting, to you. Funny, I don't recall you mentioning the same objections to other posts about shootings, bombings, explosions, submarine hits...etc. So, it almost feels as though you have singled-out my contribution only. And I gather from the silence of the rest of the participants here that your aim has full support.

(In my neck of the woods shootings, rare as they are, have significance.)

Therefore, I'll refrain from contributing further, leaving you to carry on the magnificent job you've been doing to date.

Farewell.

-- Rachel Gibson (rgibson@hotmail.com), March 24, 2001.


It's alright Rachel, I appreciate your posts, whatever you find of interest.

-- Phil Maley (maley@cnw.com), March 24, 2001.

"I gather from the silence of the rest of the participants here that your aim has full support." ...

In short, this statement is a falsehood because your posts are highly valued around here and Geno-Calif obviously didn't read that the posting format is to report infrastructure incidents that are of interest, including human behavior and community impact. Don't let this issue piss you off, you'd never be more missed than from here.

Secondly, I believe that this particular post is on point because these shootings might eventually lead to weapon restrictions into areas that are soon to become devastated and panic ridden because of looming infrastructure collapse, so please continue to keep us in tune with the times.

Regards,

-- Doris (nocents@bellsouth.net), March 24, 2001.


Rachel, we all love ya, doncha know.
Your posts are all On Topic ;;;;-

-- spider (spider0@usa.net), March 24, 2001.


Rachel.

Don't, let one poster get to you. If I had seen the post earlier it would have been GONE. We need your input on the forum as always. I have thought about saying farewell many times but I am still hanging around. Come on back.

Martin

-- Martin Thompson (mthom1927@aol.com), March 24, 2001.


You really should request of the moderator (if you are not one under an assumed identity)

This person is definately not a moderator for the board!

-- Martin Thompson (mthom1927@aol.com), March 24, 2001.


Rachel, I just logged on for the first time since late last week and was appalled to see this little thread. I'm sorry this idiot has gotten under your skin, although I most certainly understand why.

Leaving aside rude comments made by non-contributors suddenly "out of the ether": At first glance I suppose one might think that the issue of school shootings is off-topic, since this board has mostly been focused on more technical and economic issues.

BUT...let me suggest that as the pressure increase on individuals from the economic spiral; as we see the fruits of the collapse of public education (among many other services); as general alientation and anomie mounts in society, we will see lots of "cracks" in people's mental well-being. And school shootings, while over-hyped relative to their actual frequency, are in my opinion a symptom of that strain.

Look for more nastiness in coming months. I fear for anyone living in densely populated areas (cities *or* 'burbs) as the summer heat and layoffs increase and the electricity decreases.

Rachel, I look forward to more of your posts on this and any other topic that seems important. Illegitimati non corubundum est.

--Andre

-- Andre Weltman (aweltman@state.pa.us), March 26, 2001.


To fix one of my several spelling errors, and to add an explanation:

From another website: http://www.uwasa.fi/comm/termino/wwwboard/messages/706.html

In Reply to: Illegitimati Non Carborundum posted by joe on August 24, 1999 at 16:06:37:

< Can anyone translate? >

Not orthodox Latin, but as far as I can tell: "Don't let the bastards get you down."

-- Andre Weltman (aweltman@state.pa.us), March 27, 2001.


I understood, Andre--easy to see "illegitimate" from the first word; not hard to conjure the rest. :)

Thanks to those of you who took the time to assure me I wasn't too far out on a limb with my post, although I did not have future plagues and pestilences and reactions thereto in mind when I did it. I usually read the wires, where items are "breaking news" before they hit the "breaking news" sections of other media online and off. That, and the horrible thought (to me) of *anyone* taking a gun into an education centre, are the only reasons I posted it.

In retrospect, though, and in light of Doris's and Andre's comments, I have seen more than one article lately mentioning the British gov has contemplated taking guns from farmers as an anti-suicide measure. While I had no intention of this thread developing into a gun debate one, I have views on the subject which probably differ from the norm on this board, given the high US component, but each culture is different and has to be respected as such (I guess). Ashton and Leska said long ago, "Canadians will just quietly help each other," and I sincerely hope they were right.

GC's OT rating was an attempt at censorship, plain and simple. Usually when we see items of no interest to us personally (don't we all?), we simply skip the item--we don't bother to stop and tell someone they shouldn't have posted it. That's probably because we think they had every right to post it, if it was important enough to them to do so.

But the OT rating also made me do much soul searching, especially in the time before the rest of you spoke up, and also since then. I've posted items I personally believe are OT, as I believe others have, as well. I haven't felt guilty doing so, as they seemed to be of general interest. Then, there are the borderline items--may be, maybe not. These days I'm surprised to find an article that mentions "computer," or "glitch," or "failure of electronic device/control." So, while I resent what GC did, I also respect that I should examine what I do even more carefully than I had in the past. For that reason, I'm just going to bump along for a while and not be quite so voluminous.

I apologize to anyone who thinks I over-reacted or who thinks I reacted in an inappropriate manner. The degree of courtesy, respect and professionalism permeating this board has retained me for this long; should it deteriorate as did other boards with which we are familiar, I don't think I would want to be associated with it.

Wishing you the best as you carry on,

-- Rachel Gibson (rgibson@hotmail.com), March 27, 2001.



Moderation questions? read the FAQ