Posted on 02/12/2016 10:01:28 AM PST by oh8eleven
Full Headline ... "Mother of Columbine killer Dylan Klebold gives first TV interview since massacre: 'I had all those illusions that everything was OK'"
The mother of one of the Columbine shooters still has trouble calling her son a "killer," nearly 17 years after the bloody high school massacre that left 13 people dead.
"There is never a day that goes by where I don't think of the people that Dylan harmed," Sue Klebold told ABC's "20/20 Friday" in her first TV interview since her son's gun rampage.
She then explained why she used the delicate term "harmed."
(Excerpt) Read more at nydailynews.com ...
Well, we can condemn her for that if/when it actually happens, eh?
I also recall reading that after the attacks and murders, the police went into one of the murders’ bedrooms and found materials for making pipe bombs, among other things...
As a parent, how do you NOT KNOW what your kid is doing in YOUR house?
Sorry if this seems harsh but having a “no go zone” or a “sanctuary room” in your house is negligent, irresponsible, naive and stupid...
I read the book Columbine, which described how criminologists believe Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold were a “criminal dyad”, with Harris a born psychopath and Klebold a depressant who followed Harris. After reading the book twice, I am persuaded by that theory. However, if anything, that theory makes Dylan Klebold an even more chilling character than Harris. A true psychopath like Harris is born bad-to-the-bone; Klebold, on the other hand, freely chose to follow along and to laugh as he and Harris shot their friends and schoolmates.
She should get some money from Moby moore.
Wasn’t colombine based or influenced by basketball diaries and the kids were video taped saying how they wanted Spielberg to direct the movie about them?
So all of these shootings are just kids living out Hollywood fantasies?
Why do we blame the guns?
“I don’t know this guy’s story enough to know if she truly is to blame.”
Then don’t speak about it or claim the parents cannot supervise their children. These kids did these things right in front of and while their parents were home.
If anything positive came out of Columbine, it may be this: police began to realize they couldn’t simply “wait out” an active shooter situation, and hope to reason with the killers. Stopping a massacre means taking action, not waiting outside the door.
Today, most police departments are better equipped and trained to deal with an active shooter. Unfortunately, too many of them are still able to kill large numbers of people before the cops arrive. That’s one reason we need civilians who are armed and capable of fighting back—many of the shooters/terrorists still look for localities and events where their victims won’t be able to fight back.
Back in the 1970s, Palestinian terrorists targeted Israeli schools, knowing that the students and their teachers represented a soft target. When the IDF told the education establishment they didn’t have enough soldiers to guard all the schools, the educators decided to arm their teachers. There hasn’t been a major attack on an Israeli public school in more than 35 years, and that’s no accident.
One of the first officers to respond to last year’s terrorist attack in Paris was a deputy commissioner for the city’s police department. He went in alone, with only a handgun, and shot one of the terrorists. He only pulled back after SWAT teams arrived on scene and entered the theater.
Too bad ordinary Parisians didn’t have the same option to shoot back.
If “I didn’t know anything” or “I didn’t do anything” makes a good book, then have at it.
I can’t provide a citation but I seem to recall reading that the bullying claim had been debunked. Anyone else have that information?
I recall some of that. Also, that D and K were part of the Trenchcoat Mafia, so there was a little clique of “outsiders.”
Thanks. I was hoping I wasn’t the only one who had read that.
http://blogs.thegospelcoalition.org/trevinwax/2012/10/09/7-myths-about-the-columbine-shooting/
My problem with her is that she refuses to admit any of the warning signs that she saw. She ignored them, and then she tries to make it sound like ignoring the warning signs wasn’t her fault either.
She poo poo’s them away as if they were a fly that landed on her cupcake.
You know, I get what you mean. However, I think it’s because nobody could imagine that the warning signs could be signs that her son was planning to commit mass murder. A friend of mine asserts that there is no mystery behind Columbine, that the reason it happened is because both sets of parents looked the other way. I believe that that may be the answer to the puzzle of how logistically Columbine happened. However, the more puzzling question is: why did Klebold and Harris WANT to murder their classmates? When I was a teenager, I did whatever I wanted to the extent I was allowed to get away with it...but, had I been given total freedom, shooting up my school is nothing I’d ever have been inclined to do.
One thing that bugs me is the mom talks about how the son wrote a paper that the teacher went so far as to contact them about. But the mom says, “they never showed it to us.”
I mean, she is the parent, right? She walks away from that situation by shrugging her shoulders and blaming the school for never showing it to her, but she is the one who never followed up. Never asked or called again about seeing the violent essay for herself.
As to the why, I think it had a lot to do with the psycotropic drugs both killers were on.
Harris would have probably turned out to be a killer anyway. Klebold, maybe not.
Agree with your viewpoint, the question of how do you go from being angry as a kid to planning a massacre is one to ponder.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.