Another school shooting: this time from Canada

[Luziyca]

From CTV

CTV Saskatoon has said that "A 17-year-old male has been charged with four counts of first-degree murder following a mass shooting that left four people dead in La Loche, Sask."

[Washington Resistance Army]

I was very surprised and saddened to hear about this last night. This isn't something you see happening in Canada very often, if at all.

It's my hope that the shooter's name isn't made public, at least for now. It always bothers me whenever the media gives these people their fifteen minutes of fame which inspires copycats.

It is annoying, yes. But I feel that the name should be released, so that if he ever does get released, people will know who he is, and will shun him and make sure that he is ostracized.

...

You do know people who do these kinds of things tend to be people who are shunned and ostracized for various reasons right?

[Luziyca]

It is annoying, yes. But I feel that the name should be released, so that if he ever does get released, people will know who he is, and will shun him and make sure that he is ostracized.

...

You do know people who do these kinds of things tend to be people who are shunned and ostracized for various reasons right?

Yes. But why is it that releasing names is a huge problem if they commited a school shooting when we regularly release names for drunk drivers who murder entire families as a result of their actions?

Besides, he could have gotten the help he needed. Now that he committed the crime, the response should be to lock him up and throw away the key, for the benefit of society.

[Camicon]

...

You do know people who do these kinds of things tend to be people who are shunned and ostracized for various reasons right?

Yes. But why is it that releasing names is a huge problem if they commited a school shooting when we regularly release names for drunk drivers who murder entire families as a result of their actions?

Besides, he could have gotten the help he needed. Now that he committed the crime, the response should be to lock him up and throw away the key, for the benefit of society.

Mental health care is pretty much deplorable right across the world; Canada, while better than most, is not doing anywhere near enough. So, unless he ramped up to this crime with an escalating series of criminal offences (which would put him in contact with the police, and from there healthcare professionals), it's doubtful that he would have had access to mental health services. Even if he had, La Loche is a largely First Nations community, and as would be suspected is fairly poor, small, and ill equipped to handle the sorts of social services that this individual would have needed.

That is, if he's found to have committed this crime because of mental illness. And we have absolutely no idea whether or not such is the case. I can't stress that enough.

[Occupied Deutschland]

...

You do know people who do these kinds of things tend to be people who are shunned and ostracized for various reasons right?

Yes. But why is it that releasing names is a huge problem if they commited a school shooting when we regularly release names for drunk drivers who murder entire families as a result of their actions?...

The crimes aren't all that comparable, is the problem. Drunk driving resulting in deaths is rarely a deliberate way for someone to go about killing others for vengeance and/or attention. School shootings tend to line up with motives of vengeance or desire for attention much more readily. Drunk driving tends to be an act of ignorance with deplorable consequences virtually nobody would ever desire to reproduce. School shootings tend to be deliberate acts of murder and/or terror, often with a related aspect of the shooters desiring the fame/attention that such deliberate and violent actions can achieve them.

One can criticize the merits of releasing names in either case, but there is a substantial difference in the motives behind each case and the reasoning for why the names would be released or not. Releasing the names of drunk drivers could, arguably, have a deterring affect on other instances of that crime occurring ('If [blank person] can do it, so could I!') whereas releasing the names of school shooters doesn't conceivably hold that same value, and could encourage similar crimes because of the 'fame' attained by school shooters (or any violent criminals who commit egregious acts, for that matter).

[Camicon]

Are you aware of how citations work? If you continually reference a single source, then you don't include it multiple times in the bibliography; hence, each new citation is referencing a new source. Wikipedia has three-hundred fifty-three unique sources for school shootings in the USA, and twenty unique sources for schools shootings in Canada. Twenty unique sources for only eighteen shootings, so some incidences have multiple citations, which only increases the reliability of the information.
I was implying that what you're saying stinks. Like shit. Because I called it shit.

Yes. And what I am telling you, is that those sources are cherrypicked, that they are taken from the shootingtracker/Bloomberg data and the articles found afterwards, and that the overwhelming majority of them do not fit the actual definition of a mass shooting.
Argue semantics all you want, it's still juvenile and dismissive.
This is why I hate rules against flaming: if people were just allowed to call eachother dickheads and get it out, they wouldn't feel the need to resort to rules lawyering, passive aggression and veiled jabs.

My recommendation that you familiarize yourself with what reading comprehension is was not meant in jest, because you are clearly not keeping up with even basic sentence structure. Does that rustle your jimmies a little, when I point out that you aren't following what I'm saying? I think I see some rustled jimmies here.

I think you're projecting a bit here. Not surprised, you get this a lot in Neoprogressives.

The only way those sources could be cherry picked is if data were excluded, because it is simple documentation of events that have occurred. Wikipedia would have to actively ignore news stories about guns being fired on or at school grounds, and there is no conceivable reason for them to do that.

Now, what's this about "mass" shootings? This entire conversation has been about school shootings. Trying to shift the goalposts? Tsk tsk (you can't see it, but I'm wagging my finger at you in a disapproving manner).

And if you think my insulting your shitty arguments is some attempt to insult you by proxy, then that's your problem, not mine. But please, tell me more about how you know my political identity better than I do. I could use a good laugh.

[Nickel Empire]

I find it interesting how the media said 2 people were killed, Justin Trudeau said 5 people and the police said 4 people.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

I find it interesting how the media said 2 people were killed, Justin Trudeau said 5 people and the police said 4 people.

The PM's statement was based on old miss communicated info, the police updated the info to say 4, I don't know where the number two came from.

[Camicon]

I find it interesting how the media said 2 people were killed, Justin Trudeau said 5 people and the police said 4 people.

The PM's statement was based on old miss communicated info, the police updated the info to say 4, I don't know where the number two came from.

The shooter killed two people away from the school grounds, and killed another two at the school (while also injuring several others). The "five dead" number came from a miscommunication, where an individual currently in critical condition was believed to be dead.

Also, the shooter is a minor, so his name is not being released by the police, and publication of his name in connection with this crime is illegal. This publication ban would be lifted if he is tried as an adult, if the court decides to lift the publication ban, or if the publication of his name is made "in the course of the administration of justice, if it is not the purpose of the publication to make the information known in the community". So, for those folks worried about yet another mass shooter getting fifteen minutes of fame in the media spotlight: chill your hoots, if the publication ban was going to be lifted then it would have already.