world

16-year-old boy stabs 22 at Pennsylvania school

42 Comments
By KEVIN BEGOS and JOE MANDAK

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2014 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

42 Comments
Login to comment

Clearly a deviant can cause mass harm w/o a gun. Fortunately no deaths and sadly alter lives forever.

3 ( +10 / -7 )

Wounded, but no deaths. Says a lot about the type of weapon used. But sad to see this happen.

6 ( +12 / -6 )

Wow, lucky this kid didn't have a gun - how many would have died? This is essentially the control group that proves guns do kill when used by killers, and that without guns, less people will die.

Removing access to guns is clearly the only logical solution to create a civilized society. The idea that access to guns is a freedom is propaganda flowing through the mouths of the brainwashed.

10 ( +17 / -8 )

Accidents happen and removing freedoms is not the answer.

This wasn't an accident. It was an attack, and if he had a gun he could have killed many.

I'm glad I live in a country where every idiot who wants to go on a rampage can't just grab a gun and cause as much mayhem as possible.

6 ( +10 / -4 )

Removing access to guns is clearly the only logical solution to create a civilized society. The idea that access to guns is a freedom is propaganda flowing through the mouths of the brainwashed.

And if someone like a principal or security guard on the campus would have had a gun, maybe this nut job could have been stopped sooner. Also, you do remember what happened about a month ago in Yunan, China where a muslim seperatist group attacked innoncent people at a train station and killed 29 people just using knives, or a few days after that in Hunan, China where this time a dispute between vendors resulted in 6 people killed from a stabbing spree.

No matter what the weapon, if people on intent on killing they will kill. Just because this happened in America and the perp didn't use a gun that normally fits the so called "profile" of the violence in America, no need to try to deflect that it is not about the weapon, but the lunatic intent on killing.

-9 ( +7 / -16 )

@MarkG

Life is not perfect. Accidents happen and removing freedoms is not the answer

What do you mean by "removing freedoms" ? Carry knives and/or guns to school is a "freedom" not to be "removed" ?

You sound like a real pessimist ! If I understand rightly (according to you) to live the longest time without any problems one must be wrapped in cotton wool, maybe even live in a "bubble"... ?

Just think of all the wonderful things you'd miss ! Life would be utterly boring ! I'm so happy I learned how to ski (I teach it now) ride horses, play tennis... (haven't yet been hit either by a racquet or a tennis ball..) I'm just glad I'm not your wife !

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Somehow, another disturbed child in America found opportunity to express whatever rage lacerating fellow Americans.

That second amendment crowd is sure gone love this. Another chance to put guns in the hands of children for the NRA's freakish freedom worship.

America, home of the free to slaughter each other, because the Constitution demands it?

Or, maybe a vicious industry of weapon manufactures who own the government?

This time knives, next time, and so many times before, guns.

Land of the Free, Home of the Brave. Another sick child chooses a weapon and twenty two lives are forever changed.

Americans, they sure have an iron stomach for slaughter and not the guts to protect their children.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

Too much Walking Dead? Some people just snap. The more introverted, the more dangerous.

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

China where a muslim seperatist group attacked innoncent people at a train station and killed 29 people just using knives

You have to go all the way around the globe to find an example of mass killings with a knife, but you can go in any state in the US and find recent examples of mass killings with guns. Heck, a lot of gun homicides don't even make the news in major US cities, they're just too common.

5 ( +9 / -4 )

Wow, lucky this kid didn't have a gun - how many would have died? This is essentially the control group that proves guns do kill when used by killers, and that without guns, less people will die.

Who says there would be deaths? Last September 13 people were shot in Chicago in a single incident and no one died, during the mother's day parade last year in New Orleans over 15+ people were shot in a single incident and no one died. Do those shooting incidents act as a control group? All objects can and will kill when used by someone with a murderous intent.

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

Or, maybe a vicious industry of weapon manufactures who own the government?

One of the most popular guns glamorized in the so called "gangsta" videos is a Glock 9mm. This gun was designed and named after Mr. Glock who is an Austrian, and Austria is the primary producer of the gun. So much for him owning the US Government.

You have to go all the way around the globe to find an example of mass killings with a knife, but you can go in any state in the US and find recent examples of mass killings with guns.

So you prefer people to be massed killed by guns in the USA just to prove your point? I don't. The incidents of mass shootings even though they do make the news are not as common as one believes. However, if you were to study crime reports from various cities, you will see that people are killing each other with a vairety of weapons from knives to fists.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Good thing no one was killed.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

No matter what the weapon, if people on intent on killing they will kill. Just because this happened in America and the perp didn't use a gun that normally fits the so called "profile" of the violence in America, no need to try to deflect that it is not about the weapon, but the lunatic intent on killing.

It is amazing how someone calmly points out a fact that runs contrary to commonly accepted thought and he gets down-voted.

In the Marines I was taught that deadly force is "That force which a person using which a person knows or should know would create a substantial risk of causing death or serious bodily harm" No where in that definition does it say anything about a gun. Like the Drill Instructor said in Full Metal Jacket it is a hard heart that kills.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Funny. For an article that contains no mention of guns, there sure is a lot of talk about them in the discussion; it's the usual dance, of course - each side coming away as convinced of their own righteousness as they came in.

Personally, I'm thinking about those sasumata-style mancatchers they keep in the teachers' room at Japanese schools. Always thought they were rather silly... Now I'm thinking I may need to reevaluate that opinion.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

This whole incident reminds me of the latest episode of the Fos show "The Following" for season 2. Joe Caroll's cult are going about NYC and other locations on stabbing sprees killing people. I am sure that when they delve into this kids mind, they will try to place some of the blame on this show and it's influence on him. That may be true to a point, but I would also bet that the reason why he felt he may have needed to copy-cat the show was the fact that he probably was on some type of drug for his supposed mental condition. If you peel back the onion on most of the mass killings in the US, you will find that all of them were on some type of anti-depressant or some other mental medication. That is the bigger issue, not so much gun control (since guns were not used in this case) or the effects of TV (the following is in its second season and we have not seen mass stabbings from viewers watching the first season).

More powerful than the NRA, the big pharmacutecal lobby will try to pin this on TV and not their products.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

If you peel back the onion on most of the mass killings in the US, you will find that all of them were on some type of anti-depressant or some other mental medication.

...correlation equals causation, then?

I mean, is it really surprising that mass killers would by in large be drawn from the subset of the population which might require such medication?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Always the same questions: Why did a sixteen year old child slash his classmates? How was it possible for him to imagine such destruction? How long will America be awash in domestic violence they seem unable, unwilling and incomprehensibly powerless to stop?

Cry gun, cry knife, cry fertilizer bomb the never ending slaughter feeds slaughter and the American seems dominated by political paralysis.

Another loss, innocent children forever disfigured, their teachers helpless and the international is not surprised that some will urge more guns.

Comical, destructive and anesthetizing: The sleep of those who cannot wake to their own slaughter because it would be too painful to answer the questions that terrorize their children and the rest of the world, but they have been at it for years, so even death seems normal in their schools.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

You have to go all the way around the globe to find an example of mass killings with a knife,

Ah five people were stabbed to death in Brooklyn last October:

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/10/27/justice/new-york-mass-stabbing/

Plus lets say what you said was true that wouldn't be surprising considering the US really only borders two countries, one of which has a population just above 30 million.

but you can go in any state in the US and find recent examples of mass killings with guns. Heck, a lot of gun homicides don't even make the news in major US cities, they're just too common.

In the past ~25 years about 26 states have had a mass killing with any weapon type. So I would say there is an exaggeration there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rampage_killers:_Americas http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rampage_killers:_School_massacres http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rampage_killers:_Workplace_killings http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_familicides_in_the_United_States

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Readers, please stay on topic. Guns are not relevant to this discussion. Posts that do not focus on what is in the story will be removed.

Didn't anyone tell the kid that it was a violence-free zone and that it's illegal to slash, stab, or otherwise assault others?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Also, a girl with “an amazing amount of composure” applied pressure to a schoolmate’s wounds and probably kept the victim from bleeding to death, said Dr. Mark Rubino at Forbes Regional Medical Center.

She has saved her fellow students lives with first aid. Obama daughters are fortunate enough for having security guards at school. However her daddy is not Obama.

In US, soldier is killing fellow soldiers. Student is killing fellow students. Movie goer is killing fellow movie goers. She is someone special for the land of the mass killing field. She should be honored for her bravery and selflessness.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

How exactly are you defining "mass killing" here?

Well if you look at the source it is using 2 or more people killed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rampage_killers_(Americas) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rampage_killers:_School_massacres http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rampage_killers:_Workplace_killings http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_familicides_in_the_United_States

Are you trying to say that there are not multiple gun homicides in every state? Because I can go look at every single state in the US and find gun homicides in the most recent statistics.

According to your claim that there are mass gun homicide incidents in every state the answer is no that is not true, around ~26 states have had a mass shooting in the past 25 years.

Oh I'm sure you can find gun homicides in every state but that wasn't your claim, your claim was that each state has had a mass shooting incident that resulted in mass homicide which isn't true.

That's not putting anything into perspective.

Yes it is. Do you understand what the concept of putting something into perspective means?

i would most certainly hope that more are dying from disease than homicides - what kind of society would it be if they weren't?

Yes you would hope that but a lot of people are naive, a lot of people if you asked them would believe that gun homicides kill more than HIV. A lot of people if you asked them what kills more people on a per-capita basis in the US Alcohol or firearms a lot of people if not the majority would incorrectly state that firearms do. If I asked a person in Japan what kills more on a per-capita basis gun homicides in the US or drunk drivers in Japan nearly all of them would incorrectly state that firearms in the US do. For example when Americans were asked last year if gun crime was getting worse or getting better the vast majority of them incorrectly stated it was getting worse, gun homicides are down nearly 49% since 1994 and non fatal gun assaults are down nearly 69% since 1994 and accidental gun deaths are down nearly 40% since 1994 as well. Already the homicide rate of the nation was down 6.9% in the first half of the year of 2013 compared to the first half of 2012.

This is a completely irrelevant comparison!

No it is not, it is putting it into perspective. The odds are greater you will die from a drunk driver in Japan than you will from homicide committed with a gun in the US. Do you dispute that? The truth of the matter is that by itself a gun homicide rate of less than or equal to 3 per 100k is extremely small and a lot of every day activities/behaviors are more likely to result in your death than gun homicide, especially long guns in the USA.

How about you compare the homicide rates of the US and Japan? US: 4.8 per 100,000 Japan: 0.3 per 100,000

OK go ahead, so a difference of 4.5 per 100,000, frankly for me considering that it is out of 100,000 and the difference is four people out of 100,000 I consider that difference to be trivial in the grand scheme of things, obviously the difference is not trivial to the victims and their friends and family but to society as a whole it really is.

Are you going to tell me there is neither correlation nor causation from the high rates of gun ownership in the US and the low rates of gun ownership in Japan?

Oh I'm sure there is but it is not as strong as people think. For example my state of Minnesota has an overall homicide rate of 1.4 per 100k, a gun homicide rate of 0.82 per 100k. Another example are those "assault weapons" according to the assault weapon ban bill author Senator Diane Feinstein her numbers show that on average 45 people die each year from those firearms and 55 are wounded each year from those firearms nationwide, that comes out to a per-capita casualty rate of 0.029 per 100k or 1 tenth of the overall homicide rate of Japan. If Japan had the same gun ownership rates as the US would Japan's overall homicide rate be 4+ per 100k? I don't think so, in fact I don't think Japan's homicide rate would even rise above 1 per 100k.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

the Fos show

Correction, that should be "Fox." But this incident seems eerily similar to what has been going on in the show "The Following." I hope that this will not lead to more people copy catting the show and this kid and start going on stabbing sprees.

I know people like ot blame the media, it is not all their fault, but they do play a factor. You see the same thing with the types of crimes committed here in Japan from people who follow the magna characters too closely, and some of their crimes committed.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The best thing is they caught him alive. They can question him and try find out why their is a subset of teenagers who feel the need to kill their peers and anyone else.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@Strangerland:

This is essentially the control group that proves guns do kill when used by killers, and that without guns, less people will die.

No, this is the control group that proves those with intent will use any weapon they can get. As I've always said, concentrate on recognizing the type of person that commits these crimes, and you'll never have to worry about weapons among the civilian population again.

Removing access to guns is clearly the only logical solution to create a civilized society.

This instigator in this event didn't have access to guns and he wasn't civilized at all, was he?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

this is the control group that proves those with intent will use any weapon they can get.

Exactly. And this shows that with guns, many die, with knives, many don't. It's nice to see that you agree.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

OldHawk, the point that those intent on doing harm to others, by any means available, is lost on the willfully blind. Such persons would prefer to live in a fully Orwellian world, and force others to as well.

This young man had evil intent, and no law nor weapon-free zone designation would stop him.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

The human mind is capable of anything and it is also easy to make it go psychotic under the right conditions. The environment we grow up in including our parents has a big effect on how we turn out. All of the fault is not on the kid but the society at large.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

There is something deeply, deeply wrong with a society in which this kind of mass attack keeps happening. The challenge is to find out what that is and try to fix it. I know my parents' generation didn't have these kinds of events. I know the answer is complex, and there is not just one thing we can point to and say, "That's it. That's why these things keep happening," but I sure wish there were. It makes me feel sad, sick and a bit hopeless.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Need to check for use of multiple pharmaceutical drugs.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Wounded, but no deaths. Says a lot about the type of weapon used. But sad to see this happen.

Well, the point is, gun or not, it is completely irrelevant. If a person really wants to do bodily harm, regardless what that weapon is, severe injury is severe injury, it's about the people wielding these weapons.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

You really think people are going to die at the same rate in stabbings as in shootings? I want to give you the benefit of the doubt, but then again your comments are making that hard.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

"it's about the people wielding these weapons."

Finally, something everyone agrees on. A divergent point seems to be harm at arm's length or harm at 45-60 rpm. A difference some fine irrelevant. The divergence seems on either potential or actual danger and neither point is agreed upon. Hence, all the wasted words.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What do you mean by "removing freedoms" ? Carry knives and/or guns to school is a "freedom" not to be "removed" ?

Weapons are already illegal in schools. Banning them everywhere else isn't a rational solution.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

It's rational if you're not a barbarian.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

No. If that were true, then house to house searches would be being performed to find drugs.

You're making my point about the irrational and ineffective concept of outright bans.

No. Most people are law abiding citizens and will follow the law, even if they don't agree with it. And foundries making guns will be like labs making meth - the police will deal with them as they find them.

But considering that guns would soon become very scarce as law abiding citizens turned in their guns,

See: Connecticut.

Also, how would you get law-abiding citizens to turn in their guns if you're not going to do house-to-house searches? (You really think that free people cannot recognize a bad law?)

Not as long as that society allows everyone to arm themselves it isn't.

If it weren't for being able to arm myself, I would have died at the hands of a junkie mugger back in '99. How civilized is that?

Looking at other countries shows this to be incorrect.

July 22, 2011: Confessed mass killer Anders Behring Breivik kills 77 in Norway in twin attacks: a bombing in downtown Oslo and a shooting massacre at a youth camp outside the capital. The self-styled anti-Muslim militant admitted both attacks.

April 30, 2009: Farda Gadyrov, 29, enters the prestigious Azerbaijan State Oil Academy in the capital, Baku, armed with an automatic pistol and clips. He kills 12 people before killing himself as police close in.

Sept. 23, 2008: Matti Saari, 22, walks into a vocational college in Kauhajoki, Finland, and opens fire, killing 10 people and burning their bodies with firebombs before shooting himself fatally in the head.

Nov. 7, 2007: After revealing plans for his attack in YouTube postings, 18-year-old Pekka-Eric Auvinen fires kills eight people at his high school in Tuusula, Finland.

April 26, 2002: Robert Steinhaeuser, 19, who had been expelled from school in Erfurt, Germany, kills 13 teachers, two former classmates and policeman, before committing suicide.

April 28, 1996: Martin Bryant, 29, bursts into cafeteria in seaside resort of Port Arthur in Tasmania, Australia, shooting 20 people to death. Driving away, he kills 15 others. He was captured and imprisoned.

March 13, 1996: Thomas Hamilton, 43, kills 16 kindergarten children and their teacher in elementary school in Dunblane, Scotland, and then kills himself.

Dec. 6, 1989: Marc Lepine, 25, bursts into Montreal's Ecole Polytechnique college, shooting at women he encounters, killing nine and then himself. (That's in Canada eh.)

Aug. 19, 1987: Michael Ryan, 27, kills 16 people in small market town of Hungerford, England, and then shoots himself dead after being cornered by police.

You were saying?

No, trying to justify a populace that can walk around and shoot anyone they want in the face at any time is barbaric

Strawman. But it's an excellent indicator of your distorted prejudice against legally armed citizens.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Assistant Principal Sam King=hero

I hope everyone recovers.

The rampage — which came after decades in which U.S. schools geared much of their emergency planning toward mass shootings, not stabbings

Cut and paste directly from the article and its there for good reason.

Yes we need to take knives seriously too, but not go overboard. Recently a high school student was severely disciplined for having a knife in his EMT kit in his car in the parking lot. We need knives to cut things like seat belts, rope and food. Can't really have a cooking course without knives around.

And I think this is probably a chef's knife or carving knife, not just a kitchen knife, which would include cleavers.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You're making my point about the irrational and ineffective concept of outright bans.

No I'm not, I'm refuting your point that banning guns would result in house-to-house searches. This is obviously not true, as other illegal items have not resulted in house-to-houses searches.

See: Connecticut.

Make your own arguments. If there is something you want me to see, show it.

Also, how would you get law-abiding citizens to turn in their guns if you're not going to do house-to-house searches? (You really think that free people cannot recognize a bad law?)

Most people are law abiding citizens, and will choose to do so, even under a law they don't agree with. The huge majority of people would turn in their guns if they became illegal, though they may do so grudgingly. People for the most part want to stay in compliance with the law, and do not want to risk jail time.

If it weren't for being able to arm myself, I would have died at the hands of a junkie mugger back in '99. How civilized is that?

And if you weren't allowed to arm yourself, 20 children and 8 adults wouldn't have died at Newton in 2012.

Looking at other countries shows this to be incorrect.

July 22, 2011: Confessed mass killer Anders Behring Breivik kills 77 in Norway in twin attacks: a bombing in downtown Oslo and a shooting massacre at a youth camp outside the capital. The self-styled anti-Muslim militant admitted both attacks.

April 30, 2009: Farda Gadyrov, 29, enters the prestigious Azerbaijan State Oil Academy in the capital, Baku, armed with an automatic pistol and clips. He kills 12 people before killing himself as police close in.

...

So you found a few examples spreading back to 1987. We could find near as many, if not as many, examples in your country alone this year. Compared to a few you found for the rest of the world in the past 27 years. Thank you for proving my point.

Strawman.

It's not a strawman. Any of you can be shot in the face at any time by people holding legally armed guns - while shopping, while going to school, while sitting in the park. What you call a strawman is the reality that you would rather bury your head in the sand and ignore than admit.

But it's an excellent indicator of your distorted prejudice against legally armed citizens.

I have a prejudice against idiocy when it means that people die. I have a prejudice against people who are too selfish to give up something for the greater good of their people, due to selfish self-delusion that they are more important than the safety of society as a whole. So yes, I do have a prejudice against legally armed citizens, particularly the ones who shoot children in the face.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Weapons are already illegal in schools.

Hilarious! Pretty much every place around the schools they are legal. That means the ban can have only so much effect. I come from a dry county, so no alcohol sales there. But its surrounded by counties selling alcohol, so guess what? Plenty of alcohol to be found in my county.

Japan is an island nation with strict weapons laws. Japan is not surrounded by weapons. Its surrounded by water. So guess what? The rules are extremely effective, even the rules on certain kinds of knives. Yes, America shares a long border with Canada, but Canada has strict rules, so not nearly the problems of America and I cannot see Canadian weapons being smuggled into America so much. America also shares a border with Mexico. That is where the real problem will be, but its just one border. The rest is ocean.

America can and should get its weapons situation under control. It would lower the murder rate by removing the tools of murder. It would also be a good step toward dismantling the culture of glorifying violence, not to mention glorifying the tools of violence. I often hear talk about addressing mental illness. Well guess what? America's violence culture is giving the mentally ill lots of violent ideas!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Most people are law abiding citizens, and will choose to do so, even under a law they don't agree with. The huge majority of people would turn in their guns if they became illegal, though they may do so grudgingly. People for the most part want to stay in compliance with the law, and do not want to risk jail time

Considering the lack of compliance when it comes to registering the rifles in Connecticut and New York, the failure of the drug war as well as the prohibition of Alcohol as well as prostitution gambling......I'm not so sure about that. Heck look at the amount of piracy there is for music and movies.

So you found a few examples spreading back to 1987. We could find near as many, if not as many, examples in your country alone this year. Compared to a few you found for the rest of the world in the past 27 years. Thank you for proving my point.

Or you could just look at China just this year and or the previous year.

And if you weren't allowed to arm yourself, 20 children and 8 adults wouldn't have died at Newton in 2012.

Yep and the question, for me at least is, is balance: How frequently is such an event in Connecticut to take place and is the number of people who own such objects for recreation outweigh the cost. Considering how rare this event is for Connecticut, only one rifle homicide for example in the previous nine years prior to Newtown, and the hundreds of thousands that own such objects and possibly 1 million+ I believe it is a fair balance.

Your objection is really nothing to do with casualty counts just the principle, 88,000 Americans die each year from Alcohol but I have a feeling you would be against making Alcohol illegal or really restricting its use/purchase. Why? Because the principle of the whole thing, Alcohol is not designed to kill and therefore their deaths are an acceptable cost purely because the product is not designed to kill.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"America can and should get its weapons situation under control. . . America's violence culture is giving the mentally ill lots of violent ideas!" - entire paragraph says more than the entire string, well done.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

But its surrounded by counties selling alcohol, so guess what? Plenty of alcohol to be found in my county.

Considering the people of your county are willing to purchase alcohol than perhaps its time for the county to reconsider its ban.

America can and should get its weapons situation under control.

One could argue that it is, homicides are down around 50%, gun homicides are down 50% since 1994 and non-fatal gun assaults are down 69%. Since 2007/8 homicides are down nearly 20%.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites