In Katherine S. Newman’s Rampage:
The Social Roots of School Shootings, she researches two rampage shootings and
details the accounts from witnesses and the young shooters themselves. The reading also gives a background of who
the shooters were and tries to figure out what were the reasons for the
rampage. Newman’s research delves back
into the concept of youth-as-objects-of-saving-and-study and highlights the
importance of paying more attention to signs of trouble within youth.
The reading details two different
rampage school shootings as well as defines what is considered to be a rampage
shooting. According to Newman, a rampage
shooting must, “take place on a school-related public stage before an audience;
involve multiple victims, some of whom are shot simply for their symbolic
significance or at random; and involve on or more shooters who are students or
former students of the school (Newman, 2004).”
Acts of revenge are not considered rampage shootings according to
Newman. Her analysis in chapter 2 of the
shooters reflects the first half of the semester where youth were considered as
objects of saving and study. Her
findings show that though there was no way of really telling, if the parents,
teachers, or faculty paid closer attention to the signs, then the shootings
could have possibly been prevented. This
takes us back to the theory that youth are objects of saving and study because
it shows us that if we study the youth more carefully, then we can save them
from committing such violent acts. Though
rampage shootings are rare, it is still a threat to society that should be
carefully observed.
In chapter 2, Newman lays out the
signs of trouble within the youth and in chapter 3 she discusses all the
potential reasons that lead youth to commit this type of crime. Researchers observed that though there is a
higher crime rate among inner city youth, most of these rampage shootings were
done by white suburban boys who mostly grew up comfortably. Newman also focuses on the fact that the
shooters were subject to some sort of rejection from their peers or felt the
need to impress them. However, this is
not always the case. In an article
posted by USA Today, Greg Toppo discusses the events of the Columbine shooting
and described the two boys as the bullies, versus being bullied like in the
accounts in Newman’s research. These two
completely different descriptions of personalities behind shooters reiterates
the fact that youth need to be closely watched by adults.
Rampage shootings at schools
relight the fire in adults that youth need to be saved and in order to save
them must study them and protect them at all cost. In light of these tragedies
schools sought to increasing their security, seeing that as one of the best
measures they could do to protect the youth.
However some researchers such as Kupchik would disagree with the concept
of increasing security, arguing that schools are already one of the safest
places youth can be. Society today still
struggles with the crippling question of what we should do with youth.
Newman, Katherine. 2004 Pp. 3-73 and 335-347 in Rampage: The Social Roots of School Shootings. NY: Basic Books
I thought it interesting how you mentioned that the attention that ignited from these shootings have roused the adults to reconsider how they "deal" with youths. It's important to realize that these shootings are extremely rare, and just like you said, schools are still one of the safest places youth can find themselves in. So it is surprising to see how the schools are girdling up their budget and investing on security officers and surveillance cameras, which, surprisingly, have been noted to ADD to the negative environment of fear and distrust. The ways in which the schools are using to control their students can in fact aggravate the existence of violence--but for what? There is literally more chance to get hit by a lightning, or get murdered out on the streets, than to be shot at a school rampage. However, I do admit that the shock and just the sheer horror of these shootings strike fear in the heart of every parent; but I must also assert that the sole gravity of the crime should not justify the extensive use of resources, especially if these resources seem to backfire.
ReplyDeleteOne cannot help being skeptical when professionals claim that schools are the safest place for children, especially when media magnifies these rampage shootings. As Males mentioned in “Framing Youth” youth have been negatively portrayed by the media, or as he put it, “kids everywhere were killer Chuckies”(159). These rare instances are incredibly magnified by the media, which makes them seem worse. A view that has only proven to be detrimental to youth, it would be best to see the best way to help them. Teresa Nguyen connected the Newman article with the view of “youth as objects of saving and study”, which would be beneficial to troubled youth as well as all those youth. How our socity goes about saving youth is perhaps a bigger issue now.
ReplyDeleteVery well presentation Teresa and great summary of Rampage: The Social Roots of School Shootings. I have to agree that youth have fallen into a world of study and should have more attention to prevent damages. It’s interesting how Newman brings a good point of youth respond to revenge when they are seen as threat. With a close view youth would be prevented and taken care of by older adults, faculty, or parents, but in reality many older people ignore the damage. Teresa brings a good point of research have shown that crime is seen more in inner city and done by white suburban. In my opinion I believe that many youth fear against danger. It seems that youth fear of danger increases the need and desire to be close to others, making separation from family members and friends. I agree with Teresa that shootings or any kind of bullying should be closely observed and take action with adults. Overall, great point Teresa and good reference to USA Today.
ReplyDeleteThis article did an excellent job at highlighting a reoccurring issue in society, which is the prevalence of the adult centered perspective. One aspect I would like to point out is how the author’s blog relates to a previous reading we had in the beginning of the semester, the Males article if I believe (if it’s wrong, I would appreciate if someone corrected it for me!). The article talked about how rare events like shootings are. The general populace is horrified by these events, and rightfully so considering the heinous nature of the crimes. But media representation blow it up to make it seem as if youth always behaved like this, even though events like shooting are the exceptions not the rules. This in turn leads to more confusion about what to do with youth as a category….and pushes more public support for things like security in schools. Even though one could say increased security and et cetera is justified, to an extent, it doesn’t help that the media sways public opinion.
ReplyDeleteTeresa does a great job analyzing Newman’s book. I do agree with Teresa on the fact that Newman’s point of view echoes the concept of youth-as-objects-of-saving-and-study. I think that Newman neglects to look at this crisis in a larger scope. Newman seems to refute the myth that these tragedies have a simplistic explanation. Newman does not provide any substantial solutions when it comes to providing practical strategies for the prevention of rampage school shootings. I personally believe that the issue of rampage school shooting is not only limited to students and their background, but it is very much extended to how the society approach the gun issue. I think rather than digging into student’s personal issues, one should emphasize on the root of the problem.
ReplyDeleteTeresa Nguyen does a very good job at summarizing the readings by Katherine Newman. Rampage shootings are an issue that has been getting a lot of attention, especially in the media. So much so, that it seems as if rampage shootings are occurring at a frequent rate. As Teresa pointed out, I find it interesting that most of these rampage shootings are occurring in primarily white, middle class suburbs, a fact that, as discussed during lecture, may be the reason for the extensive media coverage. In part because of the fact that this violence is occurring in the least expected places, where the belief is that the neighborhoods are a lot safer than in the inner-city schools. The close attention that the media has paid to these shootings have also led to the panic of parents when sending their children to school. After the sandy crook shootings, school districts such as LAUSD had to implement new security measures in elementary schools so that the parents would send their children to school without fear, increasing the power of the new regime in schools. I also find it interesting that there has been a focus on these shooters as objects of saving and studying, with Newman writing about peer rejection and isolation in the suburbs, it makes me wonder how a rampage shooting would be discussed if it happened in an inner-city school.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed reading Teresa Nguyen's blog post regarding the readings and class lectures. I found this topic extremely interesting and feel that more people should be informed about rampage shootings. The fact that they are occurring at a frequent rate is shocking. I agree with Maria Campos' post and how it is surprising that the shooting have been happening in middle class, white neighborhoods. I feel the need to involve parents in the cause against rampage shootings because they can control what their children are viewing. The age of technology has opened up violent images and content to children negatively influencing them and numbing children to violence. The media and the attention they have brought to these types of shootings makes them an even larger event. Teresa also does a great job of summarizing Newman's book regarding peer rejection and isolation of suburbs.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed reading this essay as I felt it did a good job covering the different broad aspects of the reading but also questioned the statements presented. The statement regarding what to do with youth is always a difficult one. As described Kupchik would disagree to a certain degree that increasing school security measure would decrease school violence. One of the finding was that the more the students felt their opinions were being considered for the regulations the better and safer they felt. In schools in which rampage shootings have already taken place, it is almost impossible for parents to feel that by not increasing security measures there students are safe. I believe that most parents would want increased security for protection from the youth-as-a-dangerous-class. The same legal representations of these youth are constantly reemerging in various ways.
ReplyDeleteTeresa does a great job at summarizing and analyzing Newman’s reading. Overall, rampage shootings have become more of an issue in the last couple of years. Although, this article focuses more on youth it is important to note that in the recent years shootings have been taking place in movie theatres, military bases and places of worship. Rampage shootings take place all over the nation and by people of all ages. Furthermore, every time a shooting takes place a discussion on gun soon follows, however that discussion soon fades away until the next shooting takes place. In addition it will be interesting to see if in the future the media gives any attention to the fact that in recent years the rampage shootings have occurred in white suburban neighborhoods as oppose to low income communities, which are the communities being policed, and are also the communities dealing with policies such as stop and frisk. It would be interesting to see if policies like these ever get introduced in better-off neighborhoods. Lastly, the discussion surrounding the shooters usually involves a conversation about mental health however; I wonder if the same conversation would take place if the shooter would be a person of color. My guess is that it would not. Although, there was a conversation about Virginia Tech’s shooter Seung-Hui Cho state of mental health there was also a conversation about how his culture might have somehow influence his actions. This is highly problematic, and it will be interesting to see where the conversation goes from here.
ReplyDeleteTeresa did a good job of summarizing the readings by Newman. I found it interesting how most of the research done on this topic of security in the schools contradicts itself most of the time. Which brings up the topic of what exactly causes rampage shootings? Even though Newman says that rampage shooters tend to be rejected by their peers, but the article that she brought in says that some rampage shooters were the bullies at their schools. Although Newman brings up great points, he still only presents part of the issue and part of the demographic that these types of issues effect. It seems that most cases differ drastically so instead of looking at the rampage shooters collectively, we need to look at them individually because it tends to be about what is going on their lives rather than anything else.
ReplyDeleteTeresa correctly points out that Newman’s research is exemplary of the concept of youth-as-objects-of-saving-and-study. Newman was precisely right in explaining why rampage shootings are so terrifying: “they contradict our most firmly held beliefs about childhood, home, and community” (Newman 15). When these tragic events take place, fear grips the public as they consider their lack of control of youth and struggle to understand why youth would take such actions. If this confusion is not properly worked through, it can lead to a general fear of youth, which it has. I think it’s this fear that has led to the notion of youth-as-a-dangerous-class.
ReplyDeleteBefore being so quick to judge those who implemented the new security measures in light of the shootings, it’s useful to put ourselves in the shoes of those teachers and students who actually experienced these traumatic events firsthand. We have to ask ourselves why they would agree to these new measures; it probably makes them feel safer – or at least gives them the reassurance that some action is being taken. However the heightened scrutiny drives a wedge between youth and adult culture when these measures are implemented wrongly. Security measures in school are not necessarily a bad thing if only we kept in mind the purpose and priority of schools: schools are first and foremost institutions for teaching, not for disciplining or punishing. Though there is room for security measures, we have to find the limit, which is very hard to do.