BREAKING NEWS: WSAZ TV reporting shooting at elementary school in Portsmouth, Ohio

[Squatch]

Source: MSNBC

...developing

No link yet.

[Staph]

1. According to local news report,

it is suspected that it is a domestic situation with the teacher and her SO. The school is Notre Dame Elementary. There is also another shooting nearby that is assumed to be related. No word of any children being hurt. They think the gunman has left the school and is somewhere nearby.

I'll update when the local news has any other reports.

[Tesha]

21. It'll be a great country when *EVERYBODY* has ten guns. (NT)

[RoseMead]

29. Hey, having ten guns is great

until somebody comes along who has eleven...

[Tesha]

30. Funny how that works, ehh? (NT)

[geiger]

2. Christ!!!

[Staph]

3. From WSAZ reporter on site

The suspect is holed up in a nearby house -- shots have been fired and they don't know if the suspect is alive or if hostages are involved. He is said to have rifles in the house. State police helicopter is circling the house.

Unofficially, no students involved in the attack. No students were in danger.

Teacher was airlifted to nearby hospital. No report on her condition (rumor that she has died).

[swag]

4. I assume the shooter is a member of a well regulated militia.

[AllyCat]

7. I cannot believe all the people that like to solve their stupid little problems with guns

What a tragedy this country has become.

[bdamomma]

8. no one values life anymore

again, to confront someone's problems just use violence instead of talking isn't the same practice being done by this regime.

bomb people first, do not ask questions.

[Ellen Forradalom]

10. And I cannot believe all the people who think women's lives are their property to dispose of

Equally tragic.

[Tesha]

22. "When all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail." (NT)

[Redstone]

17. Excellent comment. (No sarcasm here.)

Redstone

[Marthe48]

5. Here's a link

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23048362/

[ursi]

9. domestic violence murder ...what a way to solve things ...this is so sad ...

[bossy22]

13. i wonder

if there is a positive correlation between our increasing divorce rate and increasing domestic violence. it seems like we've become a society that is so obsessed with person gratification NOW..

[kestrel91316]

25. Well, my guess is that domestic violence can AND SHOULD

result in divorce.

I don't think we should blame divorces for the violence. That's a slippery slope to concluding that divorce shouldn't happen, and that means women irreversibly bound to abusers.

[kestrel91316]

23. Our local drama last night was also some domestic situation.

Guy killed three males in the home (unknown age - sons??), a female escaped, guy holed up and shot two SWAT members, killing one, then died in a nail of gunfire as the house went up in flames.

I am guessing our community is better off without him, whoever he was.......

[Staph]

6. Update

The teacher was both shot and stabbed, in an apparent act of domestic violence. No information yet on her condition.

At the home where the alleged shooter/stabber is holed up -- some smoke is coming from the building and the fire department has been called. Dozens of state, county and local police on site, and a swat team is on the way.

The children have been let out of school and parents are picking them up.

[trag]

11. Sad!

I live just 30 miles from this school. What a heartless SOB this nut job is.

[bossy22]

12. people

just dont know how to deal with their anger anymore

[bdamomma]

15. I guess I'm from the older era, when you would talk out your

differences and come to an understanding or being more tolerant, instead of gunning someone down and using violence.

[kestrel91316]

26. And god forbid people should just act like adults and accept that

some relationships go bad/end and the adult thing to do is accept it and move on.

[Staph]

14. Update 11:30 AM EST

Swat team is on site and suiting up.

Rumor on the street (not verified) is that the teacher and the shooter were married and going through an ugly divorce. Another rumor says that he was on medication that was not well-regulated.

The shooting/stabbing took place in the classroom. There were students in the cloakroom who heard this happen. An 11-year-old girl was interviewed -- some students ran, some froze in place and cried.


A brief editorial comment -- I'd bet serious money that the shooter lost his job recently, or is long-term unemployed. Portsmouth is a classic rustbelt small town, with high unemployment. In the small West Virginia town where my sister lives, there have been three murder-suicides in the last five or six years, usually the unemployed or under-employed husband kills the working wife and then kills himself. We are a very sick country, if this is the only way that some folks see to resolve their problems, the only way to fix that hole inside when your life looks hopeless.

[zazen]

18. battering a conscious strategy of control: not a function of class, race, or pers stress

Lundie Bancroft's book "Why Does He Do That" provides an excellent breakdown, by a man who has worked with batterers for 15 years, on how eerily conscious these control tactics are that these guys use. They may seem emotional, but they arise from definitive cognitive assumptions about entitlement and ownership. I wish I could say battering was limited to men who've lost jobs or are otherwise economically frustrated, but plenty of millionaires batter too. Their partners, when they can escape, usually have other resources than shelters, which is why they don't show up so much on statistics. But latest FBI was that 1 in 4 women will be assaulted by a male partner in her lifetime.

[kestrel91316]

27. My college BF was a potential batterer. He was psychologically abusive

and very controlling. He tried to hit me once. I gave him fair warning about what would happen if he didn't clean up his act, and he only improved for a month, so I left and never looked back.

Trust me, it's ALL about ownership and control.

[RoseMead]

20. We drive through Portsmouth once a week

to pick up my stepdaughter from visitation at her mother's house in Mt. Orab. Your assessment of the economic situation in Portsmouth is spot on. And it's been that way for a long time, now. One of the most depressing parts of the trip, for me, is passing the area that used to be a steel mill once and is now the site of a brand spanking new Wal-Mart complex. (OK, technically that's in New Boston, but it's on Portsmouth's doorstep.)

I'm really wanting to say that the fact no children were attacked is a silver lining to this story. Considering how near some of the students apparently were when the attack took place, this thing could have been much, much worse. I know that may not be much comfort to the injured and traumatized, however. :-(

[theHandpuppet]

38. And there were people lining up for those pitifully few SlaveMart jobs

Portsmouth used to have a steel mill, shoe factory, coke plant, was a hub for the N&W railroad, etc. All gone. Now there's little left but service jobs paying minimum wage and with no benefits. Many younger people have left to seek jobs elsewhere, leaving the elderly without family or hope. Drugs are everywhere. Their food pantries are in crisis and homelessness is on the rise.

But hey, MSM, let's talk about Britney Spears 24/7 because doing real journalism about poverty and despair in America makes people uncomfortable. It's ugly and frightening.

Michael Moore could do a whole documentary on Portsmouth as a microcosm of what is really going on in this country. Who knows, they might even show it in Europe.

[theHandpuppet]

35. Over 25% of people in Scioto Co. live below the poverty line

Drugs and violence on the rise, not to mention hunger, despair and homelessness.

[Staph]

16. Noon update

There is another crime scene. Another woman was stabbed, shortly before the attack on the teacher. It is assumed that both attacks are related, with an implication that the two women are related.

The teacher is in critical condition at Cabell Huntington Hospital in Huntington, WV, about 50 miles away. The first victim was life-flighted to Grant Memorial Hospital in Columbus, OH, about 90 miles away. Her condition is unknown at this time.

Press conference at 12:15 PM -- they are treating the suspect as a barricade situation. No students were injured, though students were present in the classroom when the attack occurred in the school. The school will be closed for the rest of the week, though counseling will be available tomorrow. The shooter had a previous domestic violence charge and a restraining order.

WSAZ-TV is updating information about the situation on their website at http://www.wsaz.com/news/headlines/15395431.html

Swat team is moving in.


I can not believe the comments on the website. "If we required all teachers to carry guns this wouldn't happen anymore." Do you think that, as a teacher, you could shoot your (ex)husband in front of your fifth-grade classroom? Guns are not the solution to every problem, any more than war is the solution to problems between nations! Now flame away!

[Xithras]

19. As a teacher, and the husband of another teacher...

Do you think that, as a teacher, you could shoot your (ex)husband in front of your fifth-grade classroom?

When the alternative is letting the ex stab and shoot YOU in front of a classroom full of fifth graders, I think the answer should be yes. Life is ugly, and a situation like that is going to be ugly no matter what decision the teacher makes. At the minimum a teacher can at least demonstrate to the students that one does not always have to be the victim of those who are stonger and desire to hurt others.

The only thing more evil than those who desire to hurt others are those who hold the power to stop them and choose not to.

[RoseMead]

24. As a former teacher

and a woman, I think the idea that this teacher "let the ex stab and shoot" her in front of her students is appalling.

And a teacher shooting someone, even an attacker, won't teach the students that "one does not always have to be the victim of those who are stonger and desire to hurt others." It will teach them that the only way to fight violence is with more violence. Sorry, kids get that message enough in this country. We don't need them to be getting it from their teachers, too.

A way has to be found to protect the innocent, but arming everyone and encouraging them to shoot first (lest they be accused of "letting" someone attack them) is not the way to go.

[Xithras]

33. Sometimes the only way to stop violence IS through violence.

When someone has made the choice to physically harm or kill others through violence, those bystanders with the capability have a choice. They can stand by and watch, they can become their victim, or they can stop them.

Physically stopping violence typically requires the application of violence yourself. Using violence to stop violence is NOT wrong, if the effect of your violence will be to stop an even greater application of violence.

I wasn't advocating arming the kids, or even the teacher, with guns. There are plenty of other options that could be deployed, but all are violent in some way. It is foolish, however, to think that violence must be met with passivity in order to prevent the proliferation of violent thoughts in students. What that really teaches the students is that power comes through violence, because those being victimized will simply submit to them. Children need to see that those who would use violence are stopped, using whatever force is neccesary to stop them. They need to see that using force to get your way will not succeed, and that those who eschew cooperation and civility have no power over them. The only way to achieve that is to deprive violent people of any opportunity to succeed. The only way to achieve THAT, in many instances, is to meet their violence with violence, in the hopes of stopping their activities before any innocents can be harmed or their goals can be accomplished.

[RoseMead]

34. Ok, I'll bite for a minute

What bystanders are you talking about in this case? The 11-year-old students? Or has there been a report that there were other adults who watched the attack and did nothing? Because I certainly haven't seen that reported. So who, in this case, should have taken action that they did not take?

And, if you're not advocating arming the teachers, what other options do you suggest, that would have worked in a situation like this? A man bursts into a classroom (presumably, based on what I've read so far) and suddenly attacks the teacher. If the teacher isn't armed, what violence can he or she do that will stop the attack? I guess the teacher could try to throw something at the attacker, or wrestle the guy to the ground, if there's time. But if the attacker has a gun, how will that stop him? Even a baseball bat wouldn't help if someone's shooting at you. Taser maybe, but then there still needs to be time to react.

IMO, in this case, the answer would have been to keep the attacker, or at least the knife and gun, out of the school in the first place. Did this school have metal detectors? Did it have any rules to make sure people (including parents and teachers' spouses) couldn't just walk in off the street and into a classroom? Were these rules follwed in this case? My guess is that the answer to at least one of these questions is probably, no.

But beyond that, I'd like to point out that you are contradicting yourself in your own argument, when you say, "Children need to see that those who would use violence are stopped, using whatever force is neccesary to stop them. They need to see that using force to get your way will not succeed..." How on earth is using violence to overcome violence *not* showing kids that using force will not succeed? It seems to me that that is *exactly* what it will teach kids: might makes right, the person with the biggest gun or who can punch the hardest, wins.

I agree, if kids are fighting, someone need to step in and stop it (although, try using violence in that situation, and you'll probably find yourself on the receiving end of a fat lawsuit). If this man had been beating his wife, and there was time for another adult to respond and stop it, and if that adult had to punch the guy or something to make him stop, that may well have been the best appropriate response to the situation. If it was known ahead of time that the teacher was in danger, steps could have been taken to protect her and the school from that individial. But in a situation like this, when an armed attacker takes a classroom by surprise, exactly what type of response, violent or otherwise, do you think could have been possible? And if violence is the answer, I ask again, *who* in this case should have jumped the guy and stopped him? The students? Who else was available?

Beyond *that*, let me also add that you sound an awful lot like you're blaming the victim here. I don't know if that's your intent or not, but your comments make it sound like you think this woman just laid back on the desk and let the attacker do whatever he wanted to her. If blaming the victim is not your intent, you need to rethink some of the statements you're making.


edited for typo

[msmcghee]

37. You suffer from the common liberal affliction . .

. . of not understanding the difference between aggression and self-defense.

The lesson the kids need to learn is not that all violence is wrong. That would be teaching them a false lesson. There are bad people in the world and sometimes they need to be violently stopped - using however much violence is needed. Those who place their lives on the line to protect us - like soldiers and cops - are not only acting morally, they are heroic.

The irony is that you can safely claim that all forms of violence are immoral because you live in a society where soldiers and cops with guns make it pretty unlikely that you will ever suffer violence from criminals - especially compared to many other places in the world.

[RoseMead]

41. LOL! The irony is

being accused of suffering from a "common liberal affliction" on DU. If I suffer from any "liberal affliction," maybe it's because I'm a....liberal? Seriously, once I managed to understand what you were saying, it cracked me up.

But anyway, I don't think I suffer from anything. I never said anywhere that all violence is wrong or immoral. What I said was, that arming teachers is a bad idea. It's a bad idea for more reasons than the one I've already given. But one bad reason is enough. Then, the other poster said that he wasn't advocating arming teachers, at which point I asked him what he thought the teacher in *today's situation* should have done. And I pointed out that it's silly to say we should teach children to use violence to overcome the violent in order to prove that violence is wrong. Because that is a silly argument.

I also think it's funny that you presume to know anything about my chances of being a victim of violence. The school where this attack happened is 45 minutes away from where I live. When I originally saw "WSAZ" and "shooting at an elementary school" in the same subject line, for a minute I was scared this was at *my* kids' school.

But what do I know, sadly afflicted liberal that I am. :shrug:

[msmcghee]

42. What you said was . .

How on earth is using violence to overcome violence *not* showing kids that using force will not succeed? It seems to me that that is *exactly* what it will teach kids: might makes right, the person with the biggest gun or who can punch the hardest, wins.

Despite the convoluted first sentence - your position is that all violence is wrong - even defensive violence. You claim that kids will only learn that "might makes right".

As the other poster correctly pointed out, that's exactly what they'll learn when the bullies and criminals get away with it.

I consider myself a liberal. And I can see how such immoral delusions contribute greatly to the Republican vote count in elections. I want (sensible) Dems to win. Not anyone who thinks defensive violence is wrong. Admittedly, it's a lonely crusade at DU but I'll keep chipping away.

[fascisthunter]

44. You Just ain't a Conservative Know-it-All

You, you Liberal!:sarcasm:

[Judi Lynn]

51. Can't get any worse than that, can you? Good lord, a liberal at a Democratic message board! n/t

[Xithras]

39. Not blaming the victim.

First off, my statement was clearly qualified with "those bystanders with the capability". Those who are innocent and unable to defend themselves are obviously not to blame. However, those who could have defended themselves, or who could have reasonably prepared to do so but elected not to out of some misguided morality, or who could have implemented procedures to do so, do not get off quite so easily.

In this case, a taser would have been a good example. Had she been equipped with a weapon such as a taser, she might have stopped him. She might have offered some resistance. Is it her fault that she didn't have one? No. The responsibility for that lays with the school, the district, and the common mindset that schools should remain defenseless. The teacher in this case bears no responsibility for what happened to her, but the school, which is quite aware of these kinds of dangers and yet chose to NOT implement ways of dealing with them, does bear it.

Your own proposal does not make sense in light of your argument. You advocate metal detectors and rules, but what good would those do against someone like this...someone intent on harming and killing anyway? What would have stopped this guy from merely shooting the door guard dead, proceeding to the classroom, and carrying out the attack anyway? The ONLY thing that would have stopped him is the presence of someone armed with a device capable of taking the guy down. Whether the device is a gun or a taser is irrelevant. Whether the shooter is a teacher, a principal, or a security guard is also irrelevant. What is NOT irrelevant, no matter how you look at this, is that ONLY the presence of A PERSON with the means to stop this attacker using violence would have prevented that teacher from being shot and stabbed. Only the application of violence could have stopped this violence.

My own contradiction is simply the fault of missing a couple of words, "Children need to see that those who would use violence are stopped" should have read: "Children need to see that those who would use violence to harm society or innocents are stopped". There is such a thing as right and wrong. It's wrong to hurt others. It's right to stop people from doing so.

[ConcernedCanuk]

36. "Using violence to stop violence is NOT wrong" - Gandhi would disagree

.
.
.

And spent his life trying to teach us.

I see he failed somewhat.

A quote form Gandhi:


I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent.

Something to ponder . .

[Xithras]

40. Ghandi would disagree, but 40 dead monks in Burma might not.

Nonviolence only works as a form of protest if your opponent values your life more than he values his position or actions. The British military in India valued human life more than they valued the dominance of the British Empire, so peaceful protest worked. The junta in Burma valued their continued control more than they valued the lives of the peaceful monks, so peaceful protest didn't.

The efficacy of peaceful protest is determined by those you're protesting, not by the protesters. Attempting to peacefully intervene against a madman with a gun who assigns no value to human life (and murderers, by definition, don't), will simply turn you into a victim.

[fascisthunter]

45. Yes... COme Over to the Dark SIde Monks...

join Xithras in his/her journey to gun utopia!

[ConcernedCanuk]

47. his

.
.
.

And in his case Gandhi failed

But not mine

[Irreverend IX]

49. Another quote from Gandhi:

"The people of a village near Bettia told me that they had run away whilst the police were looting their houses and molesting their womenfolk. When they said that they had run away because I had told them to be non-violent, I hung my head in shame. I assured them that such was not the meaning of my non-violence. I expected them to intercept the mightiest power that might be in the act of harming those who were under their protection, and draw without retaliation all harm upon their own heads even to the point of death, but never to run away from the storm centre. It was manly enough to defend one's property, honour, or religion at the point of a sword. It was manlier and nobler to defend them without seeking to injure the wrong-doer. But it was unmanly, unnatural and dishonourable to forsake the post of duty and, in order to save one's skin, to leave property, honor or religion to the mercy of the wrong-doer." -- Selections from Gandhi, Nirmal Kumar Bose, Navajivan Publishing House, 1948.

[ConcernedCanuk]

50. I like links - and more links

.
.
.

I check and double check stuff -most of the time

Anyways, here's another reported quote:

"I think it would be a good idea. "

Mahatma Gandhi, when asked what he thought of Western civilization

http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/1038.html

I think more important than quoting anyone is the effect they leave behind,

and although Gandhi was never "officially" a political leader, he was more a leader than any politician.

USA has dozens, hundreds, maybe thousands of politicians . . .

But who among them can claim to be a real "leader"?

What the USA has is a taskmaster, not a real leader

He just tells the citizens what they have to do

Hopefully a real leader will come of this "election"

Yes, I do believe that the USA's electoral process is a bit of a farce,

And that's putting it politely.

[krispos42]

52. Xithras has stated his or her case well in this sub-thread

So I will say this instead:

Violence such as this is both a societal problem and a personal problem. The particular crime rates in an area, such as the assault rate, the robbery rate, the burglary rate, the murder rate, the illegal drug rate... those are societal problems. The best way to deal with them include legalization of drugs, fighting poverty, better education, better family lives, better economies, and better law enforcement.

However, when that problem is breathing in your face or standing in your hallway, it becomes YOUR problem. Your intimate, personal, immediate problem. And what are you going to do then?



There is a perception that civilized societies are non-violent as a characteristic of being civilized. I believe this is false. What makes societies civilized is non-aggression. Being physically and violently aggressive is wrong, but violence is necessary to fight that aggression. We are fortunate to have a highly mobile police force with instant communications to respond to aggression, so the general population is less dependent upon their own means for self-defense than traditionally so. But all to often the police arrive to pick up the pieces after the fact. To investigate and try to find the assailant after the crime has occured

[kestrel91316]

28. Shootout in Room 306. Oy. I hope we NEVER see the day.

[Xithras]

32. So do I n/t

[Staph]

31. The suspect has been found dead

of a self-inflicted wound. Police negotiators had established communications with him.

The teacher, his soon-to-be-ex-wife (she filed for divorce without children on January 25, 2008) is in critical condition. The other victim, also in critical condition, is as yet unnamed.

[NuttyFluffers]

43. i wonder how many shootings can be traced to stress of poverty v. mental health care access.

i'm just curious how many of these things could be prevented if we had stronger anti-poverty measures or free mental health care.

but then there's always the gun control factor, too. i wonder which one works best in a society...

[lastliberalintexas]

48. It doesn't sound like this was one

It sounds like this was a run of the mill control freak who refused to deal with the separation of a spouse. Crosses every racial, economic and social class known to humans. Unfortunately.

[mitchum]

46. And I assume he stabbed his victims with some type of gun cleaning tool?

Because you know...