Was High School Attack Inspired by Video Games?

A 17 year old student detonated two pipe bombs in a San Mateo, California high school on Monday before being subdued by faculty members.

The San Francisco Chronicle reports that the boy was wearing a bulletproof vest and was armed with an additional eight pipe bombs, a two-foot long sword and a chainsaw. Police said that the student planned to set off the bombs and then attack survivors with the other weapons.

Gadget blog Gizmodo wonders whether there may have been a video game connection: 

If you’re wondering why this is on Gizmodo—and you guys always do—it’s because those weapons inherently remind me of movie and video game weapons. I’m not trying to say that video games cause violence or don’t cause violence, but what I’m saying is that when a 17 year old man-child thinks he can corner his classmates while dual wielding a chainsaw and a sword probably played a lot of doom and zelda and didn’t do very well in gym class, so would get tired very quickly.

A second report by the SF Chronicle describes the boy as a "techno wizard." His mother thought the bomb-making components were being used to build model rockets.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone


  1. 0
    jedidethfreak says:

    Depends on the age of the chainsaw and chain.  If it’s pretty new, nope, wouldn’t work.  Bone, depending on where in the body, can be softer than most types of wood.  I worked construction and watches some people rough-in a heating system in a new house using a chainsaw.  Took them twenty minutes, for what ususally is two hours of cutting that would still wear out a regular sawzall blade.

    Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone’s feelings.

  2. 0
    jedidethfreak says:

    You’re right, but I wouldn’t put it past some liberal nutjob to say that the teacher’s gotta go.  "Violent tendancies towards children," or some bullshit.

    Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone’s feelings.

  3. 0
    jedidethfreak says:

    There are people out there who would say that it’s someone or something elses fault no matter how old they are.

    Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone’s feelings.

  4. 0
    jedidethfreak says:

    Austin, I would posit this:  Since nobody he encountered was likely to be wielding a firearm, the vest itself was most likely to be used for shock value.

    Just throwing that out there.

    Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone’s feelings.

  5. 0
    Aurontsubaki says:

    Another dumbass excuse of games being the scapegoat, Phoenix Wright might have to take this case.

    What we got here is failure to communicate!

  6. 0
    JustChris says:

    The article does say he wasn’t very good at gym. He simply lacked the physical coordination, and plus carrying all those things probably put a heavy load on him.

  7. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    From the list provided by the OP.

    Number 1, 5, and 16 are ‘plate carriers’.  As such, they have no kevlar in them.  You need to provide your own Kevlar.  Also, 16 is crap, basically made for airsofting. 

    Numbers 18-22 are helmets, not vests.  I’m fairly certain that only 22 is a real ‘bullet-proof’ helmet.

    Numbers 2, 3, 7, 8 ,9 , 12, and 14 have no kevlar in them.  They’re basically made for motocross to protect against injury.  They wouldn’t stand up to a bullet. 17 is a shirt that basically falls into the same category, but offers no protection to one’s body.

    Numbers 6 and 13 claim to have kevlar in them, but the seller admits they will not protect you from a bullet, which makes the claim somewhat questionable (likely they have no kevlar at all).

    Numbers 4 and 10 would, in fact, stop a small bullet.  They do appear to be real body armor with level II protection.

    However, the item I would most draw your attention to is Number 11.  The tactical vest, which is likely akin to what the would be murderer was wearing.

    His vest was not made of kevlar.  It was made of low quality nylon, like most tactical vests you can buy for 69.99.

  8. 0
    Nekowolf says:

    Is it still made of kevlar? Then it’s a kevlar vest.

    Whether the kid in question knew such or not is irrevelant, because he may not have known. If it’s made of kevlar, it is made of kevlar, and no amount of semantics or such will change that.

  9. 0
    Father Time says:

    Aw crap I’m late. Ok err the game would not give a kid reason to want to go on a rampage so no they’re not responsible.


    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  10. 0
    Ryno says:

    I concur as well.

    And the important thing to take away from this is: violent games/movies don’t train people to kill. We finally have conclusive proof.


    Saying that Jack Thompson is impotent is an insult to impotent men everywhere. They’ve got a whole assortment of drugs that can cure their condition; Jack, however…

  11. 0
    Baruch_S says:

    Actually, I doubt he will be. If you read the full article, the kid was a former student, so the teacher at least can’t get in trouble for inappropriate contact with a student. I doubt the school has any rules against tackling non-student chainsaw-wielding psychos in the hallway…

  12. 0
    Baruch_S says:

    I’d agree with you. I highly doubt that his attack was inspired by movies or video games, but I wouldn’t be surprised if his weapons choice were. They’re too ridiculous to be inspired by something that doesn’t involve killing zombies.

  13. 0
    Saxy says:

    Video games aside, I find this amusing:

    The kid has 10 pipe bombs, a sword, and a chainsaw, and he gets tackled. 

    Seriously? Between the sword and the saw… you can’t defend yourself?

    This kid redefines epic fail, and thank God he did. If any body with any real intelligence handled those weapons…

    Well, anybody with any real intelligence would generally not attack a school, anyway.


  14. 0
    Stinking Kevin says:

    That Gizmondo article plays on stereotypes and jumps to unsupported conclusions, but it never suggests the attack itself was inspired by video games, only that the attacker’s impractical weapon choices might have been.


    It’s not saying that action movies and video games turned the kid into a violent sociopath. It’s just saying that this violent sociopathic kid might have gotten his stupid weapon ideas from playing video games or watching action movies.


    Which is probably true, I guess.


  15. 0
    JustChris says:

    Why Gizmodo, a tech-savvy blog, is attempting to draw a video game connection with the crime is beyond me. Seems like something for a slow news day/let’s stir up interesting discussion for them.

    A lot of things have been said about the boy, but the article does point out the funny bit that someone who is not good at gym class would lack the coordination to attack someone with a sword or chainsaw effectively. It’s not Gears of War. In real life his target would move wildly struggling to get away from the chain saw, and cutting through bone would probably jam it (especially a small one).


  16. 0
    gamegod25 says:

    once again parents = fail

    My mother was fairly lenient but there was no way in hell I’d get away with making more than a half dozen pipe bombs, get a bullet proof vest, chainsaw, and two foot sword without her knowing. She’d have some questions that I better have some damn good answers.

  17. 0
    ShayGuy says:

    Point. He definitely could’ve gotten his ideas from Evil Dead. Hopefully, we’ll never know, because if anyone actually spends time and money to find out what he was thinking, somebody’s misplacing their priorities.


    Lord, grant me the strength to finish what I

  18. 0
    ZippyDSMlee says:

    Inspiration for such things is found in the dark recesses of the mind depression, anger, hatred sorrow brews a insipid volatile stew of regret and remorse.

    Blaming fiction for the actions of the broken and the damned is unrealistic and quite petty….thus throughly human….. still must we fear the unknown so much we fear everything that is known?

    Until lobbying is a hanging offense I choose anarchy! Stop supporting big media and furthering the criminalization of consumers!! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/

  19. 0
    mogbert says:

    Game/movie inspired or not, he got himself tackled!

    F YEAH! Give that teacher a raise and a medal! Most of these stories end with candlelight vigils and interviews with the survivors. I’m glad this had a better ending.

  20. 0
    Bigman-K says:

    Hum, so if you are under 18 it’s not your fault and you can’t be held responsible for your own actions. IT HAS TO BE a video game/movie/T.V show that caused it. God, this infantilization and babying of youth today is incredibly rediculous.

    "No law means no law" – Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black on the First Amendment

  21. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    The vast majority of those ‘vests’ have NO, repeat, NO ballistic protection to them.  They may look cool, but until you buy the PLATES, they’re just cute looking vests for children.  Also, a lot of these seem to be made for airsofting.

  22. 0
    axiomatic says:

    Not really.

    It looks more movie inspired to me. He’s basically carrying all the things Bruce Campbell had in Army of Darkness.

    But emulating movies doesn’t make it a "hot button" issue now does it?

  23. 0
    Yellowchposticks says:

    Techno wizard? Model rocketry and YouTube videos does not qualify someone as a techno wizard. 

    But where else can we shift the blame?  Perhaps movies, there’s plenty of chainsaw usage.  Maybe Bruce Campbell, his role as Ash in the Evil Dead series definitely makes chainsaws cool.  No no, it was the woodcutting industry, a major consumer of chainsaws.  Perhaps Alfred Nobel, for inventing dynamite, the predecessor to pipe bombs?  And prehistoric people, for discovering metallurgy and sword smithing.

    Well, I kind of wanted to avoid this cliche insult, but maybe……HIS MOM (insert "your mom" joke here) for poor parenting?

  24. 0
    ShayGuy says:

    This isn’t a blame thing — nobody’s using games as a scapegoat. The kid was crazy. And an idiot. But there are idiots and there are idiots. The crazy he didn’t get from games. But the particular flavor of his stupidity looks like "applying game logic to the real world."

    He’d have attacked one way or another. But his method seems game-inspired. It’s interesting, but not really important. Actually, maybe we should credit the games here — if he weren’t thinking in game logic, it’s possible he would’ve been smarter about his attack, and done more damage than just two bombs.


    Lord, grant me the strength to finish what I

  25. 0
    Zerodash says:

    Isn’t this stating the obvious?  People will use tools they are familiar with, even fictional ones.  Its no different than if a Reinassance Fair enthusiast went nuts- they would be using a rapier or some medeival weapons. 

    The chainsaw is just plain stupid.  Also, unless the kid doled out the $$ for an actual forged & folded sword, the blade was likely too fragile to be deadly.  Those stainless steel swords sold in the mall break very easily.

  26. 0
    Geryon says:

    Frankly the mention of chainsaw is going to make me thing of Evil Dead and Army of Darkness before any video games if people are going to make arbitrary connections.

  27. 0
    Kajex says:

    For Chrissake… It’s not enough that a legitamite news source didn’t even pursue that line of thought, but you have somebody else already propogating that thought because it "inherently reminds" him of movie and videogame weapons.

    Here’s an easier answer- The kid got his hands on a chainsaw (easier than you’d think), probably had a cheap-ass "battle ready" sword made of stainless steel (which holds an edge well- before breaking into dozens of pieces smacking it against a table), and scoured the internet for 5 minutes before finding the necessary materials and procedures to creating a pipe-bomb, because he was obviously having issues. It’s not that fucking hard, trying to make a "connection" at this point is useless.

  28. 0
    JDKJ says:

    I’m so tired of flogging that old-ass debate with you that it ain’t even funny no more. I concluded back when we originally discussed the matter in the original thread that you are absolutely clueless on the issue. You can’t even get the facts, much less the law, straight. I’m not going to re-visit that issue with you. That’s a monumental waste of my time.

    Besides, I see where you’re now drifting into the realm of sophistry ("anyone" must necessarily include "me" and therefore you contradict yourself). Just because you wanna be a dumbfuck doesn’t mean that I must willing join you. 

  29. 0
    jedidethfreak says:

    Ohh, nice comeback.  I like how it contradicts itself.  "I didn’t say that to anyone!  I said it to you!"  Last time I checked, I counted as someone.

    I also love how you don’t actually try to argue with my post, you just attack me personally.  I know you’re retarded and all, so I’ll fill you in: this is how we know you’re full of shit.

    He was dead when I got here.

  30. 0
    JDKJ says:

    I never laid claim to knowing more about the law than ANYONE, just to knowing more about the law than YOU. And, truth be told, that’s not much of an accomplishment, given that the law you do know about can hardly fill a thimble.

    And, no, you’re not a dumbfuck because I’m too stupid to figure out that Austin Lewis meant "legally." Truth be told, I’m not sure why you’re a dumbfuck – just that you are. But, if I had to hazard a guess, I’d surmise that your Mother smoked cigarettes and drank alcohol during pregnancy. But, again, that’s just my educated guess.  

  31. 0
    jedidethfreak says:

    Wait, I’m the dumbfuck because you’re too stupid to figure out that he meant "legally?"  Mr. I-know-more-about-the-law-than-anyone?

    Also, maybe you really are retarded, as this is about a school attack by a student, not your quest to destroy EA.  But, since you brought it up, as I said, the NFLPA gave EA the stats, as they do every year, for X amount of dollars.  Y amount of X was to be divied up amongst the players in the game.  Since the NFLPA gave EA the stats, Z amount of Y was to be given to the retired players by the NFLPA.  You know, the National Football Leage PLAYERS ASSOCIATION, also known as the PLAYERS UNION, the group that’s supposed to be looking out for current and FORMER PLAYERS.  It’s in their name.  They are supposed to be looking out for the players.  The whole point of a union is to look after the members.  The players were fucked by said union.  The players were NOT fucked by EA.  If EA used their likenesses without having gotten the needed information for said likenesses from the NFLPA, then it would have been on EA.  That was not the case.  The e-mail you cited proved this, as had EA done this without the approval of the NFLPA, they wouldn’t have discussed it with the NFLPA, the NFLPA wouldn’t have said "just scramble the face and change the number," and the NFLPA would have had to, by their own by-laws, file an injunction against EA.  Absolutely none of this came to pass, because the NFLPA signed off on the whole thing.  That’s why those players sued the NFLPA, and that is why those players won.  To then say "Down with EA!" because the member of the group suing the NFLPA that the group calls outspoken says that he thinks they should sue EA is just absolutely baseless, and for you to think that such a lawsuit wouldn’t be a losing battle proves how retarded you are.

    He was dead when I got here.

  32. 0
    JDKJ says:

    Don’t you find it strange that I wasn’t the only one to draw that conclusion? And you’re one to talk. It took me about seven attempts to finally get your retarded ass to understand that EA didn’t license the use of the likenesses of the retired NFL players who made up the class of successful plaintiffs, something which should have been immediately apparent to anyone with an IQ above 50. 

    And as the contestants leave the final turn and enter the straightaway, headed towards the finish line, you and Austin Lewis lead the field, running dead-even in the Dumbfuck of the Year Derby.  

  33. 0
    jedidethfreak says:

    Well, we all know that you only take someone’s personal experiences at face value if and only if they agree with you completely.

    If you read any of Austin’s posts and couldn’t figure out he meant "legally" obtaining a firearm, then, even if he graduated from a small-engine repair school, you were dropped from regular class in third grade to special education, because the only way ANYONE could think he was talking about anything other than "legally" obtaining a firearm is to be mentally retarded.

    Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone’s feelings.

  34. 0
    JDKJ says:

    You can say whatever you want in defense of Austin Lewis. But I nevertheless will remain convinced that he, who claims to have matriculated from Duke University, actually graduated from The Duke School of Lawnmower and Small Engine Repair.

  35. 0
    JDKJ says:

    I thought the same thing, too. But wasn’t really surprised. Austin Lewis has a well-established and well-deserved reputation for saying shit which just don’t make no fucking sense.

  36. 0
    JDKJ says:

    It’s illegal to sell or posse black tar heroin in the State of California. Yet, I can get a $20 ballon on Skid Row in downtown L.A. within 60 seconds. What’s your point? That one kid would be either too scared or too stupid or too whatever to do it? Fine. O.K. But that don’t mean that I can’t do it.

  37. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    It should be fairly obvious I’m talking about legally getting a weapon.  Personally, I don’t see this nerd going to South Central and buying a glock.

  38. 0
    jedidethfreak says:

    But the edit contradicts this.  Body Armor and Tactical Vests are not the same thing.  A tactical vest does offer some light protection against handguns, but real body armor is designed to protect somewhat effectively from close range rifle blasts.  In either case, they aren’t that hard to get.  Military surplus stores sell 80’s and 90’s-era vests rather cheap.  In Minnesota, I went to a place where you could get one for fifty bucks, still in the original packaging.

    I’ve never heard of any gun place that lets you get a gun for fifty bucks.

    Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone’s feelings.

  39. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    Because Body Armor is harder to come by.  Reasonably, if the kid had body armor (or rather, his parents had it), they probably had a gun.  Who the fuck buys body armor without a weapon?

  40. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    So I can’t say that the fact that he lives in a state where it’s harder than fuck to get a legal firearm that it’s unlikely that he, a 17 year old nerd, wouldn’t be likely to use one in a school massacre?  But at the same time, I can’t maintain, as is the case, that California is host to some of the worst gun crime in the Nation, mostly done with weapons that are illegal?

    Do you really think this kid would have gone done to South Central with his 200 dollars and tried to get a gun?  What, with your street smarts, do you think would have been the outcome?  Because I’m willing to bet the outcome would be him getting robbed and murdered.

  41. 0
    JDKJ says:

    I already pointed out to Mr. Lewis that he should be reciting the old NRA saw that "when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns." But unless you’re schizophrenic, you can’t reasonably say at the the same time that (a) California’s strict gun laws make it impossible to obtain certain guns and (b) California’s strict gun laws don’t work to ensure that it is impossible to obtain certain guns. Those two positions are mutually exclusive. Sometimes, you just gotta pick a side and stick with it consistently and not run around, like a headless chicken, all over the place.

  42. 0
    Monte says:

     OK ya, he didn’t actually specify… but really this is Austin we are talking about.

    As someone who comments on GP, and replies to his posts, i would think that you’d have a grasp of where he stands on these issues. Namely, his stance on gun control being that it only serves to make it harder for regular citizens to buy guns legally, as criminals will just use illegal methods and thus go around the control… So if he’s talking about how "hard" it is to get guns, he is 99% of the time talking about legally… especially if we are talking about a blue state

  43. 0
    JDKJ says:

    I don’t read what Austin said like that at all. When he invites his reader to attempt to purchase particular types of guns, does he make a distinction between purchasing those guns on the legitimate or illegitmate markets before triumphantly claiming the impossibility thereof? I don’t see where he does. To me, he sounds as if he’s saying it’s simply and wholly impossible. If not and I’m wrong, then he should take more care to make distinctions clear.

  44. 0
    JDKJ says:

    I don’t know about all that "blah, blah, blah," but I do realize that you’re a nit-wit. Gotta go, now. Wendy Williams is on T.V. Can’t miss that.

  45. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    You do realize that running this drug empire requires quite a large expenditure of cash, do you not?  You do also realize that these people are very motivated by having more money, more property etc, right?  As such, they do everything they can to keep as much money in their pocket as they can.  Mexican Cartels are nothing like Denzel’s character from American Gangster.  They’re not going to give out 100,000 when 50,000 will do.

  46. 0
    Monte says:

    "Who’s cares about the difficulty invovled in legally obtaining a gun if guns are readily and easily obtained illegally?"

    legally getting a gun was the whole point of this string of conversation… Austin originally was talking about getting a gun legally… Shahab said that it was not difficult to get a gun "legally or otherwise"… and Austin was countering the claim; namely the "legal" part

  47. 0
    JDKJ says:

    When you have more money than you know what to do with and which, if you lived three back-to-back lifetimes, you couldn’t even begin to completely spend on yourself, you tend not to see things in the light which you suggest they should be seen. Again, your rational analysis doesn’t apply to a circumstance which is nowhere near rational. 

  48. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    So, you think that these drug dealers would rather spend $5000 extra PER PERSON to arm their huge armies of thugs?  REALLY? 

    Every dollar they spend is a dollar they don’t get to spend on themselves.  Think about that.

  49. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    When the difference is about 5000 dollars a rifle, you’ll go for the cheaper, more accessable, option.  That’s why most of the rifles they use have the markings of rifles sold by the American government to the Mexican government.

  50. 0
    JDKJ says:

    You’re missing the point, Mr. Lewis, which is that you can’t take formal business decision-making processes and apply them to a non-traditonal business like organized drug smuggling. As I tried to explain to you, the cost-to-profit ratio in that particualar business is so extraordinarily high that your cost-benefit reasoning simply doesn’t apply. If you’ve got more "quick money" than you know what to do with, then the price of anything isn’t really a concern. You’ll simply pay the price, regardless of how irrational doing so may seem to a more rational person. 

  51. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    They do it because they figure that violence is the best way of protecting whatever asset those individuals are watching.  Sometimes, they do it because, after 20 years of being left alone by the lazy government of Mexico, they realize that it’s still not too likely that they’ll be called on their bullshit.

    The heads of those cartels walk the fine line between business person and murderer.  They need people to realize that they’re ruthless enough, but not too ruthless (or else they’ll avoid doing business with them).  If they’re not percieved as ruthless enough, people will begin to steal from the cartel in small ways.  A few dollars go missing here, a few pounds of marijuana or cocaine there, and all of the sudden the cartel is losing 25% of their yearly cash intake and the head of the cartel is on the chopping block in favor of someone who will crack down.

  52. 0
    JDKJ says:

    There’s no reason for them to riddle with bullets anyone who looks at them sideways. That’s not a rational decision by a businessperson. It’s bad for business because it draws more heat and ultimately creates more problems than any it could ever have been intended to solve. But they do it, anyway. What do you think? A cartel jeffe has an MBA from Wharton School of Business?  

  53. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    Cartels are a business first and foremost.  A disgusting business, but a business all the same.  So, if they have to choose between a rifle that’s A) farther away B) Semi-automatic and C)more expensive or a rifle that’s A) in the hands of some ex-soldier or cop down the street B) Select-fire, allowing for a higher volume of fire against police and C)cheaper, you tell me which one they’re going to take.  There is no reason for them to buy a rifle from the US.  They have all they could want down there already.

  54. 0
    JDKJ says:

    Maybe because the cartels make so much money from drug trafficking they can’t even begin to properly count it all and don’t give a rat’s ass about the price of anything? For the same reason they’re willing to pay three times the retail price for an H2 Hummer in Chiapas. Because money ain’t no object to them.

  55. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    Yeah, assault rifles don’t go down to Mexico from the US.  You know why?  Because with record numbers of military and police desertions, they don’t need to buy from the states.  Most of the firearms that were tracked were handguns and shotguns, many fairly old.  By the way, the number that Hillary Clinton and Eric Holder were spouting, 90% of weapons used by the cartels being from America?  Bullshit.  The real number is closer to 20%.  Of the weapons which they turned the trace data over to us, 90% were from the US.  However, when you consider that they turned very few over to us, you get a very different picture.  Why would they turn rifles with Russian and Chinese markings over to us for tracing when they can already tell where they’re from?

    And why would they pay this mythological 4 times retail price for SEMI AUTOMATIC RIFLES when they can get cheap automatic ones from deserters?

  56. 0
    JDKJ says:

    Who’s cares about the difficulty invovled in legally obtaining a gun if guns are readily and easily obtained illegally? You were trying to make it sound as if next to no one in California would have the firepower needed to turn your ass into a piece of swiss cheese. And I can tell you that ain’t at all true.

  57. 0
    JDKJ says:

    Actually, my uniformed friend, the trade in assualt rifles goes in the other direction from border states like Arizona and Texas down into Mexico where the cartels are willing to pay up four times the retail price. Only an idiot would take guns legally imported into Mexico from the U.S. and then illegally import back into the U.S. Where from do get these facts? Some NRA propaganda pamphlet?  

  58. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    I said it elsewhere, but I was talking about legally getting a gun.  Of course you can illegally get a fiream, but once again, I don’t see this kid having the balls to do that.  If he had, we probably would be reading a story about a kid being killed and rolled into the street.

  59. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    Well, there’s also this thing about this individual being 17.  You know, 1 year too young to buy a rifle or shotgun?  4 years too young to buy a handgun? Yeah.  As for his parents, the fact that he lies with only his mom would increase the likelihood of there not being a firearm in the home. 

    As far as what happened in NYC goes, it’s likely because they found a few unscrupulous dealers in VA.  It happens from time to time.  There’s a dealer in Cincinnati, OH, who sold 39 browning hi-powers to one individual, who then resold them to local gangs and thugs.  There’s a store in (I believe) Iowa that did something very similar. When you find an unscrupulous dealer, it’s common to find out they supplied firearms to criminals.  That’s a very rare occurence though, and when the ATF catches on, that’s usually the end of their life.

    The bangers in South Central get a lot of their firearms from, you guessed it, Mexico.  Most of the time, they get the usual gang banger fare; Ak’s, Uzi’s, Mac-10’s, etc. But there’s not some dealer selling Class 3 weapons to them in America.

    Do the gun laws in CA work?  Hell no.  They make it harder for law abiding people to get firearms.  Luckily, there wasn’t a firearm in this kid’s house, or he’d have probably used it.  But consider if the teacher had a firearm, how much quicker this would have been ended (and at how much less risk to the teacher). 

  60. 0
    Papa Midnight says:

    The hell it is.

    Before I launch into unnecessary reasoning about how easy it is to get a gun in California, especially So. Cal., let’s employ some sheer base logic: If it was hard to get a gun, people in So. Cal. might not have to worry about getting shot for wearing the wrong color on the wrong street, gun violence wouldn’t be one of the single greatest commons of injury and death among persons under 30, there might not be metal detetectors in schools, and the police would actually not worry about being shot by some kid on the street with a Saturday Night Special in his backpack.

    Fun story, Japan has the strictest firearms laws on the planet; No citizen aside from a police officer or a member of the military under any circumstances is to possess one. But that stops gun violence? I think not.

    Fun story, California has a lot of gun laws. Cool. It must be really effective since gun violence is still heavily common in Southern California and some cities in Northern California (including San Francisco and Oakland).

    The fact that the city of Los Angeles holds what is practically an annual "Gun Amnesty" drive shows that gun laws are REALLY effective in California.

    The fact that anyone aged 4 and above and who knows even basic street smarts knows where he or she can buy a hand-gun for between $100 to $200, especially in Downtown L.A. in the corner markets where they don’t care how old you are, or from the gangs in their area (which are stretched all throughout California) shows gun laws and propaganda relating to them must be taking a strong hold among the citizens.

    Seriously, not difficult to obtain a gun in California? What California are you living in and where is the dimensional rift located so we can close it (or market it so I can make some money on inter-dimensional travel).

    Papa Midnight

  61. 0
    JDKJ says:

    There’s this thing called a "car," Mr. Lewis. I’m told that if you fill it up with enough gas and stick enough dollar bills in your pocket, you can drive out of a state with strict gun control laws and into another nearby state with few gun control laws and purchase guns and ammunition to your heart’s content, then drive back with them to the state you came from.

    New York, particularly New York City, has strict gun control laws. Yet, at one time, two-thirds of all the guns used in the commission of crimes in New York City and recovered by law enforcement (a significant number of guns) were determined to have come from four or five gun dealers in Virginia (a few hours drive away by car from New York).

    What do you think all them bangers in South Central are using to light each other up? Super Soakers? Please. There’s an AK on every block. If an idiot really wants to get their hands on a particular gun and has enough money, ain’t nothing much stopping them.

    Besides, you’re failing to recite the NRA’s party line. Isn’t their argument against stricter gun control laws that the people most likely to commit crimes with guns simply ignore the gun control laws by obtaining guns on the black market or otherwise circumventing or violating those laws? Or are you, a card-carrying, bumper-sticker sporting member of the NRA, now saying that gun control laws actually work?   

  62. 0
    Monte says:

    I see what your trying to say, but naming particular types of guns does not really make the argument… naming particular guns only tells me its hard to get a handgun with a 12 round mag; it doesn’t tell me that its hard to get a handgun with a smaller magazine size. Same goes for the AR-15; pointing that gun out in particular doesn’t tell me anything about other types of guns.

    I mean, he made the general statement that "its easy to get a gun"… not "any" gun, but "a" gun… Saying you can’t "get this particular gun" does not refute that claim as he could be talking about another kind of gun (likely one of less caliber)… gotta make a statement that makes it clear that it’s "hard to get any gun", to refute the claim that it’s hard to get "a" gun

    With the mention of california’s laws on semi-automatic weapons, i can see where your going with those types of weapons… but that still doesn’t tell me that a person would find it very hard to get their hands on something like a handgun with a 9 round magazine… sure it’s not as effecient for shooting up a public place as 12 round mag, but it would probably be an improvement to using a sword/chainsaw.

  63. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    He’s suggesting it is easy to get a firearm in California, which is contrary to the truth.  It is harder to get a firearm in California than in any other state in the US.  For example, California considers some types of shotgun to be ‘assault weapons’.  It also has some lovely laws considering ownership of semi-automatic magazine-fed rifles (like an Ar-15). 

    Fun story.  There’s a book issued by the ATF every year with every gun law of every state and county in the USA.  California has 62 pages of laws, 4 times more than any other state.

  64. 0
    Monte says:

     Why does the type of gun matter? i mean, we’re talking about some nut attacking a school, does the exact type of gun really matter… frankly, most ANY kind of gun would have been more efficient than a sword or chainsaw.

  65. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    Really?  I tell you what then, go out and get a Bushmaster and an H&K handgun with a 12 round mag.  Tell me how long that takes you.

    Oh, and I mean a real AR-15 by bushmaster, not one that has a welded mag or some such.

    What’s that?  You can’t get those?  That’s what I thought.

  66. 0
    Wormdundee says:

    It actually isn’t that hard to find a bulletproof vest. I doubt the one he was wearing was military or police grade, but private investigators and such have bulletproof vests, they have to get them from somewhere.

    There are specialty stores that sell this kind of thing, along with motion detectors, tiny cameras and such things. 

  67. 0
    Doom90885 says:

    Well since he’s under 18 he was apparently born yesterday so of course he can’t be held accountable for the actions he willingly made. Its everyone and everything else’s fault but his. He made a willing decision to acquire weapons and take action. IDC how much people say games and TV make you do something. They may give you ideas of what to do and how to do it  but at the end of the day its the person who makes the choice not the TV; not the game. Just like a gun: the trigger doesn’t magically pull by itself.  Also I’d like to know how he acquired a vest. Not exactly something you pick up at Wal-Mart. 


    Not wanting the government involved in your personal lives also includes not demanding they do your job as a parent.

  68. 0
    Papa Midnight says:

    "Occurred in California, a state where real weapons are notoriously hard to get.  A state where firearm laws are so out of control that most reputable distributors and manufacturers (last I heard Colt, Sig, Kimber, STI, Ruger, Nighthawk, Bushmaster) refuse to sell weapons to anyone that’s not law enforcement, and, in some cases, refuse to sell to law enforcement."


    Exactly what coordinates does your ethernet cord intersect with a dimensional rift. I’m just curious because in the California I know, getting a handgun is about as easy walking down the street.

    As for the so-called bulletproof vest, I bet that thing couldn’t stop a paintball.

    As for the San Francisco Chronicle… I’d hardly call it a mediocre newspaper. He probably was sporting like some paintball body armor he got in a sporting goods shop; and it is not that difficult to obtain some body armor that can stop a 9mm round. Granted one has the proper materials available, they could possibly even manufacture their own.

    Papa Midnight


  69. 0
    Shahab says:

    I live in california, have sold firearms in california, and it is easy to get a gun in california, legally or otherwise.


    Also, people are pooping these cheap swords you can buy, but I bought one for $20 when I was out with my family, didn’t let them sharpen it though so it would be ‘safe’, and when I got home it still sliced through an orange hanging from a tree and broke small branches. It has heavy and hard and I could see one breaking an arm. Remember, all it takes is one cut of an artery to have you bleed out in 5 mintues.

  70. 0
    jedidethfreak says:

    You do realize that your points 1 and 3 contradict each other, right?  If guns are so hard to come by in California, then how could you reasonably expect this kid to have a gun?

    Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone’s feelings.

  71. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    Let’s review this.

    1) Occurred in California, a state where real weapons are notoriously hard to get.  A state where firearm laws are so out of control that most reputable distributors and manufacturers (last I heard Colt, Sig, Kimber, STI, Ruger, Nighthawk, Bushmaster) refuse to sell weapons to anyone that’s not law enforcement, and, in some cases, refuse to sell to law enforcement.  So, it’s not too big a stretch to realize that even though he probably didn’t care about concealing the weapon (you know, because he had a chainsaw), he probably wasn’t able to get his hand on a firearm.  So, he went to plan B.  Plan B, however, was retarded.

    2) Pipe Bombs.  Since when did this become a ‘video game or movie style’ weapon?  It’s a classic weapon for school massacres.  Did he duct tape a bunch of doorbells to it or something?  Because then, yeah, they might have a point about the videogame influence.  Otherwise, it’s moronic.

    3) Bullet-proof vest.  I’m going to call bullshit on this, for many reasons.  One could assume that if he had the money or a parent had the money for a bullet-proof vest, they would also have the money for, you know, a handgun, rifle, or shotgun.  As such was obviously not the case, I don’t believe this is a ‘bullet proof vest’, but rather, A cheap imitation, like you see those little kids with airsoft wearing.  A lot of nerds seem to spend a lot of money on tacti-cool airsoft crap.

    4) Chainsaw.  Probably gas powered, or else he’d have to plug it in to a socket at the school, which, if someone had let him do it, would probably be the most idiotic thing I’ve heard in my life. In what videogame was this a viable weapon?  Resident Evil 4 and 5?  What, did the kid like Bruce Campbell or something?  This weapon ‘choice’ seems more like he was either A) forced to use it because he couldn’t get something better (and him living in California, I believe it) or B) a retard.

    5) Sword.  Really?  REALLY?  Because obviously, someone who try to kill people with what is probably a cheap, shitty, ‘ready for battle’ sword they bought at a Ren-fair got the idea from video games and movies.  The kid just sounds like an idiot to me.

    6) Mother.  Really?  What kind of retarded parent buys their teenage son the makings for a bomb and doesn’t occasionally check what they’re doing with it?  That’s as dumb as the Columbine parents’ excuse.

    At the end, I’d like to take a second to mock the San Fran Chronicle for just being a mediocre newspaper.  There is no way in hell this kid had real body armor, but the fact that they printed it will, of course, raise a new scare about ‘tactical equipment’ in the home and such nonsense.

    After reading the SF Chronicle’s articles, I found that, in fact, the moron in question was not wearing body armor, but a ‘tactical vest’.

  72. 0
    Papa Midnight says:

    Model Rockets, Comics, Video Games, Movies, Television, Cartoons, you name it, someone will scape goat it. The only reason Alcohol isn’t being mentioned is it probably has no play in the current factor.

    +5 if anyone mentions Weed or some other drug parapheneila.


    Anyway, I’m trying to figure out exactly WHAT game he would have been playing…

    Games in recent times with pipe bombs:

    Left 4 Dead.

    Swords in Left 4 Dead? Negative.

    Chainsaw in Left 4 Dead? None that I’ve seen, not even in these third-party add-ons.

    Bulletproof Vest? Wouldn’t mind it, might stave off those 1 shot team kills for people who can’t aim with Shotguns. But all the same, negative.


    Resident Evil 4

    Chainsaw wielding plaga. Outside of that, no other weapons…


    Let’s roll back a few years; roughly a decade…

    Unreal Tournament Game of the Year edition. The add on pack featured:

    Swords. Check.

    Chainsaw. Check.

    Sword. Oh hell yes, check.

    Pipe Bombs. Negative.

    I just can’t seem to figure out what game he could possibly have been playing and I know of no movie that features all 4 elements toghether.

    Papa Midnight

  73. 0
    jedidethfreak says:

    No, they make chainsaws that small.  They make mini-chainsaws with only a one-foot-long chain-blade thingy, whatever that’s called.

    Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone’s feelings.

  74. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    Or it’s an electric hedge trimmer. 

    Seriously though, I’ve never seen a chainsaw that could fit into a violin case, so I’m going to call bullshit on this reporting.

  75. 0
    CMiner says:

    The pipe bombs I can see as being easy to sneak it, stick ’em in a backpack and there you go.

    The vest you could wear under a jacket. (And its not terribly hard to aquire.  Surplus stores and such.  Not illegal to have one, but you get extra penalties in most states for commiting a crime while wearing one and carrying a lethal weapon.)

    The sword you could even wrap in a blanket or something and carry it under the arm.

    But how the heck did nobody notice a kid carrying a chainsaw onto school property, especially amongst all this other bulky gear?

  76. 0
    magic_taco says:

    Well, It’s glad to hear no one was hurt or worse and the teachers/staff acted in manner by subduing the creep.


    Im not surprised if JT got wind of this & is currently getting ready to call the states law enforcement as we speak.

  77. 0
    BearDogg-X says:

    No, it wasn’t. Now that wasn’t so hard to comprehend.

    Geaux Saints, Geaux Tigers, Geaux Hornets, Jack Thompson can geaux chase a chupacabra.

    Proud supporter of the New Orleans Saints, LSU, 1st Amendment; Real American; Hound of Justice; Even through the darkest days, this fire burns always

    Saints(3-4), LSU(7-0)

Leave a Reply