Repost! Columbine Essay

06-21-15

Second Repost:  This was done for my first Psychology Class

PLEASE NOTE: At the present time this program will not let me insert the actual autopsy reports mentioned in my essay. If you feel them important, please contact me and I will provide the link to them.

Nov. 17, 2014

“Columbine”

An Amateur Psychological Autopsy of Co-dependent murderers.

At 11:19 a.m. (UTC-6), April 20, 1999 Eric Harris and his friend Dylan Klebold brought hell to the small, suburban town of Littleton, Colorado when they walked through the doors of Columbine High School. By 12:08 p.m. they, along with twelve students and one teacher were dead and twenty-four others were injured (twenty-one by gunshot).

When assigned to read “Columbine”, David Cullen, 2009, Twelve, Hatchette Book Group for our final essay, we were directed to choose either Dylan Klebold or Eric Harris to complete what I refer to as an Amateur Psychological Autopsy of our choice. When I read this in our instructions the very first thing that occurred to me was, sorry professor no can do.

Between 1966 and 2014 there have been eleven major mass murders committed in the United States, each involving guns and having ten or more innocent deaths. The significant variable in those cases is only one event involved more than one proactive killer and that was Columbine, where two, perhaps even three disturbed young men went on a rampage.

I believe Columbine had three killers – Dylan, Eric and Kle-arris, the psychological malevolency created by their co-dependent relationship.

In comments from Susan Klebold’s (Dylan’s mother) essay published in the November 2009 issue of “O”, The Oprah Magazine, she references a theft committed by Dylan and Eric:

“Their theft had shown that under each other’s influence they could be impulsive and unscrupulous. Could they also—no matter how unbelievable it seemed—be violent?”

            This one statement raised a lot of questions for me.

Then Mrs. Klebold went on to say:

“No matter what he (Dylan) did, he was driven to win—and was very hard on himself when he lost.”

“His adolescence was less joyful than his childhood. As he grew, he became extremely shy and uncomfortable when he was the center of attention, and would hide or act silly if we tried to take his picture. By junior high, it was evident that he no longer liked school; worse, his passion for learning was gone.”

“He was quiet. He grew irritated when we critiqued his driving, asked him to help around the house, or suggested that he get a haircut. In the last few months of senior year, he was pensive, as if he were thinking about the challenges of growing older. One day in April I said, “”You seem so quiet lately—are you okay?” He said he was “just tired.” Another time I asked if he wanted to talk about going away to college. I told him that if he didn’t feel ready, he could stay home and go to a community college. He said, “”I definitely want to go away.”” If that was a reference to anything more than leaving home for college, it never occurred to me.”

What Ms. Klebold did not appear to realize, or perhaps failed to recognize was that over time, most probably beginning in early puberty, Dylan was displaying classic symptoms of an early onset dysthemic disorder in the form of chronic depression with suicidal tendencies. (Here too, a question arises, were Dylan’s symptoms exacerbated when he and Eric Harris became friends?)

“”At Columbine High School, Dylan Klebold envied the social successes of the school’s athletes. In his journal, he wrote, “I see jocks having fun, friends, and women.” In another entry he wrote, “I hated the happiness that they [jocks] have.” In contrast, he wrote about himself as being so different from everyone else that he seemed to believe he was not truly human or capable of functioning like a human being.”  Murderous Envy, What is the role of envy in school shootings?” Published on May 27, 2009 by Peter Langman, Ph.D. in Keeping Kids Safe.

Eric Harris, on the other hand was the direct opposite of Dylan. An extrovert on the surface, Eric was charismatic, clever, exceptionally intelligent, and very adept at hiding his true self. He appears to have learned at a young age how to manipulative people to attain his goals. He had talents and skills that might have made him a success in life but his was a tragic path – why?

Unlike Dylan’s parents, Wayne and Kathy Harris, the parents of Eric have not been as forthcoming in their comments about their son. Mr. Harris was a career Air Force pilot who retired when Eric was twelve and the family moved to Littleton, CO. Up until this time, Eric was thought to be a normal kid, doing normal kid stuff like playing soccer and wearing in-style preppy clothes, but that began to change when he met Dylan.

Was it love or evil at first sight?

Excerpt from Dave Cullen’s Blog, FEBRUARY 25, 2010 7:06PM

“Meeting the Mauser’s:  Why did Harris’s take Eric to psychologist?

Were there no psychologists at the “juvenile diversion program”? “Wayne was mystified by his son.[1] Wayne and Kathy accepted that Eric was a psychopath. Where that came from, they didn’t know. But he fooled them, utterly.”

““He’d also fooled a slew of professionals. Wayne and Kathy clearly felt misled by the psychologist they sent him to. The doctor had brushed off Eric’s trademark duster as “only a coat.” He saw Eric’s problems as rather routine. At least that’s the impression he gave Wayne and Kathy.”  They shared that perception with the Mausers. “Other than the van break-in, Eric had never been in serious trouble”, they said. He and Dylan were arrested in January 1998 and charged with three felonies. They eventually entered a juvenile diversion program, which involved close monitoring and various forms of restitution.””

“”Eric rarely seemed angry”, his parents said. “There was one odd incident where he slammed his fist into a brick wall and scraped his knuckles. That was startling, but kids do weird things. It seemed like an aberration, not a pattern to be worried about.””

“Wayne and Kathy knew Eric had a Web site, but that didn’t seem odd. They never went online to look at it. “I found them kind of incurious,” Linda said.””

One might come to wonder if they were wearing blinders or were simply oblivious to what Eric was really like and really doing.

It is said that opposites attract; that may be true on the surface however I believe that commonalities are the adhesives that bond people. In the case of Eric and Dylan the commonality was Kle-arris, the malevolent, unseen cancer created by their disturbed minds. I believe there may have been clues.

Dylan Kle-Arris Eric
Depressive Disorder, DSM-V -296.34 Severe With Psychotic Features Extremely volatile combination. Antisocial Personality Disorder, DSM-V Antisocial/Psychopathic
Avoidant Confrontational
Introvert Apathetic Extrovert
Quiet Vocal
Rage Dangerous Volatile
Pensive Apathetic Unreflective
Uncomfortable with attention Apathetic Wanted the attention
Lost interest in school Strong student
Anger issues – No DSM Major Anger Issues Anger issues – No DSM
Inferior Confusion Superior
Paranoid Apathetic Ruthless
Anxiety prone Cold blooded
Major depression issues Suicidal Depression
Feelings of rejection Amplified emotions Feelings of rejection
Feelings of entitlement
Autopsy Toxicology screen negative for drugs. Fluvoxamine has been known to induce violent behavior in some patients Autopsy Toxicology screen positive for fluvoxamine (Rx) Luvox[2]
Submissive/Beta Threatening Dominant/Sadistic
Self-effacing Self-centered Narcissistic
MIDC Scale 7: Reticent Pattern MIDC Scale 1A: Dominant Pattern
MIDC Scale 5B: Contentious Pattern MIDC Scale 2: Ambitious Pattern
MIDC Scale 1B: The Dauntless Pattern
MIDC Scale 9: The Distrusting Pattern MIDC Scale 9: The Distrusting Pattern MIDC Scale 9: The Distrusting Pattern
Dependent upon Eric  Co-Dependent Killer Dependent upon Dylan

I believe that both Klebold and Harris suffered from congenital neurobiological disorders which, had they never met may have taken them on much different paths in life. Admittedly, Eric’s path may not have been radically different than Columbine but that is something we will never know because they did meet either in the seventh or eighth grade and, hypothetically the seed of Kle-arris was planted.

During the years prior to the Columbine attack is can easily be argued that Eric was the dominant leader however Dylan, via his more reticent nature was also a force to be reckoned with. Dylan had unpredictable fits of rage that may have fed Eric’s dominant/sadistic nature adding to his own rage at the inferior world. I believe this may be seen in the types of wounds inflicted on their victims with the high percentage of head and neck wounds as though they’re saying you are not beautiful like us.

Much has been said about the victims and how they died but little has really been said about the deaths of Dylan, Eric and Kle-arris. They died, kneeling together on the floor of the Columbine High School library of self-inflicted gunshot wounds the nature of which suggests to me, one final act of defiance.

“Final Anatomic Diagnosis” of post mortem examinations.

On reading Dr. Galloway’s report, it struck me that Eric knew long before he committed suicide how he had to do it to prove to the world that he was “The Man!” He was in control right up to the end when he placed the muzzle of the shotgun into his mouth, positioned it to do the most damage and pulled the trigger. ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47Wf_RfRJTI ) Warning, graphic.

NOTE: These are footnotes:

I do not believe Eric wanted anyone to get into his mind while he was alive or dead. Dylan, on the other hand used a large caliber handgun which he placed against his left temple and fired. It is quite possible he chose this manner to preserve his face so that in death at least he might be handsome.

Dr. Galloway’s report on Dylan mentions aspiration of blood. This is only possible if the respiratory system is functioning, ergo Dylan did not die immediately as Eric did. Did he know what he’d done, did he feel any remorse, and did he finally find peace from his torment? I sincerely hope they both did.

[1] I can’t help but wonder if Mr. Harris was afraid of his son as well as mystified.

Closing:

I chose to write my essay on Eric Harris, the psychopathic murderer who led his best friend, Dylan Klebold into a web of deceit, terror and mass murder. In writing this essay I discovered Eric Harris, a troubled young man with an intense anti-social personality disorder that appears to have doomed him almost from birth. Despite what anyone, even Eric might think he was not in control of his actions because he saw no need to be. He was not in control of his feelings because he didn’t have any. He was not in control of his future because he saw none.

Had Eric not met Dylan when he did, would things have turned out differently? Maybe, but then our world is filled with chronically depressed Dylans, Eric may have found another or simply acted alone. In any event, I feel that Eric was born without a conscience and he died without one.

Were Dylan and Eric also victims? There is only one logical answer – Yes.

As sure as some children are born with congenital malformations of their organs, Dylan and Eric were born with congenital malformations of their minds.

Monday – why I do not hate Mondays!

Ok, so I sound strange. “Everybody hates Mondays, dude! What’s wrong with you?” 

Umm, does the word different explain anything to you? 

I am different, unique, special and guess what? There’s only one person on this planet with my DNA to prove it.

“We get it!, but, how can you be different and not be a Democrat?” (I was actually asked this question.)

“We Democrats are all free-thinkers, each special in his or her own way. We do not adhere to the fascistic commands of the orange-head in our WH!”

The only part of that comment I agree with is “special in his or her own way..” You got me there guys, but the remainder is about as logical as me trying on Speedos. It ain’t gonna work, no way, no how!

Therein lies my argument with the philosophy of the Democrat automatons. 

I love this definition of a “free-thinker” from the Urban Dictionary: 
“One who relies solely on themselves to make judgments based on their own perception of the world rather than blindly accepting what is told or implied by an outside influence, which is usually some kind of authoritarian figure.”

“Usually associated with non-conformists…Very few people in this world have realized that they have access to and the ability to perform independent thought. While everyone has the ability, only the freethinker uses it, because he knows what he wants.” (Chesterfield, 2016)

The Democrat leadership propagandizes this philosophy of having free-thinks lead the party, but it’s a lie. No political correctness allowed: it’s a flat outright lie. It’s as though the rank and file Democrats believe in one form of Democracy while their leadership believes in another.

Now, that said, what the hell does this have to do with my liking Mondays?

So glad you asked! 

On Monday mornings I pick up a case of fresh fruit at Sam’s to take to the Student Assistance office at my Alma mater, Meramec Community College in Kirkwood, MO. When I arrive at school I am always greeted by beautiful, young faces of youth who strive hard every day to succeed in college and get ahead but battling the problems of poverty.

I see blacks, white, Asian, Native Americans with various disabilities lining up to get to class on time to learn! There are young adults confined to wheelchairs due to conditions beyond their control who ask nothing more than a chance to learn and excel. Each and every one of these young people is marching to his or her own band; free-thinkers not chained to ideology, nor restricted by politics. 


For me, Mondays are my refueling days; the time when I recharge my batteries with the help of these energetic leaders of tomorrow.

What do you think?

I read a disturbing article this morning about American Law schools; those institutions of higher education designed to produce experts in the field of laws beneficial to the American people, or so they claim.

The article mentioned more than one, but just less than every one of these pinnacles of legal academia as having determined not to ask Justice Brett Kavanaugh to speak and or teach in their halls of “Free Speech.”

Would anyone care to know when they did this? 

Sure, I’ll tell you; glad you asked it.

They did it right after he presented his rightfully emotional argument to the Judiciary Committee of the United States Senate in defense of the way he was immorally, unethically, and potentially illegally challenged in what I considered to be a Kangaroo Court.

But, he beat them. He won. He became an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court, and as hard as it was for him to do, he showed his children, and everyone else what it is like to be a real man. 

I’m happy the man, Brett Kavanaugh overcame the opposition. I hope and believe that Brett Kavanaugh, the Associate Justice will be true to his history of justice and fair play.

So what’s my problem?

Legal academia, these failures of once proud icons of American justice. The very core of the future of our legal system refused to grant Judge Kavanaugh his legal right to ‘DUE PROCESS.”

Rather than judging him on his years of honest and loyal service, his superior rulings and position papers, and stature in his community, they deemed him unfit to enter their halls because he was justifiably upset about the attacks on him and his family.

My questions are: .

Are our American Law schools teaching our laws or are they interpreting them to suit their needs?

Do the halls or legal academia in America ring loud of the equality of DUE PROCESS?

Is there now a class offered as Law 101: “How to defeat the American belief of “Innocent Until Proven Guilty?”

Are our law schools teaching American Law based on our Constitution or Socialist Dogma based on Marx, Lenin, Trotsky, and other radicals? 

Friday’s Question is a Lesson

I can’t help but wonder if there are others besides myself who think they see what is really going with all these demonstrations and protests against everything President Trump attempts to do for our country. I’m going, to begin with defining four words:
  1. Protester:  “a person who makes a public protest; synonym demonstrator.” (Oxford Learner’s Dictionary)
  2.  Bully:  “a person who habitually seeks to harm or intimidate those whom they perceive as vulnerable.” (Oxford English Dictionary
  3. Terrorist: “an advocate or practitioner of terrorism as a means of coercion.” (Miriam-Webster Dictionary)
  4. Coercion: “The intimidation of a victim to compel the individual to do some act against his or her will by the use of psychological pressure, physical force, or threats. The crime of intentionally and unlawfully restraining another’s freedom by threatening to commit a crime, accusing the victim of a crime, disclosing any secret that would seriously impair the victim’s reputation in the community, or by performing or refusing to perform an official action lawfully requested by the victim, or by causing an official to do so.
My question is this: When does protesting become terrorism? Here in America, we have the legal right under our Constitution to Freedom of speech and freedom to protest without fear of retribution; I’m all for that. However, in this era, we seem to have less real protesting and more real bullying capped off with organized domestic terrorism. In my opinion, protesting becomes unacceptable bullying when one side denies the other side their freedom of speech, and choice; rights guaranteed under our Constitution. As bad as these types of bullying are, they often do escalate to more severe types such as uncensored cyber attacks, gossip, negative allegations, and prejudical commentaries directed at both the person and family in an attempt to discredit.
It is when a protester crosses the line from mild verbal attacks on an opponent to coercion in the form of physically blocking movement, using bullhorns in very close proximity the victim’s head – specifically ears, screams at, throwing objects, feces and urine at, physically assaults, threats to family and home, or damages personal property that bullying becomes criminal intimidation. They are no longer protesters, they are criminals who must be arrested and charged for their crimes.
However, when they turn to coercion with threats of exposing their victim’s address and phone number, health and schools records, school,  and death threats, they’ve gone beyond criminals, they are terrorists.
Lest they feel left out, I will comment on those “protestors” who receive compensation for their efforts. For me, these people are no better than paid thugs, the Sturmabteilung (SA – Brownshirts) of Nazi Germany.
I have a question for these people: Do you know the fate of the SA when Hitler finally gained power? What about Stalin’s purge of his military officers after defeating the Nazi’s?
As vile as they are, these bullies and terrorists are merely puppets on a world stage; their value to their leadership is very transitory. Their lifespan, questionable and their cause is defeatable. However, in the interim, Americans need to stand up and fight back against the violence and terrorism spawned by our own politicians with their hate speeches, sponsorships of harassment and intimidation and above all, their abuse of the powers granted to them by Ameican voters. I personally feel that the actions and words of the alleged victim, her attorneys and the Democrat Senators on the Judicial Committee were a gross attempt at coercion of the truth. What I saw, and continue to see is an attempt at a soft coup de tat of our government by the left. Do you?  

Thursday’s Tears

Today, 10-04-18, will go down in history a day of true Democrat Infamy. It will be remembered for the attempts to continue to discredit an honorable man and is family while maniacally fighting for control of our country.

One very important item all dictators had, and still have, it the power of propaganda via control of information. While the Democrats in America have not gone so far as having conservative reporters arrested yet, YET. They are increasing their attempts to hide information from the “American people” they claim to so proudly serve.

The most recent, and blatant attempt to do this is Senator Feinberg’s attempt to conceal Dr. Ford’s original letter until the perfect moment to reveal it in an effort to stop the nomination of Judge Kavanaugh. (Personally, I think Dr. Ford was working in tandem with the Democrat Party to bring down any nominee.) But that’s not my point, my point is, the disgraceful manipulation of the American voters.

Senator Feinstein was required, by the rules of the Judicial Committee to disclose the original, unredacted (censored) letter from Dr. Ford to all members of Committee, but she chose to not serve the best interests of the American people by not doing so. She didn’t even tell the committee a letter existed until she thought the time perfect. 

Senator Feinstein vehemently denies either she, or any member of her staff leaked the letter, but someone did. While the leaking is a critical issue so is the possibility that she had a specific date she planned to present it to the committee, and someone outsmarted her. 

Now, even before the FBI report has been submitted to the Judiciary Committee, Senator Feinstein is attempting to have it sealed from the public. Again. it’s her way of serving the American people. 

My question is this: If we put the Democrat circus of the hearings aside, and we concentrate on the actions of the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Feinstein; can we find a pattern of deceit and information control? 

Is Senator Feinstein serving the American People, the Democrat Party or is she only serving herself? 

Tuesday’s question

I got to thinking the other day about politicians around the world; we could probably populate a fairly large portion of Africa if we moved them all into one location. What can’t do with them, is fill a military cemetery or even a small cemetery dedicated to police officers, firefighters, and emergency medical personnel killed in the line of duty.

We, humans, are an amazing species. We rant and rave about poor representation in our governments, but we do little about it. Oh sure, we campaign, vote and, hopefully, elect the right person for the job, but what we don’t do is thoroughly investigate (vet) our candidates before we get on their campaign wagons.

Now, here comes my problem with all this. Here in America, we are electing Senators, Congressmen/women, and presidents without any thorough vetting process, if we were, we would have known more about John McCain’s treason, Senator Feinstein’s Chinese spy drivers, Al Franken’s history of sexual abuse, Representative Cummings alleged sexual assaults on women, Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s bias against President Trump and so many more.

Even when we do our normal vetting, and uncover factual evidence of wrongdoing, do we act? No! More often than not, these allegations are locked away in the vast catacomb of our Congressional buildings, hidden in Draconian vaults to await their resurrection when needed to destroy someone.

My question for the day is: Why, Why do we allow our employees in our Congress in our Capital, get away with crimes that would destroy the average American taxpayer if reported, It makes no sense.

These are the people who make life-changing decisions for all Americans every day of the week, yet there doesn’t appear to be any form of standards or rules they are required to follow; if there are some, they don’t appear to be enforced.

They legislate our lives, yet we have very little recourse for stopping them.

They legislate what law enforcement officers can and cannot do, yet none appear to have been one, nor died while wearing the badge

They legislate what our military can or cannot do, but I can find no records of any one of them having been killed in combat.

Some even disregard common morals and ethics to attain their political goals. Their punishment appears to be automatic immunity.

Who then, must bear the burden of fault for these crimes and more?

You do, I do, all voters do because we do not care enough to say ENOUGH!

We do not demand that existing rules pertaining to the operations of our Congress are strictly followed and infringements suitably punished. Neither do we demand existing rules be updated or replaced by new ones more applicable to our time.

Today, we, the voters who elected them must stand firm and punish the children we elected to represent us. It is long past time to make them grow up and take their jobs seriously before we run out of cemeteries for the real heroes of America.

The mandate of the American people must be:

No one is above the law! If you do the crime, you will do the time!”

Please do not vote the party line tickets. Please elect only the people who will help rebuild America and defend her against the onslaught from foreign and domestic interference.

Demand accountability and a clear path to remove those who refuse to give it.

 

 

 

Saturday question is plain and simple:

“Papa, why are you so anti-Democrat?”

My answer was, truth be told, I am not anti-Democrat; I’m anti-corruption.

When President Trump was running for office, he promised the American people that he would “drain the swamp!”

While political pundits have an astronomical number of opinions to what President Trump was referring. I, on a more simplistic level, feel he meant cleaning all the corruption within our government beginning with the DC area which was basically built over a drained swamp.

While many Democrats take offense at his statement saying it an attack solely on them, I disagree. I do not recall ever hearing or reading any comments by President Trump that specifically named the Democrats as being the primary target. What I did see and hear was a man fed up with the corruption in our government that was, and continues to be draining the lifeblood of the backbone of America – the common people.

The President has been fair in eliminating people in his own cabinet who he feels are counter to a more transparent and accountable government, while calling out the same on the democrat and liberal sides of our Congress.

What I have not seen, nor heard of him doing is plotting a coup de tat against the Democrat Party as it has done with Judge Kavanaugh.

Now remember, from here on in this piece, my referrals to Democrats are to the Democrat Leadership in our Congress, not to the honest, hardworking and fair-minded Democrats of this country; there are millions of those.

Personally, I believe it an imperative that our country maintains, at least a two-party political system, but it has to be well balanced, fair and transparent. We do not have that now.

What we have now, is a Conservative Party that is slowly, too slowly showing its strength and a Democrat Party that is rapidly charging into the abyss of neo-Nazi Socialism. They have become quite adept at being projectionists; blaming others for their faults. The recent confirmation hearing, or should I call it a confrontation between side-show freaks and loyal Americans is proof of that.

(Note: I refuse to use the title Democratic because there is nothing democratic about them at this point in time.)

What I saw in the hearing was all praise and glory to a woman who is obviously a fraud; anyone with 1/2 ounce of street credibility can see that, and a malicious attack on a man, a REAL MAN with a personal and professional history beyond repute. I saw rabid hyenas starving raw meat while some cowardly committee members sat silent.

The classicly disgusting point came for me after the testimonies were over and the Democrats rushed out the door to be first at a press conference they probably planned. There, in all their glory, they question the credibility of a man they had been tearing down for over a week and the sickening audacity to cry about his attitude towards them.

So I have an honest question for every Democrat and some Republican who participated in this Kangaroo Court, and despite protests, it was a court, not a hearing. I also address my question to every media pundit who questions Judge Kavanaugh’s qualifications and psychological stability.

What did you act like, and do when you felt that your reputation and family were unjustly attacked without the benefit of due process?