Finished reading this book and thought that it was very good. I was wondering if I can get any thoughts on the book. What part of Cullen's writing do you think was strong or weak and what kind of overall impression did this book give you. Personally I thought while it wasn't the best written book I have read, it was very interesting.
-
Welcome
to BookAndReader! We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!
Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.
Dave Cullen: Columbine
- Thread starter Akol
- Start date
Dave Cullen's Columbine
I read the book, and I honestly think that Dave Cullen uses language that is way too basic. He also says things that no one would have a chance of knowing, so it is most likely speculation.
Overall, the guy is bluffing his way through half the book, trying to provide a coherent story that may not be completely true.
I read the book, and I honestly think that Dave Cullen uses language that is way too basic. He also says things that no one would have a chance of knowing, so it is most likely speculation.
Overall, the guy is bluffing his way through half the book, trying to provide a coherent story that may not be completely true.
Columbine by Dave Cullen
I have read the book Columbine by Dave Cullen, and I have to say that it is a bit weird to know that the book states pretty much that there was overwhelming evidence that the boys were up to something. However, in the book, it says that they had trivial motives: to punish humanity (apparently) simply because they got caught breaking into a van.
Could this have been prevented by having stricter gun control laws, and red flags that get raised when the materials to make a pipe bomb are bought?
Any thoughts are appreciated, on anything I have said.
I have read the book Columbine by Dave Cullen, and I have to say that it is a bit weird to know that the book states pretty much that there was overwhelming evidence that the boys were up to something. However, in the book, it says that they had trivial motives: to punish humanity (apparently) simply because they got caught breaking into a van.
Could this have been prevented by having stricter gun control laws, and red flags that get raised when the materials to make a pipe bomb are bought?
Any thoughts are appreciated, on anything I have said.
Verbal-Kint
New Member
Dave Cullen makes some solid points, but after he establishes his main thoughts, he dives into speculation. It's definitely a solid read and considered definitive amongst most people interested in the shootings, I just have a problem with him pointing the finger when he has problems of his own. An example would be Cassie, the Christian "martyr". Her story was released before everything on Columbine was gathered (they even release a book later) and it was later discovered she never professed her faith in her God before she died. Aren't there still unreleased basement tapes that could change the public view completely? Cullen does himself a disservice claiming he has all the information when he himself doesn't have access to all the information.
raptorjesus
New Member
I don't think there is any way for sure to know that they were planning something so devastating. The signs were there, but jumping to conclusions like that is often difficult when the opinion of most parents have the "my child would never do something like that" mentality.
As for the subject of gun control, it has been widely debated on a national scale before and while there are speculations as to whether more gun control would actually keep guns out of the hands of those who wish to use them for harm, my opinion is that there would always be a black market for firearms in much the same way that drugs are commonly available despite being illegal to produce and possess.
As for the subject of gun control, it has been widely debated on a national scale before and while there are speculations as to whether more gun control would actually keep guns out of the hands of those who wish to use them for harm, my opinion is that there would always be a black market for firearms in much the same way that drugs are commonly available despite being illegal to produce and possess.
Verbal-Kint
New Member
As the saying goes, where there is a will, there is a way. Even without the guns, Eric and Dylan had access to homemade bombs whose supplies can be found virtually anywhere (which makes the combined purchase very hard to throw a red flag at). You could even go as far as saying with gun laws, they would have spent more time on the bombs, resulting in the "main bombs" detonation and significantly more deaths.
Peder
Well-Known Member
Speculation? Definitive? Really makes me wonder. Have words taken on new meanings lately?
I do think that gun control laws did play a role in this. If there wasnt a ban on federal assault weapons from 1994 till 2004, what types of weapons would they have been using. With acces to a different assortment of weapons and would think that the outcome would no doubt be different. In this case the real damage was done with the guns so I do think firearm control should be debated with regards to this incident.
while some parts of the book do seem to be rather speculative, I think that in all it is a fair representation. As far as a Columbine expert, Cullen is probably as close to being a Columbine expert as possible( He studied the incident for over ten years). It is difficult to believe some things he says however, but it is still a interesting book.
Speculation? Definitive? Really makes me wonder. Have words taken on new meanings lately?
I think he was trying to say how the "experts" find it to be the best account for what had happened. I am inclined to agree with him however, some parts do seemed contrived, but not enough to really harm the integrity of the book.
Verbal-Kint
New Member
Definition for speculation:Speculation? Definitive? Really makes me wonder. Have words taken on new meanings lately?
guess: a message expressing an opinion based on incomplete evidence.
Definition of definitive:
done or reached decisively and with authority: "a definitive diagnosis".
It's one thing to correct someone, it's another to incorrectly do so. Invest in a dictionary buddy, it might do you some good.
No point in having two threads on the same topic.
Also, play nice.
Also, play nice.
Peder
Well-Known Member
She said play nice. I don't much care for being called buddy. So please.
And I do have a dictionary, and use it, thank you.
But I still have difficulty about "authority" resting on "incomplete evidence."
Verbal-Kint
New Member
I said it's considered definitive. Might want to pull out that dictionary of yours and look that one up too, chief.
Peder
Well-Known Member
Evidently we speak different languages.
Have fun
Verbal-Kint, love your username. Ditto for raptorjesus. He went extinct for our sins.