There has been many explanations put forth for this tragic episode. As expected, the usual suspects, the internet and Finland's lax gun laws have been pointed to first. Saari was very active on the internet, where he showed a very keen interest in guns. And unlike from his normal contact with other people, he also showed his darker sides on the net. On example of this is the video clips he put out on YouTube shortly before the shootings. Partly due to Finland's hunting traditions, obtaining a gun is very easy in Finland. Hege Ulstein of Dagsavisen has also pointed to Finland's school system as one of the culprits. Finland has received much praise for its high results in international surveys and tests, such as the PISA-tests. Her argument is that because Finland does not prioritize social skills training as much as Norway, Finland would be more prone to such tragedies. This is a highly speculative argument in my mind.
It is true that the Norwegian syllabus contains a very high emphasis on social skills, which is very good. Whether it succeeds to reach the goals could be discussed, but the emphasis is nevertheless important. To argue that because we put focus on social skills that we are immune to such tragedies is highly dubious. We only need to think back a couple of months to find an incident that could have turned really nasty, when a barrister fired a gun into a reception center for asylum seekers and seriously injured a 16 years old Somalian. Fortunately, we have been spared of tragedies of the scope of the Kauhajoki massacre (knock on wood). But to hold that we for various reasons are somehow immune to that would be to fool ourselves.
4 comments:
I don't think one can guage the relevancy of the schools, or the families, or anything else, from reading just this story.
I might speculate the the shootist was on the kind of anti-depressant medication that is suspected in some of the shooting incidents in America.
I might speculate that anger and depression and the availability of weapons will make it possible for this kind of situation to happen anywhere. To me this supports an argument that our countries spend far too little on health care and education and supporting the social networks that give people something to live for.
Good point. Nobody is immune, it is really grasping at straws to look at this case from such a perspective.
This could have happened anywhere in the world and in my opinion has more to do with the psyche of the shooter than the country he lives in. As we all know, we can debate until the cows come home on how to make society healthier both psychologically and physically through providing a good health care system. We still have to admit that in some cases, particularly when it involves the psyche of an individual, there is not much one can draw from the system.
It sounds ludicrous that anyone possessed of any level of intelligence could really believe that a 'country' could be immune!
Sevika
What drives a person to commit such a horrendous act as this is perhaps impossible to fully understand. It is extremely complicated, and can of course not be ascribed to one factor.
As a society we need to strive to provide help to everyone that are mentally unstable. We also need to help equip every person with skills in coping with personal problems and conflicts in a constructive way, starting all the way from kindergarten.
But no matter how much we try to avoid this, there will unfortunately always be a risk that there are some that we cannot reach.
Post a Comment