Boy stabbed at school has died

[var123]

Oh my God! this is awful. A boy was stabbed today at a school just outside Aberdeen. Reports say he was only 15. Now twitter is saying he has died.

Cults academy.

And I don't think we can be blaming the school for the fact it was in the media before all parents had been informed. Teens have instant access to social media and it's virtually impossible to keep such a thing under wraps.

Also, incidents like this are thankfully still exceptionally rare in the UK so inevitably procedures will be slightly ad-hoc regardless of being rehearsed every few years. And if it was scissors!?! Well, I teach Y5 and often leave large, sharp scissors on my desk. I use them for cutting large pieces of paper mainly or cloth. Of course one day one of my 9/10yr olds could decide to grab them and stab me or a classmate but you cannot legislate for exceptionally rare random acts of violence. If I taugh infants then of course, scissors would be safely away but the school cannot be blamed in any way if it turns out a pair of scissors were snatched from a teacher's desk.

I was in my first year of teaching, in Glasgow as DH was still at uni there. We had parents turn up all day to collect their children. They heard the news and just wanted to be with them.

And I don't think we can be blaming the school for the fact it was in the media before all parents had been informed. Teens have instant access to social media and it's virtually impossible to keep such a thing under wraps.

Not blaming the school for that but the media outlets should have been more responsible in their reporting.

Yes, I remember Dunblane. I did not include it as I meant to refer to violence conducted by (current/recent) pupils against pupils and teachers. IIRC, Hamilton had no connection to the school (though his history as a leader of youth clubs may have been relevant, though no-one really knows).

My apologies for writing badly and for any offence caused.

Fair do's, glad we've cleared it up. I wasn't offended, but the pedant in me felt the need to challenge such a broad statement.

Certainly not, Dunblane was terrible but I'm too young to remember the ones before it. It's perhaps not sensitive to have posted it when the victim is barely cold, but I did think it was worthy of discussion. Others react to school shootings by saying ban guns, as if banning guns will stop such shootings. Well here was an instance of someone using a weapon to kill someone in a school despite it being banned. The ban didn't work. Which makes me think there needs to be a multilayered solution applied, better investment in mental health care, some kind of improvement in spotting warning signs in people earlier.

No I don't think the school could have stopped someone bringing in a penknife, given how available they are and how many people carry them on a daily basis. It would be easy for Joe Bloggs to swipe his dad's penknife on the way out the door for instance or failing that just nick one from a shop.

Just saw it was scissors sorry. Same principle applies, it would be easy for a kid to swipe a pair and take them into the school.

So you're theory is that one killing in a school with scissors is the equivalent of the 94 school shootings in the us in only two years since the sandy hook massacre and therefore is a good reason not to ban guns? I still don't see your logic.

Scissors is one rumour. I've also heard 2 other rumours with completely different weapons. All will become clear when the police issue official statements.

This brings back memories of thisnews.stv.tv/scotland/281399-parents-of-scots-murder-victim-address-press-standards-inquiry/

My dd later went to this school and the school is still tainted by the stabbing.

news.stv.tv/scotland/281399-parents-of-scots-murder-victim-address-press-standards-inquiry/

Try again.

"So you're theory is that one killing in a school with scissors is the equivalent of the 94 school shootings in the us in only two years since the sandy hook massacre and therefore is a good reason not to ban guns? I still don't see your logic."

No. My theory is that banning a weapon whether a gun or a knife, won't actually stop school shootings or stabbings. They aren't going to care that the gun or the knife they are killing people with is illegal to possess. They're already quite happy to kill people despite that being illegal, so they won't give a crap that to breaking possession of offensive weapon charges too. If they did ban guns in America, I'd be interested to hear what people would blame the next time there was a school shooting, would they ban guns again because the first ban hadn't worked? Or would they just accept those school shootings as an acceptable price to pay (in lives lost) for having banned guns across society?

Oh right, so the hundreds of people have died in school and uni shootings in the us would have died anyway. I see.

It's my old school - my friends who still live up there now have teens at the school.We are all in complete shock - just cannot comprehend it. The poor family - just awful, awful news.

"Oh right, so the hundreds of people have died in school and uni shootings in the us would have died anyway. I see."

Yes, unless you think that a murderer will decide not to murder because the item he is going to use in the killings is now illegal. I can't see that happening. If he's already fine to murder schoolchildren despite that being very much illegal, I don't see him deciding to cancel his spree just because he'll now also face possession of an illegal weapon charges if caught.

It's not about them 'deciding' which weapon to use, it's about ease of access for them. Guns are illegal so there are far fewer of them around and even fewer that are accessible by people intent on harm. This is what keeps the numbers of gun casualties down in this country, and not in countries where guns are legal, such as America.

No one thinks a ban is going to eliminate gun deaths entirely. But there should be much stricter controls- and if there had been stricter controls of course there would be far fewer deaths by shooting.

Would you like to see uncontrolled access to guns in the uk as well?
You think it will be good to buy bullets from asda?

The 16 year old who was detained has now been charged and will be in court tomorrow. Such a tragic incident which has ripped 2 families apart as well as any witnesses.

On the issues of knives. Last year ds was in 1st year and said something happened at lunchtime and. 2 boys were removed by the police. The next morning my friend told me that one boy had a pen knife and the other his mother's carving knife from her knife block. Apparently planning to go to a knife fight after school. They were 11/12 years old.

If you think the number of school shootings isn't related to the legality and therefore ease of obtaining a gun how do you explain the fact that they don't happen here, Donthaveausername

"It's not about them 'deciding' which weapon to use, it's about ease of access for them. Guns are illegal so there are far fewer of them around and even fewer that are accessible by people intent on harm. This is what keeps the numbers of gun casualties down in this country, and not in countries where guns are legal, such as America."

"No one thinks a ban is going to eliminate gun deaths entirely. But there should be much stricter controls- and if there had been stricter controls of course there would be far fewer deaths by shooting. "

My objection to gun control is not a belief that it doesn't save lives. Of course it saves some lives, but it also causes some deaths as well, people die because they weren't able to protect themselves. School shootings are an unfortunate side effect of liberal gun control, and if we implement stricter gun control we'll cut down on them, I don't dispute that for a second. So because of that I would support it, but the side effect of stricter gun control is that you condemn other people to death by depriving them of the ability to protect themselves. Far from solving the problem, it merely shifts it to different people. I'm not willing to support legislation that saves schoolchildrens lives if it condemns other lives in the process. That may sound emotionally uncaring, but every human life is equal, I don't believe that ending one life to save another is worth it, or that potentially ending one life to potentially save another is worth it. This is a discussion where emotion should not play a part which is very hard because a school shooting is one of the most emotional subjects you can get.

I'm open to discussion of tighter gun control as long as the right of law abiding people to own and carry for protection remains untouched. But we should maybe talk about what else can be down, maybe greater background checks, maybe greater investment in mental health care, trying to spot problems people have bottled up before they turn into something terrible.

"Would you like to see uncontrolled access to guns in the uk as well?
You think it will be good to buy bullets from asda?"

America doesn't have uncontrolled access to guns or bullets, and we shouldn't either. I would be in favour of civilians owning guns in the UK as long as there was legislation against certain people having them, minimum age for buying, must have a background check and have proven competency with that gun. The closest thing I can compare it to is like a driving license and a car, you take a civilian gun safety course, and a test about the law to prove you know when you can and can't use it, and then you get some kind of approval or license which means you can purchase one providing you don't have a serious criminal record. I say serious because someone who is in the cells each week for fighting shouldn't have a gun, but someone who also has a criminal record for theft 20 years ago shouldn't have that prevent them from owning.

"If you think the number of school shootings isn't related to the legality and therefore ease of obtaining a gun how do you explain the fact that they don't happen here, Donthaveausername"

It is related to the legality, partially but not completely. The UK has NEVER had a culture where shooting sprees are common, and this was before we had strict gun legislation. It seems we're just not that kind of country, with or without gun laws. But the legislation does play a part, I've already admitted as much with America. A gun ban in America would cause there to be less school shootings, I agree that far. But I don't think it's worth implementing, because that gun ban would also be condemning others to death - the people who died because they couldn't protect themselves through not having a weapon. It's not that I completely disagree with you, I see the merit in what you're saying but all I think it does is shift the deaths onto others, it doesn't solve the underlying problem. I feel better investment in mental health, and perhaps deeper background checks are the only real ways of having any impact on that.

shocking my heart goes out to his family and the school

I don't believe that ending one life to save another is worth it

So you do believe in gun control, then, Donthaveausername? Your argument sort of goes full circle and bites itself on the arse.

It's never occurred to me (and, I assume, millions of other Britons) that I put my life at risk by not carrying a gun around. It is, however, less likely that the person I inadvertently annoy at the supermarket is far less likely to pull a gun on me for my mistake.

"So you do believe in gun control then, Donthaveausername? Your argument sort of goes full circle and bites itself on the arse."

No I don't believe in gun control, although I think I see the point you're getting at - That by supporting gun control I am kinda believing in that reasoning. Liberal gun laws do sometimes mean you sacrifice one life to save another, so I perhaps worded it wrong. What I'm meaning to say is that I don't want to support changing legislation to protect lives if the cost is going to be sacrificing other lives. Strict gun control sacrifices lives to save lives just as liberal gun control does, whichever you believe in you are in a way supporting the philosophy that it's acceptable to sacrifice one life to save another. None of us can really escape from that fact. It would be nice to have a different system where people don't die, but if that system is going to be the same as the old system it's not worth it.

"It's never occurred to me (and, I assume, millions of other Britons) that I put my life at risk by not carrying a gun around. It is, however, less likely that the person I inadvertently annoy at the supermarket is far less likely to pull a gun on me for my mistake."

Having a gun doesn't just save you from a life-threatening attack, it deters all kinds of things to make them less likely (although still possible and they do still happen although at a reduced frequency) . A mugging, home invasion, these kinds of things happen less in communities where civilian ownership of guns is higher. Theories that a mugger would for some bizarre reason decide to shoot you before nicking your purse have been shown to be baseless, and what actually happens is a safer society.

Again I don't understand where this fear of someone pulling a gun on you because you argue with them is coming from. In the UK do we normally worry that anyone you argue with is about to hit you or attack you with a weapon that isn't a gun? No, so the paranoia about "someone I annoy at the shops might get out a gun and shoot me" doesn't have any real grounds, it's not based on anything real. When you and your DP have an argument in the middle of cooking dinner do you suddenly become terrified that they will stab you with the large knife they have? Why feel any different if they were armed? You can be capable of having an argument with an armed person without feeling the need to draw a weapon on them.

There was 10-15 minutes yesterday where we knew someone at my brother's school had been stabbed to death but didn't know who. The fucking relief when we knew it wasn't our boy then the horror of what had happened will never leave me.

Bailey's parents didn't get the relief we did.