zlacker

>>exolym+(OP)
This reads well-meaning, but ultimately misdirected. There is no solid data corroborating the "school shooters are bullied" narrative - in fact, many of them have a long history of being bullies themselves, which then gets twisted from "kids try to avoid the weird kid who does disturbing things" into "poor little baby had no friends".

Disabled, queer, poor teens are not shooting up schools. The profile of a school shooter is overwhelmingly white, male and middle/upper class. A shooting is an ultimate tantrum for which the perpetrator is never held accountable.

>>hellof+e6
I often wonder how many of these open letters are read by the person they're directed at, presumably very few. I think some of the points they say make sense, and if they hung around on 4chan or 8chan and posted very abbreviated versions of these points, then that might at least reach some potential shooters. But posting on a substack is a bit like screaming into the void even if it was, as you say, well-meaning.

>>smcl+X6
I mean, some of the OP's points seem to vacate a lot of responsibility from where it's due, so in that sense they would definitely speak to their target audience.

Unfortunately, the reality is that there are often good reasons why young men who shoot up schools are excluded by their peers. If anything needs to be targeted, it's their ability to self-reflect on that and deal with (often not real but perceived) rejection and confrontation in a healthy way, but I doubt that this will go well.