Nation shocked by Kauhajoki school shootings
On September 23 a student opened fire, killing nine students, a teacher and himself. Less than a year earlier, another young man shot eight people and himself at Jokela High School. What are the implications for Finnish society?
People lay candles by the Kauhajoki vocational school in the western Finnish town of Kauhajoki on Wednesday September 24, 2008.© Lehtikuva
With the Kauhajoki tragedy, Finland has been irrevocably changed. While the Jokela killings were considered a shocking one-off deed by a disturbed youngster, the Kauhajoki case raises serious questions for society as a whole.
There were startling parallels between the events in Kauhajoki and Jokela. In each case, a young man who seemed ordinary – but a bit withdrawn – bought a handgun and planned his attack in complete secrecy without anyone around him suspecting what was to come. Each sought peer support on the internet and posted threatening videos on public websites, showing himself firing a gun.
After the Jokela incident, a thorough analysis of the reasons for the violent assault was launched. The same kind of probe has been promised after the Kauhajoki shootings. There are at least three key dimensions to these acts: young men’s mental malaise, pathologically deviant communities on the internet and the availability of handguns.
Hard to detect hatred
We do not know exactly what kinds of lives these school shooters lived, because some of the details are protected by the healthcare system’s patient confidentiality. However, according to the publicly available information, both young men had experienced bullying and as a result had become somewhat withdrawn. The Jokela shooter, 18, had sought mental health treatment, but was denied. The Kauhajoki perpetrator, 22, indicated in a note that he had been planning the attack since 2002, and said that it was motivated by a hatred of humanity. In any case, it is clear that these sorts of acts are carried out by ill, lonely individuals. (See also the article by European Member of Parliament Lasse Lehtinen on Virtual Finland.)
Some young men always become marginalised, and the incidence of violence among them is hardly a new phenomenon. However, the catastrophically expanded suicides carried out by these two young men represent a new phenomenon. Since the traditional symptoms of Finnish depression and angst have been of a different nature, the warning signs and risks associated with these school attacks went unnoticed by the mental healthcare system. Externally, both of these young men seemed to be normal and functional.
Recognition of these kinds of mental health problems requires special expertise. Since the Kauhajoki incident, awareness of risk recognition procedures developed in Germany and the US has been spreading quickly among Finnish mental health professionals.
Since the Jokela attack, Finland has directed new resources toward psychosocial services for children, youth and families, with an extra investment of ten million euros between 2008 and 2011. Access to mental health services has been facilitated and accelerated, and oversight of the school healthcare system has been stepped up.
Spotlight on youth internet use
Both of these Finnish school killers had joined international communities where young people who admired school shooters meet and brag about their ideals. As destructive as these types of communities’ mental landscape is, it is not far-fetched to conclude that through these groups the young shooters sought and received the attention, admiration and sense of community that they may have felt denied by those close to them physically
In both cases, the shooting videos uploaded onto the internet were harbingers of what was to come. The pre-Jokela videos were noticed, but not taken very seriously – so many other wide-ranging products of tasteless imaginations are continuously posted on the internet. The reaction to the videos uploaded by the Kauhajoki killer was completely different: they were immediately reported to the police, who took action on them.
Experts see a clear risk of school violence linked with nihilistic communities and publicity on the internet. The perpetrators of a great number of the world’s approximately 100 school shooting incidents had joined violent online communities and even announced their intentions in advance over the internet. These school shootings around the world are startlingly similar, and the methods are spread over the net. Thus, monitoring the net plays a key role in preventing such tragedies.
Since the attacks, Finland has also boosted police resources for monitoring websites popular with the young. However, such surveillance is difficult: Hundreds of hours’ worth of material is uploaded to these sites daily, those participating can do so anonymously and as soon as authorities track down suspicious communities and screen identities, they can instantly disappear, only to pop up elsewhere under different names on different servers. Therefore police action depends heavily on tips from the public. There have been calls for parents to keep an eye on what sorts of websites their children and youngsters frequent. Since the latest shootings, police have received many tips regarding inappropriate material on the web. Although most of these items have turned out to be merely distasteful jokes, they have been taken seriously nevertheless.
Who needs weapons – and what kind?
Both school shooters had legal weapons and had been interviewed by police before receiving gun permits. In order to receive such a permit in Finland, an applicant must be able to prove a target shooting, hunting or gun collecting hobby. There are plenty of guns in Finland, but so far studies have not shown a strong link between guns and crime.
On the other hand, experts say the relatively easy access to handguns does increase the risk of school shootings. Reform of gun laws was already underway before the Kauhajoki incident, but since then it has been made a legislative priority. The regulations on acquiring a gun will most likely be tightened, although it is too early to say how.
As a first step, police received new rules on gun permit approvals about a week after the Kauhajoki tragedy. From now on, no one will be allowed to buy a handgun as a first weapon. Furthermore, each applicant must submit a statement from a doctor certifying that he or she does not suffer from any psychological problems that might pose a risk of harm to himself or herself or others. And every applicant must be interviewed by at least two trained police officers.
Finnish flags flying at half mast at Luotsikatu in Helsinki on September 24, 2008, a day after a shooting at a vocational high school in Kauhajoki, Western Finland.© Lehtikuva
System works well, but collapsed at critical point
Finnish flags flying at half mast at Luotsikatu in Helsinki on September 24, 2008, a day after a shooting at a vocational high school in Kauhajoki, Western Finland.
Since the November 2007 Jokela killings, officials, the media and individual citizens have done much to protect public safety. All educational institutions are required to have crisis readiness plans. National operational models have been developed to intervene against marginalisation at an early stage, and children are being taught safety skills. All police staff members who handle gun permits have been retrained and the Board of Education has arranged crisis training for some 2,000 teachers and others who work with young people.
Internet users more readily report threatening material spotted online and police have been probing these cases. Five days before the Kauhajoki tragedy, local police received information about the attacker’s shooting video, and immediately began investigating the matter. The young man was located and interrogated on the day before the shooting spree. Police considered confiscating his weapon, but decided not to – with tragic results. A probe of the Kauhajoki police actions has been launched. So far, citing the ongoing investigations, police have declined to release details to the public about the interrogation and the decision to allow him to keep the gun.
When the catastrophe occurred the next day, the local and national crisis organisation performed like clockwork. Police, rescue operations, healthcare, youth workers, the Finnish Red Cross, churches and others were immediately informed and help was made available to everyone suffering in one way or another because of the attack.
Kauhajoki is a small town, but there was no chaos, even though it suddenly faced a flood of worried relatives, friends, officials and media from Finland and around the world. The press, which was sharply criticised for its handling of the Jokela incident, behaved with restraint and recognised its duty to protect the victims’ loved ones. The media also limited coverage focusing on the shooter, to avoid turning him into a hero for anyone considering a future attack.
Churches around the country immediately opened their doors to anyone in need of a place to pray, meditate or speak with a pastor. The evening after the attack, youth counselling services were opened over the phone, by text message and in online chatrooms. The next day, the nation’s flags flew at half-mast and all schools discussed the events in a manner appropriate to each age group. The prime minister visited the town and the state quickly decided to fund crisis assistance for the youth of Kauhajoki.
Everything worked well – except that the tragedy that claimed 11 lives was not prevented. The young man’s rage and grim plan were not recognised in time, or taken seriously enough.
Time for serious contemplation
This act, which profoundly disturbed children’s and young people’s sense of security, forces us Finns to seriously ponder whether there are factors in our society that send certain youngsters into deep loneliness. In the wake of the Kauhajoki calamity, the issue of community has become an overriding theme in the run-up to local council elections in late October.
Salla Korpela,
journalist
salla.korpela @ kolumbus.fi