A noticeable theme in his story telling is that he poses a question, more often then not a moral dilemma, describes a story that's perfectly related to the question, the story ends in a complicated answer, he then asks another question following the story, and then admits that there is never a clear answer to the questions he's been asking. He usually states that his questions either have no resolve or haven't been explained by anyone yet. Which isn't really helping resolve the issue of violence in school.

He just spent about 3 or 4 full pages explaining the story of McCandless, and it still disproved his agreement on the opinion that reading and having faith in reading practices would restore humanity and better the student community. It makes no sense to me why, stylistically, he would include several lengthy pages of information that doesn't prove his original thought. It just seems like the argument he's trying to make isn't being supported by any of the information hes providing.

Very strange how she believes removing the accessibility of the internet from children and promoting the reading of books will solve the mental instability of the students committing these mass murders.

I'm interested in hearing his suggestions for putting "these violent students back into line". Considering the sarcasm he uses to discuss the previous methodical approaches of previous institutions.

I come from a school that, from when I first arrived, harbored students that were racially biased, extremely unhappy, and excluded from a variety of social groups. Administration saw this was a problem after students were publicly hazed an taunted because of their race. Even though a majority of the school was diversified this still occurred, and administration decided it was time to act. They offered several outreach programs and began a variety of school functions such as school plays, school psychology meeting, pep rallies, etc. And there was a noticeable improvements in student behaviors a crossed the diversified community because the students were basically kept busy and had methods of coping with the challenges they faced in daily life and in high school.

Stylistically, the author sure does enjoy using lengthy sentences and adjectives that spark the imagination. What I found odd was his transition from describing the murderers as outsiders, losers, and specimens to immediately discussing how inspirational and beautiful the funerals of the victims were. He kind of walks into the sentence not even acknowledging the insults he threw out previously.