The Bath School massacre, still the deadliest ever on us soil. Not one shot fired

I had never heard of this school massacre before . I did find a thread on it from 2012 but I think it deserves a new one so we dont forget.

It really does not even get mentioned in any of the threads by the right or I would have heard of it.

And obviously the media never mentions it . I am really shocked that I have never heard of it before.

In Bath Township Michigan a school electrician mad that the township foreclosed on his farm because of taxes blew up the town school killing 44 people mostly children.



Only half of the explosives he rigged actually blew up or it would have been much worse.

(504 pounds on unexplored material)


before he blew up the school he murdered his family and burned down his farm . Then after he blew up the school he blew up his car killing himself and others.

If this guy had access to an Ar-15 type rifle back then he might of chose that to do his killing. But he didn't so he chose a bomb and his car.

The point being if crazy people want to kill they are going to kill.

If they are going to plan it, practice for it then do it you could substitute "gun" with bomb, car, U-haul, _____, _____ ,____ and people are most likely going to die.

And here we are almost a full century later, with all the super sophisticated "assault rifles " and it still stands as the deadliest ever.

I saw one mother, Mrs. Eugene Hart, sitting on the bank a short distance from the school with a little dead girl on each side of her and holding a little boy, Percy, who died a short time after they got him to the hospital. This was about the time Kehoe blew his car up in the street, severely wounding Perry, the oldest child of Mr. and Mrs. Hart.

It is a miracle that many parents didn't lose their minds before the task of getting their children out of the ruins was completed. It was between five and six o'clock that evening before the last child was taken out.

When the doctors got here they detailed three men and myself to take the stretchers to gather up the dead and put them in a row on the grass where we could cover them up.

As soon as the coroner got here and swore in a jury, the bodies were removed to the little town hall, that served as a morgue, where at one time during the afternoon there were thirteen ambulances to take the little ones to the undertakers designated by their parents.

The Bath school disaster

a reply to: notsure1

So this happened in 1927, according to the article referenced.

One reason you don’t probably don’t hear too much about this tragedy is because it happened, as you noted, almost 100 years ago.

You might also have noted that in those intervening years, civilian access to high explosives (appears to be dynamite in the picture, though I’m not an explosives expert) has been severely restricted.

So much so, in fact, that would be bomb makers have had to resort to making their own explosives in many instances.

No doubt resulting in the self-elimination of more than a few psychopaths over the years.

Perhaps similarly stringent restrictions should be applied to civilian access to semi-automatic weapons?

One can but hope that a similar fate awaits more than a few of those demented individuals who would use such weapons for their nefarious deeds.

a reply to: Bhadhidar

What? Explosives are easy. Anyone can make a deadly bomb easy.

a reply to: notsure1

Have you worked it out yet?

Here's a clue, a disgruntled psychopath will use the most deadly item available to them to kill as many people as possible, they don't care about people, they care about hurting as many people as possible as quick as possible.

Argue that point all you like as we have no way of stopping nutjobs, however we do have the ability to limit the nutjobs ability to kill as many people as possible, quickly.

a reply to: Bhadhidar

One reason you don’t probably don’t hear too much about this tragedy is because it happened, as you noted, almost 100 years ago.

The real reason you dont hear about is because it does not fit the agenda that is being pushed. That is obvious if you dont just put your head in the sand and scream guns.

originally posted by: notsure1
a reply to: Bhadhidar

What? Explosives are easy. Anyone can make a deadly bomb easy.

Tell that to the jihadists that keep blowing themselves up with those easily made explosives...

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: notsure1

Have you worked it out yet?

Here's a clue, a disgruntled psychopath will use the most deadly item available to them to kill as many people as possible, they don't care about people, they care about hurting as many people as possible as quick as possible.

Argue that point all you like as we have no way of stopping nutjobs, however we do have the ability to limit the nutjobs ability to kill as many people as possible, quickly.

How? lol is it ban guns?

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: notsure1
a reply to: Bhadhidar

What? Explosives are easy. Anyone can make a deadly bomb easy.

Tell that to the jihadists that keep blowing themselves up with those easily made explosives...

Yeah like the shooters dont usually kill themselves as well.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: notsure1
a reply to: Bhadhidar

What? Explosives are easy. Anyone can make a deadly bomb easy.

Tell that to the jihadists that keep blowing themselves up with those easily made explosives...

Wow and they all have guns but yet use bombs.. Hmmm why is that?

originally posted by: Bhadhidar
a reply to: notsure1

So this happened in 1927, according to the article referenced.

One reason you don’t probably don’t hear too much about this tragedy is because it happened, as you noted, almost 100 years ago.

You might also have noted that in those intervening years, civilian access to high explosives (appears to be dynamite in the picture, though I’m not an explosives expert) has been severely restricted.

So much so, in fact, that would be bomb makers have had to resort to making their own explosives in many instances.

No doubt resulting in the self-elimination of more than a few psychopaths over the years.

Perhaps similarly stringent restrictions should be applied to civilian access to semi-automatic weapons?

One can but hope that a similar fate awaits more than a few of those demented individuals who would use such weapons for their nefarious deeds.

You honestly think that a person needs to be an expert in order to get a hold of explosives? You also think that restricting guns from people will not allow them to have guns? What world do you live in? There is a prie on anything and the seller will always sell to the best deal, guns just don't magically disappear, just like drugs, they are always present.

This was 91 years ago, few people from that place back then are still alive. It's not talked about because it's FRIGGING OLD. Try bringing up anything older than Kent State for dead students of any age, and people start scratching their heads. Old stuff doesn't resonate well.
It is occasionally brought up in comparisons for school-targeted violence -- don't know why you never heard of it, but I have since Columbine. That wasn't exactly yesterday, yanno.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: notsure1

Have you worked it out yet?

Here's a clue, a disgruntled psychopath will use the most deadly item available to them to kill as many people as possible, they don't care about people, they care about hurting as many people as possible as quick as possible.

Argue that point all you like as we have no way of stopping nutjobs, however we do have the ability to limit the nutjobs ability to kill as many people as possible, quickly.

So assault guns are not needed?

Like Mcvey or Mao or Genghis and Mohammed?

Good f'n luck.

A disgruntled person decides to blow things up. And people. We can only try to prevent it. We don't rally together and claim the right to own as many explosives as we can get our arms on.

Yet someone with a grudge, with an intent who snaps on a certain day, can easily get a high powered gun and shoot as many people as they can before either being killed, killing themselves, or being caught.

What a fail op.

Or are you arguing for the right of the people to have a tonne of explosives, you know, for hunting and protection against the other hordes of people with tonnes of explosives?

...

Or burn them all in a church, that works.

originally posted by: notsure1

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: notsure1
a reply to: Bhadhidar

What? Explosives are easy. Anyone can make a deadly bomb easy.

Tell that to the jihadists that keep blowing themselves up with those easily made explosives...

Wow and they all have guns but yet use bombs.. Hmmm why is that?

They had guns that were inefficient compared to today's weapons, but I'm sure you knew that already.... Right?

a reply to: notsure1

I heard of that a long time ago, have you heard of this besides Guy Fawkes?

"The Day British Soldiers Blew Up 10,000 German Troops"

www.forces.net...




And then...

West Nickel Mines School shooting

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: AllKnowing

Where did I say that only “experts” could access explosives?

I swear reading comprehension has diminished almost as rapidly as critical thinking ability over the last few decades!

I said, “civilian access to high explosives has been severely restricted”, not eliminated, not made available only to “experts”; in fact, I never even used the term “expert”.

Nor did I suggest in any way that restricting civilian access to semi-automatic weapons would “not allow them to have guns”, as you claimed.

I did not suggest that ALL guns be restricted.

Nor did I suggest that ANY guns be confiscated.

If you were to re-read my post (assuming of course that you would be capable of understanding what you are reading, which may be too much to hope for) you will find that I merely suggested that Consideration be given to restricting civilian access to ONE TYPE of gun.

originally posted by: Bhadhidar
a reply to: AllKnowing

Where did I say that only “experts” could access explosives?

I swear reading comprehension has diminished almost as rapidly as critical thinking ability over the last few decades!

I said, “civilian access to high explosives has been severely restricted”, not eliminated, not made available only to “experts”; in fact, I never even used the term “expert”.

Nor did I suggest in any way that restricting civilian access to semi-automatic weapons would “not allow them to have guns”, as you claimed.

I did not suggest that ALL guns be restricted.

Nor did I suggest that ANY guns be confiscated.

If you were to re-read my post (assuming of course that you would be capable of understanding what you are reading, which may be too much to hope for) you will find that I merely suggested that Consideration be given to restricting civilian access to ONE TYPE of gun.

Yeah that's your Fixx?

a reply to: notsure1

You had me at AR-15. 2nd.