I figure whatever the Larry kid did is a moot point. Unless there was some sort of threat on Brandon's life, which there apparently wasn't, murder is completely inexcusable.

I mean, if I had been hit on and stalked a lot by a gay guy when I was 14 years old, there may have been a fight, and I definitely would have gotten people to keep him away from me.... but shooting him in the head is just sick. There's no excuse, so I don't even know why they're attempting to rationalize it.

I don't think that's exactly what the Newsweek article is saying at all, though I do think the particular sentence you quoted was rather poorly written.
I think what Newsweek is saying isn't "geez, homosexuality is terrible and homosexuals shouldn't be protected or have the right to their free expression." I think what Newsweek is asking is "do middle school kids really have a sound enough conceptualization of homosexuality to even correctly define themselves that way, and should blatantly assertive sexual identities be encouraged in middle school atmospheres?"

In which case I'd say: public schools are public property...insofar as free speech should generally be unassailable and encouraged, there shouldn't be a problem with a kid's free expression in a unique identity (Lord knows I can relate to having been bullied, and that shouldn't be tolerated) but

I also don't think Newsweek is offering any justification for what Brandon did. (EDIT: Let me specify that this component of my argument, though I've been quoting and will continue to quote Fifthfiend, is directed to Swordchucks. I'm just too lazy to copy-paste and quote Swordchucks here. But I don't think Fifthfiend touched this issue much.) I'll say it before and I'll say it again: we can debate whether or not this was specifically a gay-hate crime, but on the matter of "does Brandon deserve to be tried for murder?" the answer is undeniably, unequivocably yes.

What Brandon did was beyond grotoesque and a perverse over-reaction to his situation. Even if Larry had sexually harrassed him (and it depends on who you ask, apparently -- I wouldn't be surprised if he did, wouldn't be surprised if he didn't,) there's no justification for Brandon's actions. The only feasible argument in regards to Brandon is whether or not he should be tried (and certainly found guilty) in adult or juvenile court. Personally, I'd actually prefer an adult-court trial -- a murder this well-planned and meticulously thought out deserves an appropriate court sentencing. There is no justification for what Brandon did. None.

I think that's a very biased generalization in favor of Larry's interpretation.
(Note: I'm not defending the kid for killing him, we're getting into another subject than the murder itself entirely.)
Alternatively, I got the impression reading the article that Larry had purposefully relied on a sexual identity he didn't even fully understand in order to grant himself protection and immunity from the more "popular bullies." That, I don't particularly mind -- it's not a morally prudent action but in and of itself, it's not really immoral either -- he's young, he's in the process of discovering who he is, and being "gay" is an identity to latch onto, though had he lived I'd wonder whether he'd still consider himself homosexual or bisexual five or ten years from now...even his own father seemed convinced the kid was in a state of flux.
What I did consider "immoral" among Larry's actions was the fact that he attempted to subsequently use his homosexuality as a weapon to frighten and/or terrorize other men. I mean there's a huge fundamental difference between "sticking up for yourself and being proud of your sexual identity" and "commenting to the boys on how you like to stare at their naked bodies in the showers, purposefully and malignantly "flirting" with boys who haven't incited you, and giving a boy a valentine in the middle of a basketball game with the intent of humiliating him in front of his classmates." When Larry decided to respond to the bullying by becoming his own variation of a bully, he in essence stooped down to their level.

I mean if Larry really liked Brandon and genuinely believed there was a chance that Brandon would date him? I doubt he'd hand him a Valentine in public, at a basketball game, in front of all the other boys -- particularly after Brandon had apparently expressed dissatisfaction with the thought of being pursued by Larry before. And if only Brandon and other "popular students" were saying that Larry was tormenting his classmates I'd be like "okay, they're probably covering their asses with lies," but the fact that a few teachers (from a town in California not exactly known to harbor conservative or anti-gay sentiments) expressed sincere concern with Larry's behavior is a pretty good indication he found that line and jumped right over it.

This is no justification whatsoever for what Brandon did: but I don't think Brandon shot Larry just because "Larry was gay." In that sense, it wasn't a gay-hate crime. (Hell, in the maturation time of hell and internal confusion that is middle school, I wonder if Brandon even had the mental and philosophical capacity and maturity to really even fully comprehend what homosexuality was, who homosexuals were, and if he really hated them as a group and/or wished they didn't exist.) It was more like "Brandon and other popular bullies tease Larry, Larry teases Brandon back and escalates the situation, Brandon becomes humiliated by one of Larry's stunts and may (or may not) have been harrassed, Brandon does the morally inexcusable thing and decides life-ending violence is the proper solution."

Which, unfortunately, happens with a lot of middle school kids period, heterosexual and homosexual, and it's why we have school shootings and beatings and bullying and other such serious issues all around the country. It's not an issue exclusive to the gay community: it happens to ethnic minorities and "goths" and "emos" and "nerds" and "hippies" and "gypsies" and "different kids" everywhere.

You see, this is why I justified my perspective by the qualifier that I am a prude and that few would probably relate with my opinion. You see, I didn't really start having sexual fantasies or desires or anything of that nature until my second year of high school, and the thought of having liked girls in middle school is absolutely foreign to me. I will say that in my personal experience, sexual expression of any sort (homosexual, heterosexual, bisexual, you name it) was not a serious issue among me and my group of friends in middle school, and I'm thankful for that. Back then I was too young to think properly on the subject. Hell, I was called "gay" as a generic slur for the first time in 8th grade and actually thought the bully was calling me "happy!"
...Yeah, I had a sheltered childhood.

1. I'm pretty sure I knew I liked girls and only girls in late elementary school, when and where someone "discovers" their identity shouldn't be an issue.

2. What should be an issue should have nothing to do with rights (aside from the obvious one), from what I can see here the biggest problem of all is a middle school kid blowing away another middle school kid. Whatever happened to dodgeball?

The murder is in no-way justified. However, it likely wouldn't have happened if something had been done before the kid reached the point that he killed his classmate. Some people don't cope with things like that very well. Not saying it's in any way justified, just that it could've been prevented.

And just imagine the horror of the rest of that middle school class as they see another person's brains hit the floor for no reason.

There is no way Brandon's actions can be condoned, justified, or whatever - murder is murder, especially amongst kids. On the other side though, Larry's actions also were worth condemning, sexual harassment is also unjustifiable whether straight, gay, bestial, or whatever - it just never merits the harasser being executed in a computer class.

The problem in the future is that we have several different camps forming around this tragic event: the gay-rights movement is claiming a martyr (they shouldn't since the kid more or less was provoking others), the anti-gay groups are blaming Larry for Brandon's actions (in what little defense he has, Brandon did have a right to respond, only NOT with violence), and then we have the parents and teachers who are all milling around blaming each other instead actually working together to solve these goddamn problems facing kids today.

Am I the only one who got creeped out reading the "One day I'll be famous," line? I mean, what with the situation now?

I may be a really bad person for saying this, but I was more amused than creeped out. Irony does that to me.

There really isn't much more I can add that hasn't been stated already. It looks like a fairly cut and dry case. Boy meets other boy. Boy possibly has feelings for other boy, but also is a bit of a drama queen. Boy provokes other boy repeatedly. Imbecilic/incompetent staff/parents fail to take appropriate action. Other boy commits murder. None of any of this is justified.

Kind of a tragic story, really. Several lives completely ruined forever. One of them just doesn't go on....

I wish that Brandon had've gone to the school about being sexually harassed by Larry. I also wish that if he had done so, the school would've disciplined Larry. I'd rather deal with a possible furor over punishing a homosexual boy for sexually harassing a classmate than deal with the trauma experienced by every child who was witness to that murder, not to mention the grief that Larry and Brandon's friends and family must be feeling.

Rather than going through legal channels to alleviate the harassment, Brandon threw his and Larry's lives away. Schools need to adapt their sexual harassment policies for the changing times, and they need to educate students on what is appropriate and what is not.

how many kids you know would listen?