FWIW, I found the Virginia Tech Shooter's Plays and read them. I've summarized and commented on them below.
Richard McBeef: An angry teenage boy is trying to convince his mom that his stepdad is a murderer/child molester. Though he admits to the stepdad that he was lying, he's successful in breaking up his mother's relationship, but the stepfather kills him.
Mr. Brownstone: A bunch of teenagers sneak into a casino and are playing casino games, talking about how much they hate their teacher and wish they could kill him. (They make many references to how the teacher "ass rapes" people. Whether this is intended as metaphor isn't clear.) The teacher shows up at some point. One of them wins the jackpot and the teacher claims that the kids knocked him over and stole his ticket. So the teacher gets the money and the kids swear they will get revenge.
CC's Thoughts on them:
Both stories are badly written and seem more like the work of a high school kid than a college student. He does not come off as if English were his second language, he comes off as very immature and an unsophisticated thinker. He also doesn't understand some of the basics of playwriting. (E.g. If at all possible, avoid having scenes take place in cars.)
Honestly, though, had I been in a class where these were workshopped, I would have thought the guy was a jackass, but I wouldn't necessarily have thought "school shooter." He comes off as much more mentally ill in "Mr. Brownstone."
I do write mysteries myself, and though the shooter's work is very bad, when I reread the summary I wrote of the first play, I might easily have written a story with the same plot outline.
It's probably worth noting what the two plays had in common:
1. Angry young people who are ultimately punished for their actions.
2. Accusations of molestation (admitted to be lies in the first play, possibly hyperbole in the second)
3. Lots of swearing, much of it sort of odd in the way that kids who are just learning to swear use swearing badly.
Anyway, that's what I gleaned from them.