Yes. I'm an alum. I have friends who are still there (hopefully fine - I haven't heard from them, but they'd have no reason to be near any of the shooting sites). I also have a little cousin who's a senior there. She's okay, but one of her friends was shot. I don't know how badly. But this is not a good day.
It's also not the first shooting at VT this year - an escaped prisoner killed a sheriff's deputy on the first day of classes in the fall.
Posted by Mrs.M (Member # 2943) on :
We're in Richmond and everyone is absolutely freaking out.
Posted by Architraz Warden (Member # 4285) on :
Short summary is that 21 have been killed (as well as the shooter in the yahoo story above) and 21 wounded on the campus.
The story started out earlier with one dead, the shooter at large, and the campus on lockdown. The second series of shootings happened later and at a different building. I really hope this wasn't something that was made worse by a simple mistake like lifting the lockdown too soon, or letting the wrong people out.
Posted by Mrs.M (Member # 2943) on :
A bill to allow handguns on campus was struck down last year, which seems bitterly ironic now.
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
Looks a little confusing ... some of the reports say there were two shooters, and one is dead. Others talk like it is just one.
Probably will take awhile to get all the information straight.
This is horribly tragic.
Farmgirl
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
Oh my goodness, what a horrible situation.
I read an article from foxnews.com that said the two shootings, the one at Ambler Hall and the other at the engineering building were not known to be related. That seems like an extraordinary coincidence, if true.
Latest I've heard -- updating the story at work -- was that there was one shooter, who crossed the campus for two separate shootings.
However, AP has photos of a man being arrested, so dunno. We may not have all the details yet.
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
"A bill to allow handguns on campus was struck down last year, which seems bitterly ironic now."
Yep, only the NRA protects the right of maniacs to slaughter.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by aspectre: "A bill to allow handguns on campus was struck down last year, which seems bitterly ironic now."
Yep, only the NRA protects the right of maniacs to slaughter.
I am going to hope beyond hope that -- if not just for some semblance of respect for the situation -- we wait at least a single page before turning this into a dumb, emotionally heated gun control debate.
Posted by graywolfe (Member # 3852) on :
rumor from a source of a source states that psycho confronted girlfriend who was pregnant from another man, shot her, then went to engineering bldg to kill man who impregnated her but did not have clear info on who he was other than an engineering student. This is a source, from a source at best so it could be wrong, but it does go in line with rumors that it was related to a domestic girlfriend/boyfriend situation.
My brother is incensed as he was eight years ago, with what in his words, was a lollygagging police force that was not remotely aggressive enough in dealing with the situation. It appears there is clear video of police walking while gunfire could be heard repeatedly, if this is true, this horrific incident has to be used to rectify SOP when it comes to these crisis. We've had too many psycho's get hours of room to kill until they're exhausted, if this is due to SOP, than it has to be changed. The kids were defenseless, the police they're only hoping, if they took forever getting after this nut job, that is something that simply can't stand, and must be changed so something like this can't happen again, at least in this fashion (there will always be nutjobs, our only recourse is to create operating procedures that can kill these murderous swine before they've killed two dozen freaking people over more than 2 hours of freaking time).
Posted by Mrs.M (Member # 2943) on :
My intention was NOT to start any kind of debate or discussion about gun rights. I was simply remarking on how a measure was passed to keep the kids safe and failed miserably. I am the wife of a professor and I know dozens of families who have kids at VT - I am sick about this. The reputation of the Hokeyville police is well-known.
Posted by James Tiberius Kirk (Member # 2832) on :
That time of year again. :-/
quote:The bloodbath took place at opposite sides of the 2,600-acre campus, beginning at about 7:15 a.m. at West Ambler Johnston, a coed dormitory that houses 895 people, and continuing about two hours later at Norris Hall, an engineering building, authorities said.
Is there a reason why the school was not closed after the first shootings? Granted, it's a large campus but I'm left with the impression that they didn't even cancel classes.
--j_k
Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :
quote:Originally posted by aspectre: "A bill to allow handguns on campus was struck down last year, which seems bitterly ironic now."
Yep, only the NRA protects the right of maniacs to slaughter.
Because criminals are well-known to obey the law.
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
It sounds (from reports) like the area around the first shooting WAS shut down for a time. But they didn't shut down the entire campus. Don't know how hard that would be to do on a 2,600 acre campus -- that is a huge area.
FG
Posted by Tresopax (Member # 1063) on :
quote:My brother is incensed as he was eight years ago, with what in his words, was a lollygagging police force that was not remotely aggressive enough in dealing with the situation.
That is an overly quick rush to judgement, given you are basing it on rumors from friends of friends or videos posted online. These are the people risking their lives to defend the students there - they should get at least some slack, before the facts come out.
quote:I was simply remarking on how a measure was passed to keep the kids safe and failed miserably.
I suspect the measure succeeded. If there were a bunch of panicking college students running around with guns, I'm sure the situation could have been even worse than it ended up being. There could have been scared and otherwise innocent people shooting other people.
Posted by graywolfe (Member # 3852) on :
No doubt he's rushing to judgement. I don't disagree Tresopax, but based on available evidence there appears to be a two hour stretch between the initial gunfire and the bulk of the killings, and there are numerous pieces of video showing cops walking while gunfire can be heard. I don't really care much if it's a rush to judgement, I want a hue and cry about this so at the very least SOP in these situations can be changed. The death toll is at 32. It's hard to believe that many would be dead if the reaction had been more aggressive. Of course I could be wrong.
On the second point, agreed, if the law had passed (not having seen the particulars yet) I would imagine there would be a plethora of drunken shootings.
Posted by SoaPiNuReYe (Member # 9144) on :
Somebody said that a guy hid behind a dumpster and took a video of the shootings with his cell phone. I dunno if it is true though.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
I have no idea how things happened on campus or what the right thing to do would be but I wonder if closing the campus and sending people home would really have been the right thing to do? I mean, instead of thousands of students in class, you'd have them all wandering the campus headed home...if you don't know where a gunman is or where he's going would you really just want everyone wandering around outside?
And as far as running, I know my husband said once a citizen complained because they (he's a firefighter) didn't run from the truck to a call. They had to let the person know they are trained NOT to run...to go forward slowly, assessing the situation and the threat level and consider everything before rushing in. So...I'm not excusing the police or anything (haven't seen the video) but I agree with others who said let's hold off on the blame game and rush to judgment here, at least until we know more.
The person most responsible for these deaths is the gunman, after all. If campus security did something wrong, then by all means let's look at that and see if we can improve it but for now, let's not crucify a police force until we know the particulars of the situation.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
The reports I've read say he's dead.
But these types of incidents are rapidly changing and so information will continue to come in.
The most recent death toll I've seen is 32. Unbelievable. What a horrible tragedy for those students and their friends and family. Posted by Fusiachi (Member # 7376) on :
Not so much detained... he was killed.
Posted by SoaPiNuReYe (Member # 9144) on :
Yeah, my bad guys hes dead. I was watching TV and they said that they had a guy detained and they started talking but I have satellite TV and the wind knocked it out so I just assumed it was the guy.
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
They had a guy detained early on but he wasn't the shooter.
Posted by Sharpie (Member # 482) on :
My kids have friends on campus, some of whom have been in touch with us via instant messenger, etc. They said they were on lockdown right away after the first shooting -- but I'm not sure they (the friends) are clear on the order of events. They seem impossibly young and far away, to me.
Awful.
Posted by graywolfe (Member # 3852) on :
quote:Originally posted by Belle: I have no idea how things happened on campus or what the right thing to do would be but I wonder if closing the campus and sending people home would really have been the right thing to do? I mean, instead of thousands of students in class, you'd have them all wandering the campus headed home...if you don't know where a gunman is or where he's going would you really just want everyone wandering around outside?
And as far as running, I know my husband said once a citizen complained because they (he's a firefighter) didn't run from the truck to a call. They had to let the person know they are trained NOT to run...to go forward slowly, assessing the situation and the threat level and consider everything before rushing in. So...I'm not excusing the police or anything (haven't seen the video) but I agree with others who said let's hold off on the blame game and rush to judgment here, at least until we know more.
The person most responsible for these deaths is the gunman, after all. If campus security did something wrong, then by all means let's look at that and see if we can improve it but for now, let's not crucify a police force until we know the particulars of the situation.
See to me, if that's the way they're trained, they need to stop training in that fashion. It seems pretty clear, historically, that in these school shooting situations, caution and prudence are probably a product of the traditional "hostage situation" procedures and are wrong headed. If the history of school shootings tells us anything, it's that the shootings stop when the individual runs out of ammo, or gas, or because suicide by cop is inevitable, they don't stop shooting until they're ready to stop shooting, and the cautious procedures of making sure every last step is taken in order, is the sort of thing that insures that death tolls will be enormously high. It just doesn't work and I'm not blaming the police individuals specifically, obviously they were following procedure. I just think it's obvious that the procedures should be scrapped and new ones put in place to deal with this problem because the procedures as currently used DON'T WORK.
Posted by Goody Scrivener (Member # 6742) on :
Report I received from the mother of a VT student is that the shooter's girlfriend lived in the dorm. She wasn't there so he shot the female RA and then escaped the building with the rest of the residents being evacuated. Then he went to the Engineering building where she was supposed to have class, she wasn't there, her classmates couldn't or wouldn't tell him anything, so he lined them up and started executing them.
Posted by Qaz (Member # 10298) on :
Death toll's up to 32 now.
Posted by SoaPiNuReYe (Member # 9144) on :
quote:Originally posted by graywolfe:
quote:Originally posted by Belle: I have no idea how things happened on campus or what the right thing to do would be but I wonder if closing the campus and sending people home would really have been the right thing to do? I mean, instead of thousands of students in class, you'd have them all wandering the campus headed home...if you don't know where a gunman is or where he's going would you really just want everyone wandering around outside?
And as far as running, I know my husband said once a citizen complained because they (he's a firefighter) didn't run from the truck to a call. They had to let the person know they are trained NOT to run...to go forward slowly, assessing the situation and the threat level and consider everything before rushing in. So...I'm not excusing the police or anything (haven't seen the video) but I agree with others who said let's hold off on the blame game and rush to judgment here, at least until we know more.
The person most responsible for these deaths is the gunman, after all. If campus security did something wrong, then by all means let's look at that and see if we can improve it but for now, let's not crucify a police force until we know the particulars of the situation.
See to me, if that's the way they're trained, they need to stop training in that fashion. It seems pretty clear, historically, that in these school shooting situations, caution and prudence are probably a product of the traditional "hostage situation" procedures and are wrong headed. If the history of school shootings tells us anything, it's that the shootings stop when the individual runs out of ammo, or gas, or because suicide by cop is inevitable, they don't stop shooting until they're ready to stop shooting, and the cautious procedures of making sure every last step is taken in order, is the sort of thing that insures that death tolls will be enormously high. It just doesn't work and I'm not blaming the police individuals specifically, obviously they were following procedure. I just think it's obvious that the procedures should be scrapped and new ones put in place to deal with this problem because the procedures as currently used DON'T WORK.
I'm going to wait a day before I discuss how ridiculous this comment is.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
Well, graywolfe, we'll have to disagree...because I believe the first thing a rescue worker needs to do is not become a victim himself. My husband is no good to any victim if he's lying on the ground bleeding himself. The cops cannot apprehend a suspect if they allow themselves to be shot by the suspect.
If you have multiple shots firing, the thing to do is not to rush in and present yourself as another target, but rather asses the situation, evacuate any civilians nearby and determine a course of action that minimizes loss of life to the police, the bystanders, and yes even the perpetrator. The worst thing you can do is add yourself to the casulty list. Then, you divert resources away from other victims.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
I guess it's harder to "lock down" a campus that big, huh?
This whole thing is very sad.
Posted by Mrs.M (Member # 2943) on :
The Asian man being shown in the pictures with an officer kneeling over him is NOT the shooter. He's a reporter for the school newspaper who was detained and released.
So far most of the kids we know there have checked in, but we just heard that a faculty member is among the dead. I'm devastated.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
I know this is kind of an awful thing to say when people are dead, but I'm selfishly glad it's not Andrew.
Posted by Mrs.M (Member # 2943) on :
Even as I'm running through a list of who it could be and their families, I am too.
Posted by Cashew (Member # 6023) on :
From a different perspective, and while I realise that horrific incidents like this are by no means the norm, I have 5 grandchildren (oldest is 7) living in the US (Utah and Arizona) and things like this keep planting seeds of worry about my grandkids growing up and going to school there. My thoughts are with the families of those poor people.
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
"My intention was NOT to start any kind of debate or discussion about gun rights."
You pulled a gun on campus for fear of "ghoulies and ghosties and long leggedy beasties and things that go bump in the night" even though you were in the company of your 6foot5 husband and two dogs.
"I am sick about this."
So naturally the first thing you think about is your "gun rights".
"Because criminals are well-known to obey the law."
As if criminals would have easy access to absurdly powerful guns without the NRA.
"I am going to hope beyond hope that..."
Sorry, Samprimary. You should know by now that immediately after an incident like this, NRA-types begin proclaiming that we need even more fantasizers running around with concealed weapons.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
I wish every event like this didn't turn into an emotionally charged debate about gun possession and gun control. Sadness, rage, and confusion are not good methods for deciding how we run our society.
There are no easy answers, and trying to find places to lay blame based on emotion and spotty information is pointless and counter productive.
Maybe changes need to be made, but sometimes bad, crazy people cause a lot of damage, no matter what. Don't misplace your anger at senseless killing by directing it at each other.
Posted by Cashew (Member # 6023) on :
The news reports I'm seeing are saying "at least 33 dead" now.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:So naturally the first thing you think about is your "gun rights".
Flexing those psychic powers again, aspectre? Or do you read tea leaves?
How, exactly, do you know what the first thing to cross Mrs.M.'s mind was when she heard that people she knew might have been killed at Va. Tech?
Posted by graywolfe (Member # 3852) on :
quote:Originally posted by Belle: Well, graywolfe, we'll have to disagree...because I believe the first thing a rescue worker needs to do is not become a victim himself. My husband is no good to any victim if he's lying on the ground bleeding himself. The cops cannot apprehend a suspect if they allow themselves to be shot by the suspect.
If you have multiple shots firing, the thing to do is not to rush in and present yourself as another target, but rather asses the situation, evacuate any civilians nearby and determine a course of action that minimizes loss of life to the police, the bystanders, and yes even the perpetrator. The worst thing you can do is add yourself to the casulty list. Then, you divert resources away from other victims.
If shots are being fired and you spend all your time thinking about the situation and analyzing it, you're going to find a dead shooter and a whole facility full of dead men and woman. I disagree. The cops are there to protect and serve, if they are not engaging the individual that is actively in the process of shooting people that minute, that second, does it not follow that as each second passes more and more will be shot dead. My comments are called ridiculous. Seriously. Thirty-two people are believed dead. Thirty-freaking-two. You don't listen to gun fire, and think about how best to make sure 132 don't get shot, you engage the individual and kill him, period.
If some think that's ridiculous, I really don't understand where that attitude is coming from. Could more die through engaging them? Possibly, but it is at least as likely that more could have been saved if more aggressive measures were taken. While a cop laying bleeding on the ground isn't going to help many people, simply waiting for the guy to run out of victims, or bullets while they lay waste to an entire engineering building in order to assess a situation doesn't seem like an effective means of addressing the situation either.
Something needs to be done. If you want to call my comments ridiculous, feel free, but as the procedures currently stand, it appears clear that they are ineffective in stopping these actions before the death toll is enormous. I don't expect an A-Team caliber response of bullets flying everywhere, and I don't expect a charge of the light brigade either, but I would like to think that a guy actively murdering students left and right would be engaged as soon as possible to stop it as soon as possible, it doesn't appear to me that the system used to address these kinds of active crimes does so effectively.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I think it's ridiculous that the guy had two hours to kill 32 people before any law enforcement official even got close enough to do anything at all. To me, I just disagree whole heartedly. The cops are armed, the students aren't, the cops were the only shot the kids had, and it took them two hours. Whether this was on the administration, the procedures, or anything else, it strikes me as absurd that it took that long to accomplish anything, and that this guy was able to shoot what appears to be more than 50 people before anyone may have engaged him. I don't understand why the police are even around if procedures won't allow them to do their jobs and put that guy down, as in dead.
Apprehending him? Out of the question, they needed to be in there, engaging and killing him, not waiting around analyzing, interpreting, ruminating or anything else.
I suppose I'm in the minority here, but I don't mind it. I can't believe that the way this was handled by the administration or the police (not their fault, the procedures fault as far as I can tell)is acceptable to anyone. And btw, this isn't meant to excuse the psycho nut job by any means. We can't control when a psycho nut job decides to do something like this, what we can control is how the authorities handle it, and that's the only thing I'm really concerned with here.
If you disagree with my thinking, just let me know what you think would be a better means of handling this kind of nightmare. I'm open minded, and perhaps anger and rage and blame is motivating me a bit too much, but I am willing to hear anyone out.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:It appears there is clear video of police walking while gunfire could be heard repeatedly, if this is true, this horrific incident has to be used to rectify SOP when it comes to these crisis.
First, the officers were very likely assigned zones to cover. You don't want your entire force running toward the sound of gunfire, because while they are doing that, the shooter can move. You need to have coverage everywhere he might end up.
This is especially true when there might be two shooters. If one fires and the other doesn't, then the police are drawn off.
You're acting as if the police had full knowledge of what was happening. They didn't. They knew there was a shooter somewhere on campus. They didn't know where. In fact, there were conflicting reports. They needed to spread out and cover a large area. And, when doing that, there's no need for the officers already in their zones to be running.
Further, I've been on the tech campus, and I bet it's impossible to tell the direction a shot is coming from when your near those stone buildings. The officers might run to an echo and be farther away from the shooter.
Staying in your assigned zone is critical - you can cost lives, including your own, when you abandon your post because you think you know best.
Sometimes it will be necessary. Knowing when it is necessary is what separates great officers from good ones. But merely hearing shots elsewhere is not sufficient cause to abandon police procedures in the hopes that a mad rush will stop the shooter.
quote:Maybe I'm wrong, but I think it's ridiculous that the guy had two hours to kill 32 people before any law enforcement official even got close enough to do anything at all.
You are wrong. The guy wasn't shooting for 2 hours. He shot at one place, disappeared, reappeared 2 hours later, and shot again.
At the other side of a 2600 acre campus.
Posted by graywolfe (Member # 3852) on :
I did not say he was shooting for two hours, I said he had two hours in which to roam the campus freely. I am fully aware of what happened, I have friends from Va Tech and connected to the campus letting me know what went on, as they find out more information.
And additionally, my main issue here is with the lack of aggressive engagement. I don't really care who occupied what zone. What I care about is defenseless students were being murdered left and right, and there were numerous officers available to engage the suspect, and either for procedural reasons, or some other reason, he was not engaged until more than 50 were shot. Shouldn't that be unacceptable?
Posted by lem (Member # 6914) on :
quote: Shouldn't that be unacceptable?
Only if the information we have with hindsight is the same information that was available to the officers at the time of the tragedy.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:I did not say he was shooting for two hours, I said he had two hours in which to roam the campus freely. I am fully aware of what happened, I have friends from Va Tech and connected to the campus letting me know what went on, as they find out more information.
Do you know how hard it is to find someone on a campus that big? You cited the failure of the police to find him in two hours as an indication that there were problems with the way the police handled it.
He "had" 2 hours because the police are not and cannot be omniscient. Could they have done something differently based on what they knew at the time? Maybe. But you have NO way of knowing that other than amateur reports from people who saw a tiny, tiny part of what occurred.
quote:And additionally, my main issue here is with the lack of aggressive engagement. I don't really care who occupied what zone. What I care about is defenseless students were being murdered left and right, and there were numerous officers available to engage the suspect, and either for procedural reasons, or some other reason, he was not engaged until more than 50 were shot. Shouldn't that be unacceptable?
In some situations. Maybe in this one. But not based on what we know, even with your "sources."
I think you vastly underestimate the difficulty of figuring out what is happening in a situation like this. If the police don't know where the shooting is, then running around pell-mell is not going to accomplish anything unless the police get very lucky.
What, exactly, were they supposed to engage? Do you have ANY evidence that once the police knew where - as in the room - the shooter was they wasted time? Or do you just know that one scared little undergraduate took videos of an officer not running when gunfire was heard.
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
This had everyone at work glued to the break room TV screen.
Many of them have family and friends there. Posted by Brian J. Hill (Member # 5346) on :
Thanks Dagonee for giving a little perspective to the situation. I spent 18 years of my life in Radford, VA as a kid growing up, and then a college student. Radford is 15 miles from Blacksburg, and I have numerous close friends who could be injured or, God forbid, dead. This is as close to home as it can get. Further, I have no idea how to find out about my friends until there are official death tolls listed, since I am currently in Reedsport, OR with no email or IM capabilities.
The VT campus is HUGE. Even the military couldn't lock down a campus the size of VT in only 2 hours, provided they had a clear reason to do so. It's sickening to me that there are insensitive jerks with perfect 20/20 hindsight using this board to pass judgement on the campus police force. It is even more sickening that someone can be so horrid as to make this all about "gun control" and stupid political condiderations when the bodies haven't even cooled yet. Some people lack any sense of shame or decorum.
Posted by TheGrimace (Member # 9178) on :
graywolfe, I don't think it's rediculous to propose that the police should re-evaluate their procedures and see if there is anything this incident can teach them and improve on those procedures. But I don think you're failing to see that there is significant value to these methodical procedures even in situations like this where a more immediate action MAY have saved lives.
In addition to things that Dag mentioned, consider some of the following:
A bunch of cops run in to save the day only to be gunned down from behind by shooter #2, not only leaving shooter #1 potentially alive to keep killing, but adding a bunch of dead cops to the mess. Especially considering situations such as columbine, where explosives and multiple shooters/weapons were involved.
Cops run in and in the confusion of determining who is hostile they shoot an innocent bystandard. Potentially they've saved some lives but now there will be huge uproar across the country about the police being trigger-happy murderers and the like.
A cop rushes in before he has backup and is taken down by the shooter. now the shooter has another gun, more ammo and the cop's radio to listen for more incoming.
An incomplete net is formed and the shooter is able to slip out and find new victims.
A jittery shooter gets spooked by encroaching police and kills everyone in his room faster and moves on to a new room, or detonates explosives that otherwise he might not get around to detonating...
Given that we supposedly know (after the fact) that it was just one guy, he was confined to one locale and only killing a select number of individuals for information, then the course of action taken might not have been the ideal one. However, there are plenty of other situations where this probably was the best course of action.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
quote:Originally posted by aspectre: "My intention was NOT to start any kind of debate or discussion about gun rights."
You pulled a gun on campus for fear of "ghoulies and ghosties and long leggedy beasties and things that go bump in the night" even though you were in the company of your 6foot5 husband and two dogs.
"I am sick about this."
So naturally the first thing you think about is your "gun rights".
"Because criminals are well-known to obey the law."
As if criminals would have easy access to absurdly powerful guns without the NRA.
"I am going to hope beyond hope that..."
Sorry, Samprimary. You should know by now that immediately after an incident like this, NRA-types begin proclaiming that we need even more fantasizers running around with concealed weapons.
You are an a$$hole. A barely coherent one at that.
Go back under your rock and whisper your paranoid idea to those who care.
(that would be yourself)
Let others, who live in the real world, have time to grieve before crapping all over them with this bullshit.
Posted by Qaz (Member # 10298) on :
The emotional tenor of a thread on gun control and a thread on a disaster not even a day old are very different.
Please, let's put the gun control war on another thread.
Posted by Occasional (Member # 5860) on :
Greywolfe, I agree with both sides of the issue. On the other hand, what I think this means is that there has to be two kinds of police officers in this kind of world. SWAT is supposed to be the kind you are talking about. Why were they not immediately on the scene? If they were, why weren't they doing what greywolfe said needed to be done? And, if they don't have any SWAT, how can police stations everywhere get them?
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Sorry, Samprimary. You should know by now that immediately after an incident like this, NRA-types begin proclaiming that we need even more fantasizers running around with concealed weapons.
Stop. The only advice I can give you is to stop. You are trying to open up with a salvo of gouges, you're running hot, and it's neither the time nor the place.
Posted by Architraz Warden (Member # 4285) on :
quote:Originally posted by TheGrimace: In addition to things that Dag mentioned, consider some of the following:
Well, a fairly certain way this could have been avoided would have been to arrest every single student in the dorm where the first shooting occurred, as well as tracking down any and all who might have exited as well just to be sure. It would likely have averted the tragedy, but lets not think about what sort of outcry doing this would have caused. After all, with our now near-flawless hindsight, we know it would have averted a tragedy.
The point: There are realistic expectations in these sort of scenarios. It does not take long to shoot 50 people in a densely populated classroom building, and you cannot expect the police to have an instant response time. The previously mentioned reasons are more than enough to prove while that is not feasibly possible.
Honestly what shocks me in all this is that a single person with two handguns wasn't subdued, beaten, or killed by a collection of students after the first dozen shots were fired.
Posted by Phanto (Member # 5897) on :
In domino confido. Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
This affects some of us in a very personal way.
Greywolfe, I am sorry, but as someone who has worked as an EMT, you are dead wrong. I understand why you feel that way, but there are reasons police and EMT's act in specific ways. It may not look like they are moving fast enough, but hurrying with guns in your hands is a good way to get dead, or kill someone else who is near you.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:Why were they not immediately on the scene?
Which scene? The one where the shooting occurred in the morning, or the one almost a half mile away where the shooting started with no additional warning?
There are something like 27,000 full-time students on that campus. Here's a map of the campus. Find Ambler Johnston Hall on that map. Now find Norris Hall. Notice all the buildings around their. Even after Norris was positively identified as the scene, notice how big it is. I believe it's at least four stories. It's directly connected to one building, and a short sprint to 4 or 5 others.
The only way for SWAT to be "on the scene" is if they spent every day camping out in front of each building. We still don't know how long they took to get to the second scene - all we know is that some officers weren't running while some shooting was going on.
quote:If they were, why weren't they doing what greywolfe said needed to be done?
You don't know that they weren't. Once in the building, they need to find the shooter. Have you ever let off a firecracker in a school hallway. Listeners elsewhere can't tell precisely where it's coming from. To do any good at all, the officers need to be able to clear the building - that is, progress through it in such a way as to ensure they haven't missed the shooter. This takes time. It also takes a hell of a lot of courage.
Posted by TheGrimace (Member # 9178) on :
quote:Originally posted by Architraz Warden:
quote:Originally posted by TheGrimace: In addition to things that Dag mentioned, consider some of the following:
Well, a fairly certain way this could have been avoided would have been to arrest every single student in the dorm where the first shooting occurred, as well as tracking down any and all who might have exited as well just to be sure. It would likely have averted the tragedy, but lets not think about what sort of outcry doing this would have caused. After all, with our now near-flawless hindsight, we know it would have averted a tragedy.
Honestly what shocks me in all this is that a single person with two handguns wasn't subdued, beaten, or killed by a collection of students after the first dozen shots were fired.
I agree that the outcry involved should be the last thing on the police's minds, but I also know that it probably is. Especially since accidentally shooting a civilian or the like is the kind of thing that would end an officer's career (somewhat likely).
However, while I agree that such an action at the dorm potentially would have been a good move (and maybe should be an update to their policies) if they were led to believe that the shooter had already left (or if he indeed had at that point) then arresting however many hundreds of people in the dorm would likely just have tied up an excessive amount of the police force that were later needed on the other side of campus...
As for the question of why the students/teachers didn't take him down I agree, but I also understand that most people in a terrifying situation like that are going to freeze up, and if the killing happened over the course of a couple minutes rather than a couple hours it's likely that no one worked up the courage to do anything. I can't judge them for I've never been in a comparable bind.
Posted by graywolfe (Member # 3852) on :
I just don't get it Occasional. I think people imagine I'm blaming the cops. I'm not, I'm blaming the system. The guy didn't "vanish", he was somewhere. Was he easy to find? I don't know if he was or he wasn't. I don't expect superheroes or anything of the like. What I do expect is when someone starts murdering students left and right, some law enforcement official somewhere, will find them, and engage them as soon as possible.
That doesn't seem to be typically what happens in situations like this. Countless times it seems like they drive up, and then try to process information as another poster mentioned they should do. If they did the best they could and it took that long, fine, figure out a way to make the best they can do be faster for the future. 50+ people were shot, I don't see how it's conceivable that that could happen w/o procedures slowing up the police on the scene considering the reports of how the murders at least partially went down.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:What I do expect is when someone starts murdering students left and right, some law enforcement official somewhere, will find them, and engage them as soon as possible.
No one has a problem with that expectation. What they have a problem with is your ill-informed belief that they didn't do that here, based in large part on a very poor understanding of what's actually possible in a tactical situation such as this.
Posted by Mr.Intel (Member # 10057) on :
From what the comments say, the gun like noises are the cops trying to break the door down. I'm dubious.
Emotions are really high right now and everyone is scrambling for information that just isn't publicly available. Getting our collective knickers in a twist won't help anyone, least of all the victims' families. Let's give the government entities some time to sort through things and give us a clearer picture. If there were misdeeds because of this, the already forming torrent of reform will be let loose on the local cops.
Posted by graywolfe (Member # 3852) on :
Looks like the administrators are gonna take a massive hit, and probably loads of law suits as well (no lock down). I hope, more than anything, that the survivors, and those grieving can find peace given time, and live good lives. For the rest of us, I hope that they really do a thorough investigation over what went wrong and what went right, and make use of this horrific day to find answers in how to handle such horrific disasters as effectively as humanly possible in the future.
Posted by Papa Janitor (Member # 7795) on :
As with any emotionally charged subject, it seems, we have people stepping over the line. Whether or not you believe this is proper retaliation for someone else's comments, please stop it.
When I first heard that someone recorded it, I literally asked out loud "wonder how long it'll be before it's on YouTube..."
This guy shot 50+ people. Assuming he's even a so-so shot, let's say he fired 75 bullets minimum. With a handgun of the larger clip varieties (such as a Beretta 92, which has 15, plus one in the pipe), he would still need to reload at each gun at least twice, which means he was walking around with four spare clips. And that's if he's a good shot.
By comparison, I believe police officers are lucky to have two clips, and that's not considering a few cops still use six shooters.
This guy must have been a walking army surplus store. I'm impressed how a guy that's carrying a steamer trunk full of ammo can even get across the parking lot without being noticed, especially in a school that size.
Guess we'll have to wait a few days for further details.
Posted by James Tiberius Kirk (Member # 2832) on :
quote:This guy must have been a walking army surplus store. I'm impressed how a guy that's carrying a steamer trunk full of ammo can even get across the parking lot without being noticed, especially in a school that size.
Not to mention the chains he reportedly used to close off one of the building's exits.
*
Hm, the police said they believed he had left the campus; it's possible that he actually did leave and return two hours later.
--j_k
Posted by Risuena (Member # 2924) on :
quote:Originally posted by Nighthawk: This guy must have been a walking army surplus store. I'm impressed how a guy that's carrying a steamer trunk full of ammo can even get across the parking lot without being noticed, especially in a school that size.
Considering that it was snowing in Blacksburg this morning with high winds, the guy could have had everything concealed under a heavy coat and/or in a backpack and no one would have noticed - he'd have looked like any college student.
As to the chains, I could be misremembering but I vaguely remember VT using chains to secure outside doors on some buildings. So he might just have used what was already there.
Who knows? I'm sure we'll find out in the coming days.
Posted by Mrs.M (Member # 2943) on :
quote:By comparison, I believe police officers are lucky to have two clips, and that's not considering a few cops still use six shooters.
FYI, Blacksburg cops all use semi-automatics, mostly Glocks, which have 17 bullets in the extended magazine. I don't know how many extra magazines they carry. Most cops also carry a backup weapon.
quote:This guy must have been a walking army surplus store. I'm impressed how a guy that's carrying a steamer trunk full of ammo can even get across the parking lot without being noticed, especially in a school that size.
Actually, it's not surprising at all. I use hundreds of rounds when I practice and I carry them in my range bag, which looks like a regular duffel bag. He could have put the mags into a backpack and just blended in. He could also have just carried them in his coat pockets, again without being noticed.
Just to let y'all know, I trained with Roanoke and Botetourt County sheriffs when I lived in Roanoke and I did a lot of trainings with VT students (all of whom have checked in, thank G-d). Kids I taught, kids who go to my shul (and our Roanoke shul), kids of our neighbors and doctors all go to VT. The Virginia academic community is a close-knit one and we know so many professors there. This has been a terrible day for us, personally, though no comparison to the victims and families and students and faculty. When I posted my original comment, I truly did not intend it to start any kind of discussion about gun control. Certainly I've always been open about my views on gun ownership and I do wish that there had been students or faculty carrying firearms that they were trained to use. However, my primary focus is on the victims and their families and the Hokie community.
Posted by stihl1 (Member # 1562) on :
My nephew goes to VT. When I heard about this I immediately called my sister. He was fine. But this is what he told her.
Originally, they did not cancel classes or close the school. But he did decide to stay in his dorm and not go to class. He emailed his teacher, who berated him for not coming to class since they weren't cancelled. But he stayed in his dorm. Apparently he lives next to one of the buildings where the shootings happened.
I was relieved to find out he was okay, and went on with my day. Then I came home and found out that one of the people that posts on a local web board for Detroit Sports was one of the 33 killed. He was a great guy, a great Detroit Tigers fan, and I am devistated to find this out. His name was Brian Bluhm. Please pray for him and his family.
Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
I read in a news story that quoted a professor that was in the 2nd building when the shooting started. He said the police were banging down the outside door (it was chained shut on the inside, presumably by the killer) within minutes of the first shots. All of the shootings (in the second incident) and the killer's suicide apparently were done very quickly, perhaps 15-30 minutes.
So according to an eyewitness the police did have a rapid response. Claiming the police weren't "immediately on the scene" is at best premature until more facts come out.
The 2hour gap between incidents is different, IMO. The administration and/or police could have handled things differently. I'm sure decision-makers are blaming themselves, rightly or wrongly, for not doing more to avert this tragedy.
Gun control debaters, pro- and con-, should wait until more facts surface before latching onto this awful event. Even then, they run the risk of looking ghoulishly exploitive and opportunistic, unless they tread very lightly.
edit: the blogger Digby succinctly sums up my views expressed in the above paragraph: Not Today
[ April 17, 2007, 08:07 AM: Message edited by: Morbo ]
Posted by Euripides (Member # 9315) on :
quote:Originally posted by Morbo:
So according to an eyewitness the police did have a rapid response. Claiming the police weren't "immediately on the scene" is at best premature until more facts come out.
Yep; from what I've read, the police were on the crime scene almost immediately, but treated the first incident as a 'domestic' murder rather than a school shooting.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:Looks like the administrators are gonna take a massive hit, and probably loads of law suits as well (no lock down).
What, exactly, would be the cause of action for these suits? For one, they'd have to prove that a lock down was possible - remember, 20,000 people are on that campus - and that it would have actually helped.
Even if they proved that, they'd also have to prove that the decision not to choose a lockdown was so obviously flawed as to amount to an abuse of discretion.
Even then it might not be enough to recover anything - this quite simply might not be a tort.
Posted by Qaz (Member # 10298) on :
Police are under no legal obligation to protect anyone's safety. VT is a government institution so it probably isn't either. OTOH with lawsuits anything can happen.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
Right now as it stands I would be disappointed if the families and victims put all their energies towards getting some sort of monetary compensation from the school or the government.
Unless not being psychic is a crime, I think both entities tried their best to handle the situation, there just was no time to intervene.
It will be nice if we continue to get more information.
edit: as an aside, this sentence feels wrong, "It will be nice to keep getting more information." Whats wrong with the grammar?
Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
A split infinitive. Though that's not as verboten as it used to be, so I am going to not object.
Posted by Mr.Intel (Member # 10057) on :
quote:Originally posted by Qaz: Police are under no legal obligation to protect anyone's safety. VT is a government institution so it probably isn't either. OTOH with lawsuits anything can happen.
No, but they have a moral and social obligation. If police officers choose to wantonly disregard public safety (I can understand waiting for backup against a gang war or riot) they will be punished. If the government cannot guarantee basic protection from loss of life and property, the government will be replaced. It's the whole reason the US Military is still in Iraq. If Iraq could provide those things for itself, we would have no need to continue our operations there because Iraq would quickly spiral into a failed state (some say it is already). The VT tragedy is an example of a sick person abusing freedom and causing a whole lot of pain. If it is determined that the government did not prevent it when it had the power to, you better believe there's going to be changes. Otherwise, good bye local government!
Cops have an obligation and they are regularly held accountable, not just by law, but by the fact that they have been given the right to use deadly force in the name of the will of the people. If they do so (or don't do so) without the will of the people, their powers will change.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
I've been reading up on this, and the commentary going on about how irresponsible Tech and the police were is already getting old.
The common theme seems to be that the gunman shot up Norris hall TWO HOURS LATER with no police response. (And yes, the TWO HOURS LATER is usually capitalized.)
The ignorance is quite simply painful.
Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
Oh, no!! I just read that the Fred Phelps nutjobs will do their patented crazy act at the funerals. I feel sick.
Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
Dag's right. Let's not have a rush to judgement. An event this chaotic always spawns false rumours and half-truths. Wait for more facts to come out. edit:before blaming people other than the madman.
Posted by Qaz (Member # 10298) on :
Blessings on the instructor in Norris 204, who stayed behind blocking the door so that students could escape, and paid for it with his life.
Blessings on the others there who did acts of heroism we don't know about yet, and maybe never will.
Posted by MidnightBlue (Member # 6146) on :
In a press conference this morning they said that the reason classes weren't cancelled was that only 9,000 of the students live on campus, and with classes starting at 8 and the first shooting around 7:15 (I think?), many students would have already been on their way.
This makes sense to me. If all of those students didn't have classes to go to, and didn't have dorms to go to, would they have just left? Or would they have all congregated somewhere and provided a larger, denser target? There's no way we'll know.
Posted by Launchywiggin (Member # 9116) on :
Hey everyone from Radford University, which is 15 minutes from Blacksburg and VT. I grew up in Blacksburg and the VT campus and have been in the area for 13 years now. I know like 50 people that go to Tech--my mom works in Blacksburg still. I was in Norris Hall just last month before a Ben Folds concert, and I've spent the night in West AJ with my friends. The mood in this whole area is numb, with complete disbelief. Blacksburg is just about the prettiest mountain town you'd ever see. We have an extremely low crime rate and it really is idyllic. I feel like yesterday's event is going to taint us forever.
I now know 2 people who won't be going back to class. Met them at an engineering party.
Just to clear some things up. When the administration found out about this, the cogs of getting the University going were already running. 15,000 people were already in commute, and all they knew was that two were dead, an RA and a girl in her dorm. They had every reason to believe that it was an isolated incident--no one could have imagined that it would have turned into what it did. There was no reason to believe that anyone else was in danger. To me, closing down the entire campus because of a domestic homicide would seem unnecessary (not to mention a waste of hundreds of thousands of dollars).
Even if they should have immediately closed classes, no one knew who did the first shooting. What exactly are the police supposed to be looking for or trying to prevent? The news channels have been trying to spin it and find blame and it makes me sick. I don't think there's any way this could have been prevented and that the VT administration and police did the best jobs they could do.
Blacksburg really is an amazing place, and VT is a great school. This whole thing is so surreal and out of place.
Anyway--thanks for all support from Hatrack. You guys have been a huge part of my life for the past year.
Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
Launchywiggin, great post.
Qaz, I just read that it was Liviu Librescu, a Romanian/Israeli lecturer who blocked the door so students could jump out of windows to escape. What a brave man!
quote: "My father blocked the doorway with his body and asked the students to flee," Librescu's son, Joe Librescu, said Tuesday in a telephone interview from his home outside of Tel Aviv. "Students started opening windows and jumping out."
quote:"It will be nice to keep getting more information." Whats wrong with the grammar?
quote:A split infinitive. Though that's not as verboten as it used to be, so I am going to not object.
Where is the split infinitive? I didn't think that "to getting" was a verb ...
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
quote:Originally posted by Morbo: Qaz, I just read that it was Liviu Librescu, a Romanian/Israeli lecturer who blocked the door so students could jump out of windows to escape. What a brave man!
quote: "My father blocked the doorway with his body and asked the students to flee," Librescu's son, Joe Librescu, said Tuesday in a telephone interview from his home outside of Tel Aviv. "Students started opening windows and jumping out."
Hmm, true, my bad. Grammar's not my strong suit.
Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
I can't take anymore coverage of this horror right now. But I just found a great website for those interested: http://www.planetblacksburg.com/ "Planet Blacksburg is a student-run new media organization striving to provide content to the New River Valley and beyond."
Posted by Qaz (Member # 10298) on :
quote:Originally posted by Morbo:
Qaz, I just read that it was Liviu Librescu, a Romanian/Israeli lecturer who blocked the door so students could jump out of windows to escape. What a brave man!
And a Holocaust survivor.
I'll be thinking warm thoughts to him for time to come.
Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
This story about Librescu made me cry this morning. Every time we have these tragedies, we seem to hear something of the best of humanity coming even of the worst of humanity. I think these stories get told not just in memory of the people who so acted, but because such action restores hope in us a little bit. And that's not a bad thing.
Posted by Risuena (Member # 2924) on :
More names and profiles of the victims are coming out. Article from MSNBC Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
I got about halfway through the profiles of the victims and had to stop. I can't take it.
Posted by sndrake (Member # 4941) on :
quote:I've been reading up on this, and the commentary going on about how irresponsible Tech and the police were is already getting old.
The common theme seems to be that the gunman shot up Norris hall TWO HOURS LATER with no police response. (And yes, the TWO HOURS LATER is usually capitalized.)
The ignorance is quite simply painful.
Dag, the TV coverage last night was horrible. And the theme you mention was quite prominent.
There are probably two factors in this that I see (probably more that I don't as well).
1. The students, faculty and the public is horrified - the people on campus haven't even begun to process the fear and anger. The shooter is dead and there's an unfortunate human tendency to look for a target of those emotions.
2. The 24/7 Cable shows were devoting all their resources to covering this and had little information to actually report. I suspect this played a role in visiting this theme over and over again, since it was something they could at least talk about.
Like everyone else, I'm sickened.
I've followed the discussions and I have to say that Diane and I had the same reactions as Dag and others to the accusations against the administration. The logistics were just plain against any notion of "locking down" the campus. I don't know what they could have done differently, but I would bet that no one is wondering that more than the campus police officers who will live with the visions of the scenes in that building for the rest of their lives.
Posted by sndrake (Member # 4941) on :
I haven't got the stomach to check this out, but AOL claims it has an exclusive. Two plays allegedly written by Cho Seung-Hui.
I don't know if this link works for non-AOL users.
quote:AOL News has obtained two plays a classmate says were written by Cho Seung-Hui. Ian MacFarlane, the former classmate and current AOL employee, provided us with the plays. A note from Mr. MacFarlane and links to the works appear below.
Note from MacFarlane and links to plays on the page.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
I do hope - and expect that they will - do a detailed study to see what might have improved the response. I expect they'll find something - maybe even something significant - that might have improved the situation.
But we can't know any of that yet, and the implications that if the police acted less than perfectly then they acted badly are very harmful to any kind of retrospective examination of an event like this.
The worst part of the criticism is the seeming inability of the pundits to examine the situation based on what was known at the time. It's very possible that they will identify something that would have helped but that the officers on the scene had no way of knowing about.
quote:I don't know what they could have done differently, but I would bet that no one is wondering that more than the campus police officers who will live with the visions of the scenes in that building for the rest of their lives.
Exactly.
Posted by Risuena (Member # 2924) on :
I agree with everything that both Dag and sndrake have said. Yet I still wind up watching the news and yelling at the talking heads.
I was brought to tears watching the convocation and seeing everyone in Cassell giving Steger a standing ovation and showing their support. I'm glad that the Hokie Nation isn't letting the media influence them to criticize Steger.
I also cried as Nikki Giovanni recited the poem she wrote and as the Let's Go Hokies cheer broke out afterwards. I was particularly moved by the line "We are better than we think and not quite what we want to be." To me, that encapsulates everything great about being a Hokie.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
The link works for me and I'm not an AOL victim--er, user.
I'm not sure I actually want to read the plays, though. I'm going to skim and if it gets bad I'm not going to read it.
Posted by BaoQingTian (Member # 8775) on :
It's bad. I don't have words to describe them though, I'll just warn you off.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
The first one is very disturbing, but I got through it.
Posted by James Tiberius Kirk (Member # 2832) on :
[edit, removed quote because the question was already answered.]
Hm, a scoop from "AOL News," of all places.
If you don't want to read them yourself: the first one is about a kid who is violently angry at Mr. McBeef, the man who married his mother. The kid tells his stepfather off one day and it ends with the stepfather striking and killing the boy.
The second one is about a group of teenagers who sneak into a casino and meet one of their teachers there. A member of the group wins five million dollars (don't know how that works) but the teacher (Mr. Brownstone) has called the casino manager and tells him that the kids stole his winning number. He gets the money; the kids are dragged out.
--j_k
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
I think the sense of paranoia and, well, misunderstanding of basic human interactions is the most disturbing part, if these are indeed by the shooter.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
(That and the fact that everything is sexual. Was this young man molested or something? Or does he just have a disturbingly sexual world-view?)
Posted by BaoQingTian (Member # 8775) on :
I guess I'm like Stacy in the comments section. One of the first things I noticed was the quality of writing was subpar for a senior in high school, let alone one about to get a college degree in English.
I'm afraid I didn't really see a point to either of the plays. There was a lot of suggested violence, profanity, and perverse sexuality present, but what came across was the overwhelming anger and unfocused, blind rage of it all.
For you English teachers (or others), is this typical of teenage and young adult writing? Or does something here raise some big warning flags?
Posted by Qaz (Member # 10298) on :
quote:Originally posted by erosomniac: I got about halfway through the profiles of the victims and had to stop. I can't take it.
I am very surprised at my reaction. I didn't know it would affect me so much, to see all that.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
quote:Originally posted by BaoQingTian: I guess I'm like Stacy in the comments section. One of the first things I noticed was the quality of writing was subpar for a senior in high school, let alone one about to get a college degree in English.
I'm afraid I didn't really see a point to either of the plays. There was a lot of suggested violence, profanity, and perverse sexuality present, but what came across was the overwhelming anger and unfocused, blind rage of it all.
For you English teachers (or others), is this typical of teenage and young adult writing? Or does something here raise some big warning flags?
I have read a lot of writing by young people. In my high school (where, first of all, this would not be an acceptable level of writing, but I know at least a few community colleges around here where this level of writing is typical) this would have got you sent to the counselor's office and your parents called. In colleges, I don't know what the procedure would be, but I have to think that some flags would have to be raised. These plays, to me, read like some short stories I have read by seriously mentally disturbed high school students. The rage and the unfocused nature in particular remind me of a depressed, schizophrenic young man I knew (he was on medication but the medication made him depressed and had awful side effects, so sometimes he took it and sometimes he didn't.)
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
If I had a student in my classes who wrote plays like that, I'd pretty much conclude that they are a big ol' cup of crazy.
It's a unique look into how he relates to and expects the world to work. Scary place!
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Safe or free?
If we lock up or restrain by force everyone who looks like they might be dangerous before they have done anything, we give up a considerable amount of our freedom.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:The female students complained to the campus police department about contact they had had with Cho in person and on the telephone, Finchum said. Neither student pressed charges, and one labeled the contact "annoying."
In the first case, in November, 2005 officers referred Cho to the university discipline system. The next month, at the request of the second female student, officers met with Cho to ask him not to contact her again.
Hours later, a friend of Cho's called campus police to say he seemed suicidal, Finchum said. Police then contacted Cho again, and convinced him to come and speak to a mental health counselor. After that contact, on Dec. 13, 2005, a temporary detention order was obtained for Cho and he was taken to a local mental health facility off campus for evaluation, Finchum said.
Officials said they believed he was admitted to the facility voluntarily, but would not say how much time he spent there.
Does anyone remember the American University (I think) student who was suspended after school officials learned of his suicide attempt? If I recall correctly, that student sued AU over the suspension.
Posted by BaoQingTian (Member # 8775) on :
quote:Originally posted by ketchupqueen: (That and the fact that everything is sexual. Was this young man molested or something? Or does he just have a disturbingly sexual world-view?)
I don't think what he wrote necessarily indicates childhood abuse, sexual or other, although it's certainly a possibility.
My first impression was that Cho thought of himself as the stepfather in Richard McBeef. The step-father was the victim of being incessantly mocked for his name, appearance, profession, and background. He was also unjustly accused of being a murderer and child molester, and being treated so unfairly and terribly by everyone else in the story that finally he lashes out in the end and kills his antagonist, in what the author seems to consider a completely justifiable act.
The style and content of the writing just seem like he's trying to find an outlet for all his pain and rage, but just can't find a way to do it in a healthy, adult manner. That's why the poor writing really stood out to me. There are some writers out there that write some pretty (IMO) twisted stuff. However, they are able to communicate the ideas in such a way that it doesn't feel like they're screaming at the world through their work.
Hopefully, this will be a wake-up call to some teachers, counselors, and students so that more steps can be taken to stop similar things from happening in the future.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I don't think there is anything more than could have been done. Unless we want to go back to locking up everyone who exhibits signs of disturbance (all bipolar people, all schizophrenics, everyone who has taken mood stabilizers), then ultimately he had to do something criminal before he could have been locked away. It's better that way - I'm not willing to give up basic human freedoms in order to thwart madmen.
He reminds me of Harold Lauder.
[ April 18, 2007, 01:27 PM: Message edited by: katharina ]
Posted by Risuena (Member # 2924) on :
I agree with Katie. As much as everyone would like to think that something like this could be prevented, I don't think it could have been. To me it seems like his professors and the university and the VTPD did what they could to make sure he got the treatment he needed. And for whatever reason, it didn't work or he refused.
On another note, for anyone who would like to express their condolences or support of the Virginia Tech community, this friday will be "Hokie Hope" Day:
quote: Virginia Tech family members across the country have united to declare this Friday, April 20th, an "Orange and Maroon Effect" day to honor those killed in the tragic events on campus Monday, and to show support for Virginia Tech students, faculty, administrators, staff, alumni, and friends. "Orange and Maroon Effect" was born several years ago as an invitation to Tech fans to wear orange and maroon to Virginia Tech athletic events. We invite everyone from all over the country to be a part of the Virginia Tech family this Friday, to wear orange and maroon to support the families of those who were lost, and to support the school and community we all love so much.
Virginia Tech has also created the April 16th Memorial Website to share condolences, thoughts and prayers.
Posted by BaoQingTian (Member # 8775) on :
Yeah, I actually wrote that post last night before going home, and forgot to hit the post button until this morning. After reading the news this morning, it looks like a lot of people realized he had a problem and tried to do a lot of things to help, short of locking him up, and I don't advocate that at all. What a tragedy.
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
The WBC is planning on picketing, calling the shooting God's vengeance on America for attacking their church.
I guess I owe them for teaching me what it means to truly hate someone.
Edited to remove link.
[ April 18, 2007, 01:59 PM: Message edited by: erosomniac ]
Posted by Snail (Member # 9958) on :
Good Lord. Is that site for real or is it just a tasteless joke?
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
No, that's one of the WBC's real sites.
Posted by dawnmaria (Member # 4142) on :
katharina, Your right, that is exactly who this kid sounded like. I honestly don't know how he could have been helped. It doesn't sound like he wanted help and he almost enjoyed being the weird loner person. It's just truly sad he chose to take others down with him.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
eros, do we need to link to it? I clicked it before checking, we're just upping their traffic.
Posted by Brian J. Hill (Member # 5346) on :
So far, I don't recognize any of the victims' names from the official lists. Yet it still hurts (I can't think of any other word to describe my emotions.) I am a few thousand miles from Blacksburg, but my heart still resides close by. As a Radford native whose whole family many friends still live in Radford or Blacksburg, I can't fathom what is going on in the minds of those who are in the area. It is a crazy feeling. Scott Hendricks, a professor in the building at the time, is a good family friend as well as my Stake President (in the Mormon faith.) He is so shaken up right now, and my heart reaches out to him. There are so many others among my friends who are in the same situation. I can only hope they will be able to heal.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
WBC is claiming that Cho is God's tool of vengeance for attacks on their church? I do not believe any of them TRULY believe that is the way things are.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
Stephen King has written more disturbing stuff under the Richard Bachman name than Cho's plays.
Quite honestly, that first play of Cho's reminds me of something I wrote in the 8th grade for a class project, although I don't think anyone died in the play I wrote, IIRC.
Posted by sndrake (Member # 4941) on :
quote:NBC News said today that they had received a package from the Virginia Tech gunman, Cho Seung-Hui. The package included video, photos, and writings which NBC News described as "long and rambling."
MSNBC further characterized the contents of Cho's missive and video as "disturbing."
'NBC Nightly News' anchor, Brian Williams, referred to the package as a "multimedia manifesto" on his blog. Analysts on other cable news networks drew comparisons between the Cho package and Theodore Kaczynski's "Unabomber Manifesto," which was published in the New York Times and Washington Post in 1995.
NBC News immediately handed the package and its contents over to the FBI and would not disclose its exact contents pending a federal investigation.
The network indicated that the materials appeared to have been put in the mail between the first and second shootings on Monday morning.
NBC plans to air portions of the video on 'NBC Nightly News' Wednesday night.
Posted by Phanto (Member # 5897) on :
Oy.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
The NY Times has a summary of the materials.
The effect on me was to piss me off. He blames absolutely everyone else. What a childish, evil, broken person. If the effect he wanted was to make everyone feel guilty, it should do the opposite. He was clearly bonkers.
Posted by vonk (Member # 9027) on :
I'm having trouble because I have such conflicted feelings about this.
First, this is horrible. Obviously, shatteringly horrible. I can't begin to empathize with those close to the victims and would give almost anything to turn back time.
At the same time though, I feel sorry for Seung-Hui. I can't really figure out what to do with this feeling. After reading his plays and the recent articles and looking at the pictures I can't help but believe he was extremely tormented. What he went through must have been horrible; whether physical or sexual childhood abuse or the ostracizing trauma that any picked on school kid would feel, he was, IMO, obviously tortured.
I know this in no way excuses what he's done, but it introduces a perspective of a killer that heretofore hasn't been seen, and it disturbs me how much I feel sorry for him.
Posted by Eaquae Legit (Member # 3063) on :
quote:At the university, people placed flowers on a table holding his picture and a lit candle. "We remember him as a great specialist in aeronautics. He left behind hundreds of prestigious papers," said professor Nicolae Serban Tomescu.
I was tearing up as I read, and when I got to this, I laughed a bit. It sounds so cold on the face of it, but I guess it's one of the highest compliments a fellow academic could make, and one way I know I'd enjoy being remembered.
I can't read the macabre details and stories and plays and links, and CNN drives me nuts with their insistence that I watch footage. But I can handle reading the "good" stories, the heroic side of humanity. I hope I never end up in a situation like this, but if I do, I hope I have the courage and wits to act as Dr. Librescu did.
Posted by Jutsa Notha Name (Member # 4485) on :
His play with Richard McBeef reads like a child's twisted reinterpretation of MacBeth. The other one reads like a teenage angst fantasy / tragedy. Both are highly contrived and poorly written, but nothing I wouldn't be able to find equals to using internet searches of wannabe writers soaking their angst into their horrible writing. The other behavior seems to indicate a self destructive personality, which would have warranted intervention but not trigger any response from authorities that could have prevented what he finally did. The kid seemed to have a history of depression and obsessive behavior, from current accounts, but it is still a large leap from that to the psychopathic behavior he eventually engaged in. We can't treat all cases of overly depressed young adults like they are going to become mass murderers. That would be inviting worse treatment of those who I would think need positive help, not negative reinforcement of their worldview.
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
I just hope this doesn't cause all the crazy depressed suicidal people in the world to be even more ostracized and persecuted. Somehow I don't think that will help.
Reading the profiles of the people killed is heartbreaking. Especially looking at their myspace pages. So much hopeful human potential destroyed, and so many happy lives cut short.
As individuals gain more and more power through technology, (for instance, in the future individuals might be able to make nuclear weapons in a basement lab) we need to think very very hard about how we can make events like this less likely. I think that includes trying to understand things from the point of view of people like Cho who aren't thinking clearly.
I agree with what Katie and others have said that you can't forcibly detain someone who hasn't made any clear threats or done anything wrong. You can't lock them up in advance just in case, because they're weird. Maybe the answer would lie in some sort of intense outpouring of kindness and concern for people who are seen to be struggling. I really don't know. Almost everyone is struggling in some way or another.
Posted by DarkKnight (Member # 7536) on :
quote: NBC said it had acted responsibly in showing the images, which it said represented a small fraction of what it had received.
quote: "We had planned to speak to some family members of victims this morning but they canceled their appearances because they were very upset with NBC for airing the images," said NBC's "Today" morning program co-host Meredith Vieira.
quote: Police handling the investigation into the shooting in Blacksburg, Virginia also expressed disappointment at the airing of the images and rants by Cho Seung-Hui
quote: While NBC acknowledged that the material from Cho was likely devastating to the victims' families and that its news division was split over whether to air the material, NBC News President Steve Capus defended the decision to do so.
quote: NBC, which allowed other news outlets to use some of the images, said its news division would limit use of the video to "no more than 10 percent of air time."
"We have covered this story, and our unique role in it, with extreme sensitivity."
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
No more than 10% of air time? *blink* Is that a limitation?
----
*sigh* I remember when they justified printing the Unabomber's manifesto because they believed it might actually save some lives and/or lead to his arrest. At the time, I bought this argument but pointed out that this would be a dangerous precedent, because it would exist as a temptation to future killers.
NBC has not only given in to temptation, but has created further -- and far more dangerous -- precedent.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
I'm very glad that they aired the videos.
There are a number of reasons. One of them is that it provides an interestingly open look into his demented psychological state. I'm going to make a rudimentary guess: he will turn out to have a diagnosis of paranoid personality disorder and possibly also borderline personality disorder.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
paranoid type schizophrenia would not be unsurprising, yeah.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
What is the value in formulating completely untestable medical diagnoses of dead people?
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Why? He clearly WAS evil. If there is to be any useful definition of the word "evil," it has to include killing 32 people and advertising the event on NBC.
Now, he may have been evil for a reason, but that's the case for any evil person. Evil is not some separate diagnosis; it's a symptom, not a cause.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:Basically what I'm trying to say is saying he is evil is not the same as saying he did something that was evil.
Why? What is an evil person but someone who commits evil?
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
Tom, the diagnoses are not untestable. Most of these disorders have a genetic component.
Posted by Boris (Member # 6935) on :
What bothers me most about NBC airing this stuff is that they, to me, obviously did so for the shear ratings boost associated with showing it. I'm not a huge fan of modern news media in any form any longer, having studied journalism at least a little bit and knowing that very little real journalism is actually involved anymore.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
There is no DNA test for a definitive diagnosis of the above-mentioned psychiatric disorders.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
It's nice to see that CNN and NYT have gone back to focusing on the victims rather than the coverage. Hopefully that means there are a number of people ashamed of themselves.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Boris, I quit a semi-lucrative job as a freelance journalist a few years ago for precisely that reason. I was unhappy with the stories I was being asked to write.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
"Research does show that children who have a parent with schizophrenia have a 13% to 15% increase risk for getting schizophrenia."
Sounds at least a little genetic to me. I can think of a least three families with mental disorders that I would call very much inherited.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
1. That still doesn't provide a diagnosis. Since he is dead, it is, at best, still a guess.
2. There are lots of broken people who don't go on murdering rampages, and I would bet that there are at least a few people with murder in their hearts who never take action on it because it is, on top of horrific and evil, a really stupid thing to do. I think this particular person was both.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
"...evilness for the sake of being evil."
Does such a thing, in any real sense, exist?
Posted by Snail (Member # 9958) on :
I think I agree with TomDavidson.
He was clearly messed up and now he is dead so what do the specifics matter, such as if he was evil or schizophrenic, except perhaps to his parents? Would such information help prevent future cases such as this? I think not. It's just exploiting a tragedy, and spending time not talking about more relevant stuff.
Posted by Tresopax (Member # 1063) on :
quote:Why? What is an evil person but someone who commits evil?
People do evil things all the time - that doesn't make them evil. I'd wager that every president we've ever had has done something unintentionally that turned out to be evil - things that probably resulted in far worse consequences than anything this young man did. That doesn't mean every president has been evil.
Calling something evil is a statement about the intrinsic character of that thing, not just the impact that that thing has upon the world given its circumstances. You might call war evil because it intrinsicly involves killing people, and thus is immoral by nature. For a person to be evil, it would have to be the same way.
But this is exactly why I don't believe there is any such thing as an evil person. People don't intrinsically desire to do evil. Rather, they do evil because their circumstances distort evil to make it appear to be the correct decision. They may appear evil to us, who cannot fathom what it is like to be in such as messed up mind - but I believe that to be an illusion. In this case, it seems the shooter had convinced himself he had to do what he did, that it was some sort of justice. That doesn't make him evil; it just makes him wrong, and probably crazy.
In any event, don't confuse committing evil with being evil. There are many many instances in which people have done evil but were clearly not evil.
Posted by Jutsa Notha Name (Member # 4485) on :
quote:Originally posted by kojabu:
quote:Would such information help prevent future cases such as this? I think not.
You don't know that. Especially if it raised awareness about mental health and not in a negative way. I think that's incredibly relevant.
That would be incredibly dangerous. Paranoid schizophrenia does not lead someone to shoot 32 innocent people. All too often I see calls to locate and isolate markers that would make someone dangerous in a certain sadistic manner, and every time I see the focus go to something that may have played a factor but is not what caused the person to act that way. Behavior like Cho's and the shooters in Columbine required a certain level of sociopathy that there is no repeatable test for, it is something that requires a different assessment technique for different types of people. There are just not enough resources out there to fully test everyone for the psychopathic and sociopathic markers that might (and only might) make them such a risk. The benefit would not balance the cost, and could possibly lead to more ostrization and amplification of those traits, pushing more people over the edge.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
I'm assuming at this point that everyone has seen "the photo" - Cho holding two pistols at arms length, black gloves, militaryish vest, etc.
I swear I've seen that exact pose in an anime somewhere, with the character wearing a very similar costume. On one of the pictures showiung that photo projected on a tv, which washes out a lot of detail, it even looks like an anime frame.
I know lots of friends who have staged photos in attempts to recreate anime poses - either at Halloween, a con, or some other similar event. It's a fairly common activity among fandom.
I know I could easily be projecting that photo onto whatever memory I have that is similar, but my recollection is such that I suspect it to be an intentional recreation. Has anyone else thought this, or am I imagining things?
Posted by J_84 (Member # 10351) on :
I think it is very relevant to know why the shooter did why he did, since I think that once we understand his motives, we will be more easily able to see the same behavior in others and acknowledge that they have the same characteristics as this shooter, and that action can be taken before that person goes on a killing ramapage as well. Most importantly, I don't know about others, but this is a horrific tragedy, and I want to understand why it happened, how someone could do this to other people. Understanding the shooter and his motives is a huge part of explaining why something so horrible happened.
Now, I don't excuse his behavior and certainly there are others who has experienced what he has experienced who don't go on killing rampages, but I think once taking into account everything that has been said about him, and our now understanding of how he lived, and I can understand to a certain extent why the whole of all his bad experiences have led him to do this. From what I can gather from all the news articles and quotes about him, he had a difficult childhood where he immigrated from another country not knowing the language very well, and was an object of abuse and ridicule at the hands of other students, and where he lived in poverty. The blame does not lie with those students, but I believe it caused him psychological damage that is a piece of the puzzle of why he did what he did. I may be wrong, but weren't the shootings at Columbine also due to being made fun of by other students? It doesn't excuse the behavior, but it's perfectly awful nonetheless, especially in elementary and middle schools, when cliques develop and those outside them are ridiculed and made fun of because they don't fit the status quo. To be honest, I think kids can be very cruel and very mean, and I think the fault lies with their parents. As much as mob mentality develops and people want to belong, and sometimes that means joining in on a group ridiculing another group or individual, parents need to teach their kids some basic semblance of respecting others, that you don't make fun of someone because they talk differently or they're quiet. I think it leads to a feeling of ostracism, and seclusion, that eventually leads to anger and desire for revenge against those that made you feel that way. He probably grew up resenting people richer than him, and associated them with the people who made his childhood so difficult, until the psychosis grew and expanded until he snapped the day of the massacre. Certainly his sister faced the same economic situation and perhaps ridicule from other students, but there's no way to know unless she comes forward, and she has been able to build a life for herself, so there's no way to know whether it's genetic, or perhaps him and his sister process things in very different ways; with his sister, it made her stronger so she could lead a good life, and with him, it became too much for him to handle.
Posted by Jutsa Notha Name (Member # 4485) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: I'm assuming at this point that everyone has seen "the photo" - Cho holding two pistols at arms length, black gloves, militaryish vest, etc.
I swear I've seen that exact pose in an anime somewhere, with the character wearing a very similar costume. On one of the pictures showiung that photo projected on a tv, which washes out a lot of detail, it even looks like an anime frame.
I know lots of friends who have staged photos in attempts to recreate anime poses - either at Halloween, a con, or some other similar event. It's a fairly common activity among fandom.
I know I could easily be projecting that photo onto whatever memory I have that is similar, but my recollection is such that I suspect it to be an intentional recreation. Has anyone else thought this, or am I imagining things?
I didn't think "anime" in particular, but I'm not surprised given anime's tendancy to be highly contrived from other sources. It looked to me like a typical comic book hero pose or an attempt to look like an action movie hero.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
quote:Originally posted by J_84: I think it is very relevant to know why the shooter did why he did, since I think that once we understand his motives, we will be more easily able to see the same behavior in others and acknowledge that they have the same characteristics as this shooter, and that action can be taken before that person goes on a killing ramapage as well.
That's all well and good, but all too often it leads to perfectly harmless people being singled out and ostracized in a very, very painful way, creating many more problems for that person down the line. *eyes old high school*
-pH
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
quote:To be honest, I think kids can be very cruel and very mean, and I think the fault lies with their parents.
I agree with the first part but not the second part. Part of the horror of growing up is being around other immature beings, and casual cruelty is a barbarism that seems very in place with an immature mindset. It is definitely something to be overcome, but that it exists is not something to blame the parents for.
quote:with him, it became too much for him to handle.
I think it is resiliency - that's where the mentally ill part comes in. Even if he wasn't full-fledged bonkers (sorry for the nontechnical language; I don't know enough to use it correctly), he definitely did not have the skills or possibly the mental resilience needed to handle the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune.
I think his mental world was chaos and had been for a long time.
Then again, lots of people become broken in and by life and do not resort to killing people. That takes something extra. That something extra is the monstrocity.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:I didn't think "anime" in particular, but I'm not surprised given anime's tendancy to be highly contrived from other sources. It looked to me like a typical comic book hero pose or an attempt to look like an action movie hero.
That's what I would think if it weren't triggering a specific memory of a very brief scene - it shows that small isolated twitch that specifies either fear or anger, zooms in on the face, then the scene switches to close ups with the weird stop motion bullet firing thing in a lot of anime. Then it stops, pulls back slowly, and the enemies are all dead but a single hole starts bleeding in his chest. It's a heroic death being portrayed, but also a shocking one, because you think he managed to survive.
I very likely could be mashing up two different visual impressions (certainly that scene is a pretty common type), but it doesn't feel that way, if this makes sense. It feels specific, like trying to remember someone's name, not general like "what does this remind me of."
Posted by kojabu (Member # 8042) on :
I agree with you kat.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I can't believe how much this is bothering me.
quote:until the psychosis grew and expanded until he snapped the day of the massacre.
It wasn't a day. He bought the first gun a month before. It wasn't one day or one moment and then an impulse move. This was planned and was sought to be justified. It sure looks like he knew exactly what he was doing.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
He also made a number of choices -- including avoiding/refusing treatment that had been strongly advised -- that led up to the day in question. Someone who repeatedly resists treatment for their mental illness and makes advance complex and self-glorifying plans to kill people certainly fits my definition of evil.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Kojabu,
quote:You don't know that. Especially if it raised awareness about mental health and not in a negative way. I think that's incredibly relevant.
Do you really think airing this footage will "raise awareness about mental health"? Everyone I've spoken to who has seen it says something very close to, "@!#$ing nuts!" The footage isn't raising awareness at all in the public, it's titilation.
Shown in classrooms? Sure. Reviewed by mental health professionals everywhere? You betcha. Shown to teachers, perhaps, as a sort of warning-sign guideline? Sure, maybe. Shown for a ratings glut on national news media? No way.
Exactly what awareness is raised by airing this footage that didn't already exist? That some people are really, really, really screwed up in the head? That some people feel random murder is an acceptable outlet to their suffering? We already know these things as a society. We don't learn anything new from seeing this sort of footage.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
I don't see how this could possibly raise mental health awareness in a non-negative way.
-pH
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Me, neither. In my opinion, this will only reinforce pre-existing very bad stereotypes.
Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
quote:Originally posted by ketchupqueen: This story about Librescu made me cry this morning. Every time we have these tragedies, we seem to hear something of the best of humanity coming even of the worst of humanity. I think these stories get told not just in memory of the people who so acted, but because such action restores hope in us a little bit. And that's not a bad thing.
Hearing about Librescu brought tears to my eyes as well.
It's such a pity that some of the most remarkable qualities of humanity- bravery, compassion, self sacrifice- sometimes make themselves most brilliantly manifest just before the person displaying them is lost.
And to survive the Nazis, only to die in this fashion... <sigh>
I said a prayer for him. Nothing more to do.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
Well, that's the thing. Okay, maybe some more people will become aware of some "warning signs" or will think that mental health is more important. At the same time though, it'll be in an incredibly negative light and would add to the (already sizable) stigma of mental illness. So I really don't see any good coming out of it.
-pH
Posted by James Tiberius Kirk (Member # 2832) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sterling: And to survive the Nazis, only to die in this fashion... <sigh>
Holocaust survivors often wonder why they were the ones to live. This is one man who made that clear. He devoted his life to giving to others.
His actions on Monday were only one of many examples of that. He died the way he lived -- thinking of others and what he could do to help them.
May his name be a blessing. Boruch dayan ha'emet.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: What is the value in formulating completely untestable medical diagnoses of dead people?
Even if I were formulating completely untestable medical diagnoses of dead people, I'd be able to name more than a few reasons why such analysis could prove useful.
But I'm not doing that. I'm guessing at what personality disorders he WAS diagnosed with when he was previously detained in a mental facility after being deemed a danger to himself and others.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:I'm guessing at what personality disorders he WAS diagnosed with when he was previously detained in a mental facility after being deemed a danger to himself and others.
And do you have any way to test those guesses? And why would they be useful?
Posted by Tresopax (Member # 1063) on :
Understanding other people is always useful. Even when they are dead, understanding why someone does what he does would help you understand people you may interact with in the future.
Failing to try to understand others leads to shallow and false interpretations of their actions - such as "he's just doing that because he's evil." It leads one to fail to appreciate others too. And that, in turn, leads to bad judgement - because your predictions about how others will react are based in your understanding of why they act, and because your moral judgement depends on the degree to which you value other people.
So, I would say understanding what personality disorders may have influenced this killer's behavior is a useful thing to know.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:And do you have any way to test those guesses?
I'd figure the answer to this one would be easy? His psychiatric file will be discussed publicly in the future. Officials will release further information on his mental health and this will be stuff that was drawn up conclusively by mental health experts who had to diagnose him while he was being held in a mental institution, so it's not postmortem conjecture. There will be a profile on the psychological knowns of Cho much as there has been exhaustively categorized and discussed mental profiles for all other memorable mass murderers.
Is the information useful? Sure. It's not relevant to my conjecture since I'm just making a guess for the hell of it, but the information will be useful. People who commit acts this shocking do get researched in depth for good reason, part of that occuring in the hopes that future incidents can be potentially avoided; civic policy and school policy will change to accommodate what Cho's history brings to light.
Even without supposed usefulness, assuming you want to discount it as being speculative on my part, it's still informative. He becomes a psychological case study. At absolutely any rate, the kind of study and review I'm talking is inarguably more useful and productively applicable than just arguing about whether or not he was 'evil.'
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
Interesting news is already filtering down the news pipelines. Apparently, a review of his history is showing that he's a 'prototypical' textbook example of a shooter, something which probably comes as little surprise to criminologists.
More news: he was diagnosed with autism at age 8, after an analysis which was prompted by his emotional coldness and refusal to talk.
It is possible that you will see a degree of 'slipped through the cracks' discussion, since his parents were apparently unable or unwilling to get special help with his mental and social problems, which (it can be assumed) went untreated:
quote:Other relatives admitted Cho's parents had always been aware of his problems but had neither the time nor money for specialist help.
His uncle Chan Kim, 56, said: "He wasn't like a normal kid. We were worried about him not talking.
"Both his parents knew he had mental problems but they were poor and they couldn't send him to a special hospital in the United States.
"His mother and sister were asking his friends to help instead.
"His parents worked and did not have time to look after his condition and didn't give him special treatment.
"They had no time or money to look after his special problem even though they knew he was autistic."
And the members of Cho's family that have as of yet talked to the media are not mincing their words:
quote:THE grandfather of Cho Seung-Hui said yesterday: "Son of a bitch. It serves him right he died with his victims."
Kim Hyang-Sik, 82, said he had a doom-laden dream of Cho's parents the night of his murderous rampage - and woke to hear the news of the massacre and his grandson's death.
He watched Cho's sick video of himself holding a gun to his head.
His sister Kim Yang-Sun, 85, who also saw it, told the Mirror that afterwards her brother was so distraught he had "gone away for a few days to calm himself down and avoid more questions".
She too repeatedly referred to the killer as "son of a bitch" or "a***hole" and said his mother Kim Hyang-Yim had problems with him from infancy.
quote:I'm guessing at what personality disorders he WAS diagnosed with when he was previously detained in a mental facility after being deemed a danger to himself and others.
This isn't what happened. You are speculating here (1) that he was diagnosed, (2) that he was considered a danger to others, and (3) what that yet-unknown-to-exist diagnosis was.
Those are a lot of assumptions, and I don't think ANY of them happened. There has been considerable evidence that none of those did. As far as we know he was put in the hospital for being suicidal (not a because of being a danger to others), we do not know that he was diagnosed with anything, and we do know that he was released which I don't think happens unless it is judged that he was not a danger.
Posted by Stray (Member # 4056) on :
If he was held at the psychiatric facility only briefly, there may not be an official diagnosis, or if they did have to come up with something to put on the release paperwork it may not be a correct one. I don't think we're ever likely to know exactly what his disorder was, in clinical terms.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:This isn't what happened. You are speculating here (1) that he was diagnosed, (2) that he was considered a danger to others, and (3) what that yet-unknown-to-exist diagnosis was.
On the account of (3), you're wrong when you say that this isn't 'what happened.' I say "I am doing Y." You are responding 'This isn't what happened, you are clearly doing Y.' Here is a repeat of my post with emphasis:
quote: I'm going to make a rudimentary guess: he will turn out to have a diagnosis of paranoid personality disorder and possibly also borderline personality disorder.
I am speculating openly and I have never claimed otherwise! It's possible he was detained only as a danger to himself OR others, but either way he was detained as a danger! A magistrate signed the order after finding ample probable cause to believe that he was, at the time, a danger. This is an official and legal process, without which detention is not legal.
quote:Those are a lot of assumptions, and I don't think ANY of them happened. There has been considerable evidence that none of those did.
This brings up that (1) and (2) are not speculation. You are factually incorrect. He was ordered to undergo outpatient care *and* he had prescription medications said to be related to treatment of psychological problems, so that meant that he was diagnosed with something.
I'm taking a stab at it based on the input of his plays and videos. My guess is a paranoid personality disorder was at least suspected, or can otherwise be reasonably concluded. This is not an expert conclusion, This is a guess!
I am confused by the reaction to this. I don't think I was particularly unclear!
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Being recommended for counseling does NOT mean that a diagnosis is automatically given. It's clear that he refused care and refused any treatment, much less long-term treatment.
Anyway, I don't actually disagree with your guess - I don't know enough about it, but it certainly seems to fit. My point is that it is not a clear line from paranoid personality disorder to mudering over 30 people and expecting the general public to blame themselves for it.
When it comes to the evil vs. bonkers debate, I don't think it is either/or. I think it took both.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Being recommended for counseling does NOT mean that a diagnosis is automatically given. It's clear that he refused care and refused any treatment, much less long-term treatment.
No, no. That's certainly not clear as stated. He had prescriptions for a mental issue, which means that he was diagnosed with something, unless somehow it is possible to receive psych drugs to treat a disorder you haven't actually been diagnosed with. It is possible they were just depression drugs, but that still requires a diagnosis.
I'm also not talking at all about his being recommended for counseling, I'm talking about how he was released from being detained at a mental facility with orders for outpatient care. Care for something that should require a diagnosis, barring a very confusing policy.
But your point isn't something I'm actually opposing. I don't think there's a 'clear line' from any personality disorder to mass murder, nor do I think I'll be involving myself with any debate about what the public has to 'blame' themselves for.
Posted by Stray (Member # 4056) on :
Being recommended for outpatient care doesn't mean he ever went back to get it, and psychiatrists are pretty pill-happy; I could definitely see one writing a prescription with only the most tenuous of preliminary diagnoses.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
I believe that the outpatient care was under orders.
According to ABC News, Cho was evaluated by a psychiatrist and the order for outpatient treatment included a finding that Cho was a danger. Under federal law, Cho was officially prohibited from purchasing firearms because he had been adjudicated mentally defective, even though he had not been committed full-time to the cuckoo ward. I think that it is pretty clear that there was a diagnosis.
His story and his peculiar mannerisms in his video indicate a pretty demented kid and I can only guess that they point to an avoidant, paranoid personality. He also seems to have a complete lack of empathy, but that's almost a given based on the fact that he did, after all, go on a sadistic killing rampage.
And schizophrenia was also mentioned. It's possible. He could have very well been experiencing his initial psychotic break, since he was about at the age that they develop. Though even with the video, that may end up being guesswork even for real experts.
That prescription care was part of an official and legal diagnosis made after a period of detention and evaluation due to mental concerns. The kid had history. I cannot imagine that the prescription can be written off as a tenuous preliminary diagnosis.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary:
quote:Being recommended for counseling does NOT mean that a diagnosis is automatically given. It's clear that he refused care and refused any treatment, much less long-term treatment.
No, no. That's certainly not clear as stated. He had prescriptions for a mental issue, which means that he was diagnosed with something, unless somehow it is possible to receive psych drugs to treat a disorder you haven't actually been diagnosed with. It is possible they were just depression drugs, but that still requires a diagnosis.
It's completely possible to receive treatment without an official diagnosis. It's completely possible to receive medication for a LONG TIME without an official diagnosis.
Edit: It doesn't have much to do with pill-happiness, IMO. It has a lot more to do with the fact that diagnosing a mental illness is usually a lot trickier than diagnosing, I don't know, ringworm.
-pH
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
Ummmm. I guess you could totally be right. If it's possible for a person to get a prescription for the treatment of a mental disorder .. without a diagnosis for that mental disorder .. then, that's kinda crazy and I'll wonder why that's allowed.
But while I'm busy being totally confused about that, I'll hope I've got enough left to stand on. He was ordered to seek care in the terms of his release from unwilling custody. He was ruled to be a 'mental defective' and a danger. I dunno if this is all possible without a diagnosis? I can only still assume that they do imply a necessary diagnosis?
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
It's actually harder to get information now. After plastering the crap that was sent to NBC all over the front page and newscasts, it looks like the backlash was so strong that everything about the shooter has been taken off the front page at all.
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: No, no. That's certainly not clear as stated. He had prescriptions for a mental issue, which means that he was diagnosed with something, unless somehow it is possible to receive psych drugs to treat a disorder you haven't actually been diagnosed with.
I don't know if it's possible to get prescribed for nothing, but it's definitely possible to get prescribed odd drugs for seemingly unrelated problems: powerful anti-depression, anti-anxiety drugs as sleep aids, etc.
Posted by Stray (Member # 4056) on :
quote: Ummmm. I guess you could totally be right. If it's possible for a person to get a prescription for the treatment of a mental disorder .. without a diagnosis for that mental disorder .. then, that's kinda crazy and I'll wonder why that's allowed.
Like pH said, diagnosis of mental illness is way, way more complicated than diagnosis of physical problems. It can literally take years to pin down, and usually requires trying several different medications before finding one (or a combination) that will work well enough. Often the way a patient reacts to a particular medication can actually be part of the diagnostic process. And because they can't keep people locked up for years while they figure out what's wrong with them, frequently all they can do is prescribe one or more drugs to treat the immediate acute symptoms and hope the person will stick with the care process long enough to get a firm diagnosis--if someone truly does not want to receive mental health care, and can convince the right people that they aren't a danger to others, it's very hard to compel them.
Posted by Jutsa Notha Name (Member # 4485) on :
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: Ummmm. I guess you could totally be right. If it's possible for a person to get a prescription for the treatment of a mental disorder .. without a diagnosis for that mental disorder .. then, that's kinda crazy and I'll wonder why that's allowed.
But while I'm busy being totally confused about that, I'll hope I've got enough left to stand on. He was ordered to seek care in the terms of his release from unwilling custody. He was ruled to be a 'mental defective' and a danger. I dunno if this is all possible without a diagnosis? I can only still assume that they do imply a necessary diagnosis?
I seriously doubt 'mental defective' was the term used, and if so it was used wrongly. He was diagnosed as a possible danger to himself and others, but believe it or not this is not as rare a diagnosis as you might think. This is a diagnosis that usually comes along with an assessment that a person might be suicidal whether by a preexisting condition or due to circumstances (like PTSD). Mental health just is not at a stage where a diagnosis of someone unwilling to cooperate with the person doing the treatment is going to be accurate. The pharmacological aspect is even more of a guessing game, because different medicines affect people in different ways, dependant on their own chemistry and the actual nature of their problem. It is not uncommon, I hear, for doctors to go through one or two prescriptions before finding one that has the right balance of helpful ability and lack of side effects. It is similar (in my view) to pain regulation, where the doctor tries to find the prescription that offers the most relief with the fewest adverse effects on the patient, relying on the patient's honest and open response to the medication to figure out what works and what doesn't.
What I am trying to express is that it is not a simple checklist that a physician can go over and assess the patient. This is why psychiatry and psychology are separate studies from general practice or other specialized medicine. It isn't as simple as being able to say, "yes, he's crazy. The kind of crazy that could lead to shooting people."
Posted by Risuena (Member # 2924) on :
I have to say that I'm pretty uncomfortable with all of the speculation, mostly because I don't see how it's valuable. Few of us, if any, are experts in any of the fields this situation covers. And even if we were, we don't have access to all the information and likely will never have access to all of it. What we have to rely on is the reports from the media, and many of those are still conflicting and I've seen several that are extremely misleading, if not out and out lies. So how can any of us form any meaningful speculation based on that?
Posted by Ron Lambert (Member # 2872) on :
If the killer CHOSE to be mentally ill, then that gives him no more of an excuse than if he chose to be drunk. As long as choice is involved, moral accountability is also involved. The killer chose to go over to the dark side. Making this choice always results in mental illness. But it is a symptom of evil, not the cause of it; otherwise it would be an excuse for evil. Maybe his habitual choices to embrace the dark side over the past months and years of his life were the real cause of any mental illness that was detected in him at any time. Such choices tend to be progressive, spiralling further and further out of control into ever greater excesses of evil, until a kind of "critical mass" is reached, where the person explodes into violence.
This is reality, even if much of modern thought in psychology seeks to explain it away.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Oh, I definitely don't want to go into "people are mentally ill because they choose to be" territory. That's not a good idea.
However, I do think this guy certainly made evil choices at several places.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:I seriously doubt 'mental defective' was the term used
The definition of a "mental defective" includes anyone whom "a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority" has determined to be "a danger to himself or other" because of "marked subnormal intelligence, or mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease."
He was detained for analysis and observation by a magistrate that had determined that there was probable cause that he was a danger to himself or others.
When in the mental facility, the experts there had him adjudicated mentally defective, and this was detailed in the terms of his eventual release.
When one is 'adjudicated' as a mental defective due to safety concerns prompted by Cho's stalking -- as unsavory as the wording is -- this is apparently an official declaration of confirmed mental illness.
By definition and law it apparently necessarily implies that the person is either (a) a danger to themselves or others, or (b) are unable to manage their own affairs due to a lack of mental capacity.
In the case of Cho's diagnosis, (a) clearly applied and the state had determined that Cho was mentally ill.
So, unfortunately, we've got that kind of classy, classy language still in our legal system.
Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
I would like people to look at the third post in my Fox News thread because it talks about an aspect of this story that I would really like people to state their views on .
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
quote:Originally posted by katharina: Oh, I definitely don't want to go into "people are mentally ill because they choose to be" territory. That's not a good idea.
quote:Among Cho's photos were close-ups of himself clenching a hammer in a pose that recalled the pose of the persecuted man in "Oldboy."
They haven't confirmed he's even seen this movie, so it's only a theory at this point.
Posted by vonk (Member # 9027) on :
Oldboy isn't anime
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Yes, I know. But if he deliberately copied one pose from one movie, he might have deliberately copied another pose from another movie.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: Yes, I know. But if he deliberately copied one pose from one movie, he might have deliberately copied another pose from another movie.
Not to mention that there is plenty of Anime that predates Woo that certainly emphasizes the same things the article outlines. I very much doubt Woo has never been exposed to anime.
This theory could be much more valid if just a few seconds of his spree had been caught on tape.
The differences between the sheer brutality and violence of Harris and Klebold with their pipe bombs, rifles and shotguns seems quite different then Cho's pistols with their finesse and fluidity.
But thats just my two cents.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
And though she may not have been nearby I find it extraordinary that, Regina Rohde a survivor of the Columbine shootings also survived this shooting.
It is to be wondered how she feels about the American schooling system.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
quote:Paranoid schizophrenia does not lead someone to shoot 32 innocent people.
Doesn't it? Conceivably I am harbouring a stereotype, but it seems to me that this is actually a fairly perfect description of the kind of thing that paranoid schizophrenia does lead to.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by King of Men:
quote:Paranoid schizophrenia does not lead someone to shoot 32 innocent people.
Doesn't it? Conceivably I am harbouring a stereotype, but it seems to me that this is actually a fairly perfect description of the kind of thing that paranoid schizophrenia does lead to.
You are right KOM, schizophrenia also lead to a woman drowning her 5 children. This shooting is not beyond the realm of possibility. But I am not sure this kid had schizophrenia. Mental ilnesses always seem to get all lumped together. 'messianic complex paranoid schizophrenic.'
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:For a person to be evil, it would have to be the same way.
This is yet another reason why qualia are useless. Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
The Wachowski brothers themselves have stated their influences from Asian cinema, in particular to the "blood opera" genre that John Woo himself introduced in movies like The Killer, Hard Boiled, and several other movies in his early days, and even more recently Face/Off and The Replacement Killers (although they're more influenced by American culture).
The Matrix simply made it more mainstream and "cool" in American culture. The Matrix also has lots of anime influence, whereas Woo's early work really doesn't.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:THE grandfather of Cho Seung-Hui said yesterday: "Son of a bitch. It serves him right he died with his victims."
...
She too repeatedly referred to the killer as "son of a bitch" or "a***hole" and said his mother Kim Hyang-Yim had problems with him from infancy.
Sounds like a charming family. Who, no matter how angry they are, refers to their grandson as a "son of a bitch?" For obvious reasons, that particular usage is normally avoided.
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
It "serves him right" that he killed himself?
If cops cranked a couple of hundred rounds in to him, perhaps, but I hardly see suicide as someone getting what they deserve.
Posted by theamazeeaz (Member # 6970) on :
quote:Originally posted by Launchywiggin: I now know 2 people who won't be going back to class. Met them at an engineering party.
Anyway--thanks for all support from Hatrack. You guys have been a huge part of my life for the past year.
I'm so sorry to hear two of your friends are dead. One of my older sister's high school friends was also among those killed. He was an engineering grad student.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
Tom/Nighthawk: Remember something is most likely lost in the translation when you go from Korean to English. For all we know he was saying,
"Serves him right that he died along with the people he killed."
As in he deserved to die for killing them.
Even when somebody speaks English as a second language, they still tend to articulate their thoughts into Korean and then translate them into English words.
Nighthawk: I am not sure why you call it the "Akimbo pose". I'd welcome illumination. The Wachowski brothers did also cite Asian cinema and John Woo as influences, you are right in this. Why must they be influenced by one or the other? Anime writers watch movies, and Movie writers read manga and watch anime.
I don't think anyone has a firm handle on what influences Cho would say shaped his actions and the manner in which they were carried out.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:And though she may not have been nearby I find it extraordinary that, Regina Rohde a survivor of the Columbine shootings also survived this shooting.
It is to be wondered how she feels about the American schooling system.
Ergh.
"What does graduation entail? Do I upgrade to surviving office shootings?"
Posted by Puppy (Member # 6721) on :
akimbo = wielding two similar weapons, usually pistols, in both hands simultaneously
That isn't the original meaning of the word "akimbo", but it is a common usage now among gamers and action-movie enthusiasts.
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
quote:Originally posted by Puppy: akimbo = wielding two similar weapons, usually pistols, in both hands simultaneously
That isn't the original meaning of the word "akimbo", but it is a common usage now among gamers and action-movie enthusiasts.
...really? I've never heard that before.
Edit: Urban Dictionary says your definition is not only the most popular, but also the "oldest" and "original."
Posted by Puppy (Member # 6721) on :
There is an earlier definition that means "with elbows pointed outwards", but it's far less common. And definitely not used colloquially.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:There is an earlier definition that means "with elbows pointed outwards", but it's far less common
It's the only one I knew until this thread.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Huh. I would have said that far more people were familiar with the word "akimbo" in the "arms akimbo" sense than "wielding two weapons simultaneously" sense.
Posted by Shigosei (Member # 3831) on :
I'd only heard the "arms akimbo" definition.
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
Me, too. Hands on hips, elbows out.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
Me...three?
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
I don't fall into either list, I'd never heard the term before, I better brush up on my action vernacular.
Posted by MidnightBlue (Member # 6146) on :
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: I don't fall into either list, I'd never heard the term before, I better brush up on my action vernacular.
Ditto.
Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
So VT's student government is asking media to butt out and leave campus by Monday. Bravo!
I wonder how many will try to fight that request??
quote:quote from an AP story: In getting ready for the resumption of classes, the university's student government asked hundreds of reporters to leave campus by Monday morning.
Student government spokeswoman Liz Hart said the campus appreciates the reporting on the Virginia Tech story, but students are ready to move forward.
"The best way to know how to do that is get the campus back to normal," she said. "That includes being able to go back to class, to get back into our normal routine as much as a possible without being held back by anything external, reminding us that it will be a difficult road. We already know it."
quote:Originally posted by Puppy: There is an earlier definition that means "with elbows pointed outwards", but it's far less common. And definitely not used colloquially.
Say what? It definitely is used colloquially. And among non-gamers, I believe far more commonly than the Teal'c-Season-10-pose meaning -- which I'd never heard of before either. (And since gamers make up a relatively small part of the population, the standard dictionary definition is definitely more common.)
Posted by theamazeeaz (Member # 6970) on :
quote:Originally posted by Morbo: So VT's student government is asking media to butt out and leave campus by Monday. Bravo!
I wonder how many will try to fight that request??
quote:quote from an AP story: In getting ready for the resumption of classes, the university's student government asked hundreds of reporters to leave campus by Monday morning.
Student government spokeswoman Liz Hart said the campus appreciates the reporting on the Virginia Tech story, but students are ready to move forward.
"The best way to know how to do that is get the campus back to normal," she said. "That includes being able to go back to class, to get back into our normal routine as much as a possible without being held back by anything external, reminding us that it will be a difficult road. We already know it."
My friend's funeral is Tuesday. Granted this in RI, but shouldn't they assume people might want to attend?!?!?!?!
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: Nighthawk: I am not sure why you call it the "Akimbo pose". I'd welcome illumination. The Wachowski brothers did also cite Asian cinema and John Woo as influences, you are right in this. Why must they be influenced by one or the other? Anime writers watch movies, and Movie writers read manga and watch anime.
I'd post examples I already have, but my server's down. But, put simply, here are some examples, directly from Woo:
Forgive me if I thought the term "akimbo" was common; I spent the greater part of six years writing a game for Half-Life based on the asian "blood opera" genre that Woo made famous (The Opera - Site's currently down), so maybe it's just common to me. It's been also used in other games: Action Quake and Action Half-Life, Max Payne Woo's own Stranglehold, etc...
I know we sometimes have a sensitive crowd here; if the images above bother anyone, let me know.
Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
Finally some good news! The Phelps/Westboro Baptist group has agreed not to stage their horrible protests at the VT victims funerals, in exchange for some air-time on a national radio show, hosted by Mike Gallagher. I've never heard of him, but Mr. Gallagher did the right thing to get them to cancel their protests. Gallagher did the same thing to stop their protesting after the recent Amish school shootings.
quote: When I found out that they [Phelpsians] were planning to hold protests outside the Virginia Tech victims funerals, I've made the decision to offer them more airtime. On Tuesday, April 24, Shirley Phelps-Roper and other members of Westboro Baptist Church will be my in-studio guests for the entire program. They have formally announced that they are cancelling all of their scheduled protests for the Virginia Tech shooting victims funerals as a result of receiving this invitation to be on my show.
It is great they aren't protesting, but this type of bribery only encourages them to do this crap. I hate the fact that they are profiting from this.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I think they are parasites - latching onto tragedy and leeching it for attention.
Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
Kwea, IMHO it's far, far better they are on some show I've never heard of than in the faces of grieving people burying their friends and relatives. And they don't need or care about encouragment: they thrive on disapproval, as it reinforces their peculiar beliefs.
Also, they would have gotten far more press from the funeral protests than they will from this one radio show, so I'm not sure they really profit.
Posted by Qaz (Member # 10298) on :
In America's past there are certainly things that needed to be outlawed. But I think we could have kept the private-citizen ass-whuppin'. Posted by Shigosei (Member # 3831) on :
It's not an ideal solution, but I do respect what the guy has to say in his column. It seems that letting them on a radio show is better than having them harass grieving families.
Posted by BandoCommando (Member # 7746) on :
Let me start by saying that it is not my intention to start (or restart) an argument about gun control. However, I saw this article linked from google today, and it made the interesting point that our CURRENT laws should have prohibited Cho from getting a firearm through legal means. It also goes on to say that, of course, this does not mean he wouldn't have been sufficiently determined to access firearms another way.
edit: I also apologize in advance if someone already made these points and I missed it completely.
Posted by Shigosei (Member # 3831) on :
I think one possible issue is balancing confidentiality in mental health treatment and protecting society. The article says, "People who have a felony conviction or a history of mental illness should not be eligible to purchase guns." Really? "Mental illness" is a pretty broad category. The article does clarify that a court has to declare someone "mentally incapacitated" or that person has to have been involuntarily hospitalized. Are those things (particularly the latter) a matter of public record? If not, how do we prevent those people from buying guns without violating their privacy?
Posted by BandoCommando (Member # 7746) on :
I think that if a court is involved in deeming an individual mentally incapacitated, this would be part of the records made available when one is doing a background check for firearm purchases. When attempting to make a gun purchase, individuals must already volunteer to have their privacy intruded upon to a certain extent.
Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
A magistrate found that the killer was a danger to himself (not to others.) This is enough, according to the article and the talking heads on Friday's PBS News Hour, to prevent him from legally buying a gun. Problem is, this info wasn't in the database seached for the background check. So he bought the guns with no problem. I'm not sure, but I think the magistrate or his staff was supposed to report the matter for inclusion in the background check DB.
There has been a complete lack of political will in funding the background checks. With an incomplete database results like this (people who are legally bound from getting guns getting them anyway despite background checks) will happen.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
"In America's past there are certainly things that needed to be outlawed. But I think we could have kept the private-citizen ass-whuppin'."
Here in the rural South, we still have some of that. I don't know, it has its benefits, but it has its costs, too. A good friend of mine lived in Wisconsin for a couple of years. He grew up here in rural NC. He was always impressed by how much trash Northerners talked, and how little physical fighting they did.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
What exactly are the benefits of private-citizen ass-whuppin'?
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
I am so not getting into it.
Posted by Qaz (Member # 10298) on :
For the mourners, a chance to grieve without hearing their loved ones maligned. (Failing that, a more entertaining funeral, with fond memories for years to come!)
For the subject of the ass-whuppin', an opportunity to look at life in a new way, and re-evaluate life choices.
For me, the chance to say "ass-whuppin'."
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
There's a country song by Hank William called "Attitude Adjustment". It has funny lyrics that involve attitude adjustments.
In no way do I particularly promote this. However....I have taught a few lessons this way. When i was younger, I got taught a few. As Lao Tzu says, "He who lives by the sword, dies by the sword.", or words to that effect.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
quote:What exactly are the benefits of private-citizen ass-whuppin'?
The answer to this question will change drastically based upon the circumstance. But here's an anecdotal answer: 20 year old man dating and fooling around with (although to my knowledge, not sexually active) a 15 year old relative. You're 17 at the time. Sister won't be dissuaded from seeing the guy who was, in fact, a creep. Creep won't be dissuaded from seeing her with words. Parents forbid, but the relationship continues.
The benefits of a private-citizen ass-whipping in this anecdote are when the 20 year old creep, after refusing to listen to reason, is goaded into a physical fight which he loses, badly and publicly. A promise of further injury and humiliation concludes the encounter. Relationship terminated. Relative not happy, but got over it.
And that's a benefit right there.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
From what I understood, the magistrate deemed him a possible danger, and he spent a few days at an institution where they said he was no crazy enough to warrant extended residence, that decision permitted him to legally obtain a weapon, at least according to newsweek.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
The benefits of a private citizen ass-whuppin' are considered in depth in "Private Creation and Enforcement of Law: A Historical Case", which looks at the history of private citizen ass-whuppins in medieval Iceland.
A quotation of interest:
quote: During more than fifty years of what the Icelanders themselves perceived as intolerably violent civil war, leading to the collapse of the traditional system, the average number of people killed or executed each year appears, on a per capita basis, to be roughly equal to the current rate of murder and nonnegligent manslaughter in the United States.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:Originally posted by graywolfe: No doubt he's rushing to judgement. I don't disagree Tresopax, but based on available evidence there appears to be a two hour stretch between the initial gunfire and the bulk of the killings, and there are numerous pieces of video showing cops walking while gunfire can be heard. I don't really care much if it's a rush to judgement, I want a hue and cry about this so at the very least SOP in these situations can be changed. The death toll is at 32. It's hard to believe that many would be dead if the reaction had been more aggressive. Of course I could be wrong.
quote:Originally posted by graywolfe: And additionally, my main issue here is with the lack of aggressive engagement. I don't really care who occupied what zone. What I care about is defenseless students were being murdered left and right, and there were numerous officers available to engage the suspect, and either for procedural reasons, or some other reason, he was not engaged until more than 50 were shot. Shouldn't that be unacceptable?
quote:Originally posted by graywolfe: What I do expect is when someone starts murdering students left and right, some law enforcement official somewhere, will find them, and engage them as soon as possible.
quote:Originally posted by graywolfe: 50+ people were shot, I don't see how it's conceivable that that could happen w/o procedures slowing up the police on the scene considering the reports of how the murders at least partially went down.
quote:Early that morning, Crannis and Flinchum had called in SWAT teams in case they needed to serve warrants in the 7:15 a.m. shooting of two students in a dormitory across campus. Those SWAT officers were able to get to Norris Hall first, just three minutes after the first 911 call.
quote:Within eight minutes of Haas's call, Blacksburg and Virginia Tech police broke into Norris Hall. They worked frantically to save students clinging to life. Medics performed triage and rushed victims to safety as SWAT teams moved through the building to confirm that Cho had acted alone. In the critical first 20 minutes, when ambulances could not pull close to Norris Hall because they hadn't been given the all-clear by SWAT teams, one officer placed wounded students in his sport-utility vehicle and ferried them over sidewalks and lawns to get to the ambulances, parked blocks away.
Why did it take 5 minutes to get inside? Because Cho had chained the doors:
quote:As Morgan tried to keep Haas calm, Virginia Tech and Blacksburg police officers were desperately trying to get into Norris Hall two floors below. Since the Columbine shootings, police across the country have trained to respond to an "active shooter" by entering a building immediately.
Blacksburg Police Sgt. Anthony Wilson ran with four officers to the front double door. But the door was chained from the inside. They heard glass breaking, people screaming and shots being fired. They ran to the northwest corner of Norris and met up with other officers, some in SWAT gear. They tried the door there; it was also chained. "Shoot the chain," they yelled almost in unison. One aimed a shotgun and tried, but no luck. He shot again. It wouldn't budge.
...
Lt. Curtis Cook, leader of the Virginia Tech SWAT team, heard the shots and looked up at the gray limestone building to see if he could spot the gunman. The officers moved to a big wooden door next to the chained one. It was locked with a deadbolt. An officer shot through the lock and pushed the door open, then the group ran inside through a mechanical shop. It was quiet.
On a heroic note, the girl stayed on the 911 call even when she had to play dead to avoid Cho's return to the scene:
quote:Her 911 call had been critical to officers. By staying on the phone, she had given them details about what was happening inside Norris when they were locked outside.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
That article is absolutely heartbreaking (as well it should be).
quote:When Col. W. Steven Flaherty, the state police superintendent, arrived from Richmond before 2 p.m., scores of officers were photographing, documenting and searching for evidence. They could hear student cellphones ringing. And ringing. Loved ones were desperately hoping for an answer.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
You know, that's the detail that broke me down then. It's horrible.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
I can't believe that girl even after being shot herself stayed on the line and tried her best to speak without alerting Cho.
I can't imagine how one summons the courage to do that.
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
I just keep wishing some group of them could have rushed him somehow, and taken him down, or else shot him themselves. Surely we must have 1 person in 20 who can be trained and practiced (and carry weapons) to stop something like this in progress. As brave and wonderful as the officers' response was, even 3 minutes was far too late. Since our lives must contain such dangers going forward, then we must needs have a better means of countering them.
Posted by Risuena (Member # 2924) on :
Dags - thanks for linking to that article. My cousin is friends with Haas, but I hadn't heard about the importance of her phone call or the courage she had in staying on the line.
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Cry]](graemlins/cry.gif)