The Virginia Tech Massacre
There will be a lot of discussion of the events of yesterday morning on the campus of Virginia Tech. It would appear that a lone gunman, Cho Seung-Hui, killed 31 people and himself. As of now, no motive is known. It was the largest fatality from a single gun incident in U.S. history.On the griddle right now are university officials, who dithered about warning students that there had been violence. At 7:15, two people were shot to death in a dorm room. Over two hours later, with students given no warning, the killer perpetuated his slaughter, killing thirty more people, and wounding several others. In retrospect, it seems this is a monumental fuck-up. I thought to myself, if someone had been murdered in my city, I don't need to be warned, but a college, though it is like a city in many ways, also plays an in loco parentis role. Students, who may be of legal age, are still under the cloak of safety a university provides, and it seems to me that when an act of violence so severe as a murder takes place, it's a situation that calls for utmost caution. I think some heads may roll over this one.
Then there is the gun question. I've always been for strict gun control laws, and find the NRA an odious bunch. It's a sticky wicket, though, for the second amendment is pretty clear that citizens have the right to bear arms (there is the reference to militias, which further complicates the issue). Cho may very well have bought the guns he used legally. If he had no record or history of mental illness, what different could have been done?
Living in an open society as we do, and since we do have the right to own guns, these things will happen. The alternative, having armed guards in every aspect of our lives, is both impractical and undesirable, I would think. I live near the campus of Princeton University, which has an open-door policy as far as the community is concerned (of course outsiders can not get into certain buildings such as dormitories). It would be a shame if colleges and universities had to alter this policy.
In any event, this is a very tragic set of circumstances and I feel for the students of Virginia Tech and the families of those who died.
I was stunned by the University President's remark that the police at the scene didn't know at first whether the dorm incident was a murder-suicide. The gun used in that shooting was used in the classroom shootings. Unless the shooter left a dummy gun near the bodies, the lack of a gun at the scene would have immediately ruled that out, and should have led to the conclusion that a shooter was on the loose.
ReplyDeleteI was thinking about the lack of a lockdown, and realized that, until we know where he spent the two hours between the two shootings, we have no clue as to whether a lockdown would have helped. He could have killed the two people in the dormitory, walked across campus, and sat in an empty classroom pretending to study, waiting for the building to fill. He was a student, so the police would not have thought twice about his presence. It might have saved a few lives if police had been outside the building, but he still would have had the opportunity to kill students.
One report stated that a resident's card would allow them to enter any dormitory. That's a policy that I would change, if the report is true.
I don't think this will have an effect on gun laws, especially in the south. I've already heard the argument that one armed student could have prevented deaths. The debate will roll on in an endless circle, with both sides having valid points and both sides having anecdotal "proof" to back up their arguments.
I'm astounded by repeated calls that this could have been avoided, and other incidents as well, if there were more armed citizens. Yes, sure, if the professors had guns they could have nipped this in the bud. But if every half-wit and hot-head in this country walked around armed, how many more deaths would there be, every day? How many of you have been in a stressful situation and thought to yourself, "I'm glad I don't have a gun?" (particularly at the DMV). The simple truth is, if handguns were unavailable for purchase, Cho would not have bought one, as he was not a career criminal with a pipeline to illegal arms dealers. He might have done something else, like burned a building down, but he would not have been able to shoot so many people (and why didn't a background check find his mental illness record?)
ReplyDeleteI'm not disagreeing with you, Jackrabbit, and I don't think arming more citizens makes sense, but Cho probably would have bought a rifle if he couldn't have gotten a handgun.
ReplyDeleteI think anyone asking questions about this event should watch Bowling for Columbine if they've never seen it. Gun availability is only one of our problems. (Wow, just reading the preview, that makes me sound like I'm NRA or something, but I'm not. Never owned a gun, no interest in guns.)
Actually, I'm somewhat stunned by all the coverage this is getting. To me the numbers are still all within a range that I don't view this as any bigger or more important than the killing of the Amish schoolgirls or even Charles Whitman. It's all tragic, but when you make everything stop and put flags at half-mast just because a new record has been set, that sends the wrong message.
I'm not surprised by the coverage. The academic world is supposed to be more safe, more civil. So many of the victims were young. A man survived the Holocaust, only to be cut down defending his students from a madman. Many of us are reminded of that person in the past who made us uncomfortable, unsafe-why did this man go over the edge? There are so many sides to this story.
ReplyDeleteThe revelations regarding the gunman's past brushes with the law may take some of the debate away from gun control to another issue involving civil liberties that may never be resolved-how do we deal with mentally ill people who may be a danger to themselves or others? As someone who has a dear friend who is mentally ill, I've seen how those who are seeking help meet with obstacles that cause many to quit looking. How can we deal with someone when intervention is needed, but the person is unwilling? We can't go back to the warehousing and overmedicating of the past. I fear that this dilemma may never be solved.
Okay, but the Amish school shooting didn't get this much coverage--how much more safe and civil can you get? I don't think any shooting since Columbine has been so analyzed. There have been young victims before, and many-sided stories, too. To me it's all more of the same. Unfortunately. :-/
ReplyDelete(God, I'm feeling like the curiously-unmoved acquaintances I railed against who thought the shuttle Columbia destruction got way too much coverage.)
Two things: a person who has been declared mentally incompetent shouldn't be able to buy a rifle, either.
ReplyDeleteSecond: this is catnip to news organizations, made even more so by the manifesto mailed to NBC. It's many many times more dead than the Amish schoolgirls, and killed in a more spectacular fashion. Plus, the dead came from many different places (the local news here has done pieces on the the students from New York and New Jersey that were killed).
this is catnip to news organizations
ReplyDeleteExactly! And in their ongoing quest to convince me that what's happening right now is quite possibly the most important thing ever, their hyper-excitement over this has the effect of making me care less about it. :-/
It's funny (strange, not ha ha) how news works. This completely knocked the Imus business off the news. Sad to say, I'd take more of that in exchange for this.
ReplyDeleteAs for the Amish Shooting, my cable network carries only Philadelphia affiliates, so the coverage here was pretty extreme. I think some other things contributed to the difference in coverage of the Amish shootings: 1. The Amish kids had no email and no cell phones, and it was not so easy to find people from the community willing to offer soundbites on the day of the attack.
ReplyDelete2. Some of the attack may have been sexual in nature, and since the victims were children, the authorities kept many of the details close to the vest-and the media actually seemed to respect the decision.
3. The families would not be willing to speak with the media. The family of the most severely injured survivor has opted to release no information.
4. As Jackrabbit mentioned, there aren't many people who can say that someone down the block has a child going to that Amish schoolhouse. I know several people who know families with children at VT.
Actually, the newly built Amish schoolhouse just opened. They built it back quite a distance from the main road, and have increased security. Although the increased security is a necessity, it makes me quite sad.
In the Philly region, the VT shooting has replaced coverage of the city's frightening number of murders so far this year. I'm sure it will return, because I doubt that the problem of gun violence in Philadelphia has been solved in the past week.
You guys are explaining why the media sees the VT shootings as a bigger deal--more deaths (though like I said, 30 vs. 10 really doesn't make much difference to me personally), more spectacular, more chance for local angles, more people willing to talk, sensational video from the killer! Yeah, I get all that. But that doesn't mean I really understand it or agree with it. A sick individual shot and killed a bunch of people. End of story. That's how I feel. But if I come anywhere close to a news source lately I'm made to feel like I need to wallow in it. It's sickening to me.
ReplyDeleteOne thing that wasn't brought up that I thought of later about the Amish school shooting--you know, they're different from us. Weird. Almost like they're foreigners or something. So the news people don't really care about it as much. Might as well be people dying in Iraq, where they have a VT shooting at least every day. :-/
Jaydro, I can sympathize with where you're coming from, but I must admit I'm fascinated by the VT shooting, especially the package that he sent to NBC. I think they were right in airing parts of it. Call me a sicko, but I'd actually like to see more of those videos. I can also understand why anyone, particularly those who have any connection to the shootings, do not.
ReplyDeleteAnd here I was lamenting the "old days" when the head of NBC would have said "No one needs to see this crap." :-/
ReplyDelete