This blog explores the contemporary political and cultural trends from a distinct perspective
Questions
Published on April 18, 2007 By Bahu Virupaksha In Current Events
First my most sincere sorrow to the families of the 33 victims of the cruel gunman who has pitilessly snuffed out the lives of promising young men, women and teachers of Virginia Tech. Like the rest of the world, I too am outraged at the incident and am trying to make sense of it all. This is not the time to even ask whether the University Administration headed by Professor Charles Stegar should have closed the University after the first shootinf at Jonhnston Hall at 7:15 in the morning. No one could have predicted the train of events, horrendous and utterly beyond imagination.

I think that the University handled the aftermath of the tragedy in a graceful manner and the sombre convocation touched the hearts of many all over the world.

My point is different. Choe Suing Hui the perpetrator of the Virginia Tech massacre has had a history of violent behavior including stalking of women. His English Professor and Chairmen of the Department had in the past drawn attention to the violent imagery in some of his written assignments. She had in fact drawn the attention of the University Administration to the fact that the student seemed to be sick and needed to be restrained from harming fellow students. No one took this warning seriously. Why?

Had the teacher's warnings been taken seriously the student could have been helped and 32 lives saved. It is no ones case that each time the chairman of a Department complains about a student the Administration must act. However by ignoring the complaint the University set the stage for a far graeter catastrophe.

The students and faculty showed great courage and presence of mind and in one case a girl risked her own life to warn other students. A Professor shielded his stdents with his own body and the fact is that Professor was pingnantly a survior of the Holocaust only to lose his own life in this brutal manner.

I have written earlier and I do so again, but I do feel that tougher gun control is essentail to prevent more such atacks. In the immediate aftermath of the tragedy everyone will suppot the Brady Proposotion, but as the dust settles it is business as usual. I do hope that the victims of 4/17 will be honored by stricter gun control laws. Remember that the killer was able to acquire his two handguns without any difficulty in Blackburg because Virginia has very relaxed gun purchase requirements without the mandatory waiting period.

Comments
on Apr 18, 2007
Thank you for writing Bahu. This is a challenge, clearly, for our society in the United Staes, but also workldwide. Violent solutions to our pain and suffering seem only to ignite the passions and bring about more pain and suffering. While it is easy for some to say gun control will not prevent violence, from evidence, it certainy does reduce death by gunshot.

Be well.
on Apr 18, 2007
Speaking as an outsider this was a tragic event. However, and I'm sure there must be a reason, I wonder why Virginia Tech was not evacuated after the first shootings. The second shootings apparently occurred two hours later. I wonder whether the authorities at the university were being too cautious or too blase in their decision-making.

The Superintendent of Virginia State Police said at the news conference today that there may be no link between the first shootings and the second incident. That sounds to me like an excuse and a cover up after the first shooting. It doesn't quite add up. There was a crazy guy on that campus and I'll be surprised if they find two.

On the news conference itself: I am amazed that there was such disorganization. I know those people are grieving but there seemed to be no semblance of a chairman and a group of speakers. Rather, it was flit in and out to the microphone. Take over, move away, take over again. I am sorry but it was a complete balls-up and someone should have taken the reins.
on Apr 18, 2007
Speaking as an outsider this was a tragic event. However, and I'm sure there must be a reason, I wonder why Virginia Tech was not evacuated after the first shootings. The second shootings apparently occurred two hours later. I wonder whether the authorities at the university were being too cautious or too blase in their decision-making.


The University is not a building. It is a campus, of many buildings spread out over 1300 acres. The second shootings occurred on the opposite side of the campus. Why would you evacaute the whole downtown of a city for a shooting that occurs in one building a mile away? That is about what the sitaution was. And as for evacuating all the people, there are almost 30,000 people on that campus. Instead of sending 30,000 people out onto the grounds to be made target practice of by another Charles Whitman, it would seem that the more prudent action would be to lock them in. Which in this case would have had no affect since the shooter did that when he killed the other 30 people.

It is always easy to second guess decisions once you have all the facts. Hindsight is 20/20 after all.
on Apr 18, 2007
The University did not "set the stage" - the perp set the stage.

I hate it that when something like this happens, it's all about recrimination, not the freakin' perp. The conceipt that "if only.... this wouldn't have happened" is just that, a conceipt. A horrible thing happened for which there is no perfect, or even highly effective, preventive. Focus on the poor victims, including the University - it's a victim, too, and is not "the problem". The lack of stricter gun control laws is not "the problem" either - he would have just had weapons 2 weeks later or whatever the "waiting period" is.

Our society has the right to expect its members to respect the life & well-being of its citizens, who wish to have a free and open society. Turning college campuses into fortresses with checkpoints at every door is not the answer. Returning to the concept of "in loco parentis" might be a place to start, but the civil libertarian sharks will never permit that.
on Apr 18, 2007
There was no evacuation or lockdown after the first incident because the police had been told it was a domestic situation and the shooter had driven off in a pickup truck shortly after. the relaxed gun laws here in Virginia do not exist, we still require background checks. He fit every requirement the state and federal government asked of him. He could have bought his guns anywhere in the U.S. if he wanted to. It's not a question of gun laws. This freak was bent on killing folks, if he had to stay up all night with his chemistry book making friggin' dynamite or plastique, it would have happened. Quit blaming everyone else and place the blame squarely where it should be. On the dead killer.
on Apr 18, 2007
VD: I thought it was video games/Hollywood/the parents' fault.
on Apr 19, 2007
is always easy to second guess decisions once you have all the facts. Hindsight


I too believe that there is no way the University Administration could have predicted the Second Spree.

However, Gun Control or at the very least regulation of gun purchase should be thought of. In any cast this incident will over the next few days spark off opy cat incidents and educational institutions should brace themselves for more such violent incidents over the short run.
on Apr 19, 2007

at the very least regulation of gun purchase should be thought of

It has been and is in force.  There is a large misconception among many outside this country that one can walk into a convenience store and buy a gun.  That is not the truth.  It is very regulated, but not banned.  There is a big difference. 

on Apr 22, 2007
There a quiote a few issues here. First, I think University Teachers should have more control over the class and inappropriate behaviour on the part of any one should not be tolerated in the name of "liberal political correctness". When I was in grad school over 2 decades back, even a mildly inappropriate re,ark/behavior would invite a reproach from the chairman. And in the case of this killer, even demented rantings in his assignments was excused. Second, gun control. ASt the very least the purchase of a gun by somebody with a history of mental health problems should be prevented.

I am a civilibertarian but would not defend violent language and behavior in the name of personal freedom.
on Apr 22, 2007

Second, gun control. ASt the very least the purchase of a gun by somebody with a history of mental health problems should be prevented.

It already is.  The problem then becomes a right of privacy.

on Apr 22, 2007
One of the larges mass murders in American history (the Happy Land Social Club fire) was committed with a dollar's worth of gasoline and a match. 87 people died.

Shall we ban the private possession of gasoline and matches to prevent a recurrence, Bahu?


And the 1913 Massacre in Calumet Michigan was done with nothing more than a shout and the barring of a door. 73 children died in that one.

The problem with gun control is the laws already in place weren't followed. Most likely because they didn't want to stain his record, this man's mental health problems were not reported, which would have at least prevented his LEGAL purchase of the weapons, and increased the possibility that he could have been caught in attempting to obtain black market weapons.

If the laws already in place aren't even being followed, what business do we have asking for NEW ones?