I say 100% NO. But I want to have a legitimate discussion on this because I want to write about it but I really want to hear reasons why any of you believe I'm wrong....or right... I'm not looking to get into a war of words here, I just want to know what it is that I'm missing when it comes to looking at this as objectively as possible... If you agree with some of my points and not with others please share your side of the argument because I really don't have any personal reasons to be for 'one side' or the other... I'm not a fan of the police, guns happen to scare me and I'm almost 99% sure that if I owned one myself, it would get used against me because I freeze in panic situations.....

what do you think would have been a better way to handle this?


Re to VTech, the boyfriend/exboyfriend of the girl who was shot was seen leaving the dorms around the time of the shooting....so it's was a pretty high likelihood that it WAS him. Random shootings are NOT THAT COMMON. So it was entirely plausible that this was absolutely a domestic issue and the cops were busy looking for the boyfriend/exboyfriend and they DID find him and had pulled him over when they found out about the other shootings.

Obviously no one in the residence hall saw or suspected it was this Cho guy so what should the cops do? Assume it's a random shooting, evacuate the entire campus, and the only real way to have done that would have been to use bullhorns...and then they'd unknowingly have warned the killer and who knows how many more people he could of killed if there was a big ass group of people standing outside? I mean honestly now... And perhaps next they should have blocked all roads in to the campus while allowing all the people ON campus to evacuate?

I'm not a fan of police in general as I feel there are too many bad apples who abuse their power and take advantage of people, but I have YET to hear ONE person make a compelling argument as to how this could have been handled better and in fact, I believe it most certainly could have been a lot worse.

I get that people want to find someone to blame because the only real person to blame is burning in the depths of hell right now, so if you want to blame someone, blame his parents for allowing their son to go his entire 23 year life and not taking greater action, blame the lack of information that is shared between institutions....school, medical, criminal etc.... That's where the failure was. But also remember that there are plenty of other people who probably have a similar history but they don't end up committing this kind of act, and that's likely because somewhere in the long road of that person's journey, something in the system IS working, be it the parents, criminal or mental community.

And don't blame gun laws or video games either because if someone is willing to MURDER someone, then stealing a gun is probably an inconvenience for them if anything. I mean really, do you think some crazed lunatic out there, who mind you, has been able to fool enough people for enough years, is going to walk into a gun store, be denied a gun and then say, "Well...so much for that idea, I guess I'll just go get some ice cream"...? Do you REALLY think that would happen?

And just a little side note here, for the record, had it not been for the rappers, rapping about Glocks I would probably have no idea what one was, so should we blame them? I'd blame them long before I'd blame the people selling guns or the politicians who debate laws on them. But again, the only REAL person to blame 100% for is Cho Seung-Hui. Period. End.

4/19/2007 3:08:37 AM

If you want to blame anyone, blame the rich kids and the charletans that pushed him to the brink. That's what happened in Columbine and that's what happened here.

4/19/2007 3:22:16 AM

^ Borderline Personality Disorder: characterized someone who consistently blames external forces for their own problems, and refuses to take personal responsibility for their own behavior.

you sound pathologic.

i think local law enforcement oughtta check you out for any unlicensed weapons, and maybe run a general background check on you.

4/19/2007 5:03:30 AM

they do run a background check, he shouldnt have been allowed to purchase a handgun because he had been institutionalized but he cleared two background checks.

Quote :

"but I have YET to hear ONE person make a compelling argument as to how this could have been handled better and in fact, I believe it most certainly could have been a lot worse. "

all of the experts have been saying that ANY shooting on a campus is supposed to be considered an active shooter situation, so they should not have assumed that he just left.

[Edited on April 19, 2007 at 7:57 AM. Reason : .]

4/19/2007 7:55:51 AM

^ What "experts"? And is this theory or reality, because at least around here, it sure doesn't seem to occur. How often do we hear of someone being killed or robbed at gun point on or around this campus, but I certainly don't recall the place ever being locked down for it.

4/19/2007 8:47:47 AM

"what ever happened to crazy"
-Chris Rock

4/19/2007 8:58:08 AM

Let's assume the system worked...and information was shared between the court system, school system, medical system....then true enough, he probably wouldn't have been cleared to buy a gun.... But in reality, even if that did work, he would have found another way to get one...

And I'm not against the mandatory waiting period either because I think it probably does do some good as there are plenty of people who act on impulse and don't think things through..however, in this case, it would have had zero effect because this was well planned and planned very far in advance

4/19/2007 1:04:28 PM

Quote :

"^ What "experts"?"

people who teach universities how to make response plans, and police officers who have had training on responding to shootings on campuses

4/19/2007 1:08:25 PM

Quote :

"Let's assume the system worked...and information was shared between the court system, school system, medical system....then true enough, he probably wouldn't have been cleared to buy a gun.... But in reality, even if that did work, he would have found another way to get one... "

Thats not entirely true in this case. B/c his treatment was changed to outpatient treatment, he was cleared to have a gun. If that hadn't changed they wouldn't have let him buy one.

Oh, and I don't think the Police failed here

[Edited on April 19, 2007 at 1:23 PM. Reason : k]

4/19/2007 1:22:44 PM

Quote :

"^ What "experts"? And is this theory or reality, because at least around here, it sure doesn't seem to occur. How often do we hear of someone being killed or robbed at gun point on or around this campus, but I certainly don't recall the place ever being locked down for it."

i totally agree. i remember one example from when i was in school... there was a murder/suicide behind the gym and they sent out an email, but they didn't shut down campus.

4/19/2007 2:49:09 PM

I think the police did okay. They should've sent out an e-mail about the first murders faster, but they couldn't have anticipated that he was going to come come back and started shooting at random.

4/19/2007 3:32:51 PM

I think the police did all they could with the knowledge they had...they proceeded in a logical manner

4/19/2007 4:44:40 PM