http://www.inrich.com/cva/ric/news/vatechshootings.apx.-content-articles-RTD-2008-04-11-0151.html

Quote :

"A majority of the survivors and families of the victims of the April 16 massacre at Virginia Tech have agreed not to sue the state in exchange for a share of an $11 million settlement, according to private attorneys and the governor's office."

Quote :

"According to parts of the settlement disclosed last month, representatives of those killed would get $100,000. The injured would share a pool of $800,000, with a cap of $100,000 per person, and their medical expenses would be paid. Another $1.75 million would be used to create a hardship fund that the victims could draw on. The total payout includes attorneys' fees and undisclosed charitable contributions."

Quote :

""Seriously injured victims will be well-compensated and have their health-care needs taken care of forever," according to a statement released by Grenier and co-counsel Douglas E. Fierberg. "Families who lost loved ones will be similarly compensated and cared for.""

Quote :

"Lawyers for survivors and victims' families have argued in documents filed with the state that Tech failed to protect students by not alerting them that a killer was possibly on campus. Cho killed his first two victims in a dormitory around 7:15 a.m., and Tech did not send out an e-mail notifying students until 9:26 a.m. At 9:40 a.m., Cho began killing 30 other students and teachers in Norris Hall."

Quote :

"Families and survivors have already received between $11,500 and $208,000 in payments from donations that poured into Virginia Tech in the days after the shootings."

This is what happens when you condition people for their entire lives that the government is responsible for them and the actions of other people and not the individual. The only person who can protect an individual is that individual, and the only person who is responsible for your safety is yourself. And the only person who is responsible for your actions is yourself. The sooner people realize this, the better off we will be.

If I had donated money, I would be suing the families for my donation back.

4/11/2008 8:53:59 AM

Why would you want your money back if you had donated it to them?

4/11/2008 8:58:12 AM

so the state is responsible for a nutjob's killing spree?

4/11/2008 9:19:09 AM

Quote :

"Why would you want your money back if you had donated it to them? "

Why should I have given them money if they are just going to take it at gunpoint from someone else? If they're going to sue the state for money over this, I would want money I donated back.

Quote :

"so the state is responsible for a nutjob's killing spree? "

Apparently so.

4/11/2008 11:13:56 AM

Quote :

"This is what happens when you condition people for their entire lives that the government is responsible for them and the actions of other people and not the individual. The only person who can protect an individual is that individual, and the only person who is responsible for your safety is yourself. And the only person who is responsible for your actions is yourself. The sooner people realize this, the better off we will be."

In this case, the state impaired an individual to protect themselves by suspending their 2nd amendment rights. In this instance, the state is responsible.

4/11/2008 11:37:40 AM

L
O
L



if I only had a few kids I could give up in the name of money. You can make money out of anything in this country...thats for certain.

4/11/2008 11:40:06 AM

I do not understand how the families got away with the lawsuit against VT. It was not Virgina Tech's fault some nutjob when on a running riot killing spree

4/11/2008 11:42:42 AM

if this lawsuit were based on the fact that firearms were suspended on campus and thus deprived citizens of their right to bear arms guaranteed by the 2nd amendment to the constitution, they may have a point.

4/11/2008 11:47:04 AM

Quote :

"In this case, the state impaired an individual to protect themselves by suspending their 2nd amendment rights. In this instance, the state is responsible."

Right, but these people aren't suing for the right for students to be lawfully armed, they're suing for money, so they don't get my support. The enemy of my enemy is not always my friend.

And for what it's worth, even if they were suing to change the law, the law is only in place because the people of Virginia believe it to make them safer, so the ultimate responsibility still falls on the people.

[Edited on April 11, 2008 at 11:50 AM. Reason : dfa]

4/11/2008 11:48:19 AM

However, you can sue the state for removing the right of one to defend themselves. And it is because of them that harm was done to their families, and thus, can sue for harm.

4/11/2008 12:00:30 PM

Quote :

"Seriously injured victims will be well-compensated and have their health-care needs taken care of forever," according to a statement released by Grenier and co-counsel Douglas E. Fierberg. "Families who lost loved ones will be similarly compensated and cared for."""

And what is wrong with this?

4/11/2008 12:03:09 PM

If a person is injured or killed on someone else's property they have legal rights that justify compensation.

The government owns VT.

These people have a right to sue VT.

It's the same as if VT were private property. At least that's how I see this.

4/11/2008 12:35:12 PM

^ I think people are arguing that it's BS to exercise those legal rights in this case.

I don't really see anything wrong with paying for the medical bills of people shot and were injured if they can't afford them, but I don't know about other aspects of the settlement.

But, I do not believe VT is responsible, and i'd be interested to see the supposed sekrit evidence the lawyers have that show VT IS responsible.

What they hinted at was that they should have shut the school down after the first murder, but at that point, it wasn't yet clear that it was some psycho on a spree. It could have just randomly been a murder, which is not a good reason to shut a school down, IMO.

4/11/2008 12:41:27 PM

Quote :

"However, you can sue the state for removing the right of one to defend themselves. And it is because of them that harm was done to their families, and thus, can sue for harm."

That argument requires that the victims have been willing to defend themselves with firearms but were specifically prevented by the school policy from doing so. And as I said, even then, they should only sue for a change to law and policy. Attendance at VT is still a voluntary action, the school should not be held responsible for the acts of criminals outside the control of the school.

Quote :

"And what is wrong with this?"

The fact that the school and the state are in no way shape or form responsible for the decisions and actions of a criminal. If I get shot by a mugger on a public street, should NC have to pay my medical bills and health care for life?

Quote :

"If a person is injured or killed on someone else's property they have legal rights that justify compensation. The government owns VT. These people have a right to sue VT. It's the same as if VT were private property. At least that's how I see this."

And I would say that you are just as retarded if you sued Target if you got mugged in a Target. Just because you are on someone's property doesn't automagicaly make them liable for the actions of other people, especially if those people are illegally on that property.

But if you are fine with this, then answer WHY VT and the state of virginia are responsible for the actions of Cho?

4/11/2008 4:36:14 PM

They weren't allowed to carry guns on campus to defend themselves.

4/11/2008 4:39:13 PM

But they chose to attend that college anyway. Their voluntary actions put them in harms way.

4/11/2008 4:45:38 PM

no reasonable person can argue that getting shot by a schoolmate an implied risk or attending college.

4/11/2008 4:47:01 PM

No, but being unable to defend yourself with your firearm is an implied risk (actually an explicit risk) of going somewhere which prohibits your right to bear arms.

And similarly, if that is not a reasonable risk to be assumed when attending college, then it should not be a risk that the college is liable to protect its students from.

4/11/2008 4:58:05 PM

maybe if people felt obligated to donate to a fund to support the families of victims instead of wearing ribbons there wouldn't be this problem

4/11/2008 8:06:17 PM

Quote :

"Families and survivors have already received between $11,500 and $208,000 in payments from donations that poured into Virginia Tech in the days after the shootings."

And the charity of others still has no bearing on whether VT is responsible here.

4/11/2008 10:05:03 PM