Along with the grieving in the aftermath of the senseless massacre of 32 innocent people at Virginia Tech, there is a natural tendency to look for a scapegoat -- something or someone, other than just the killer, to blame. Consequently, an abundance of Monday morning quarterbacking is going on right now. But are others partially culpable for the deadliest shooting rampage in modern American history?
Many people blame themselves and/or others for failing to do this or failing to do that or for not recognizing the "obvious" warning signs. Still others fault campus security and local law enforcement for not locking the whole place down after the original incident, which occurred a full two hours before the second and far more deadly one. Some are even wondering if students and faculty members should have considered rushing the assailant, like passengers aboard United Airlines Fight 93 did to their hijackers on 9/11.
Then, of course, we have the perennial ad hominem arguments about guns. This knee-jerk reaction occurs after any substantial shooting anywhere in the U.S. Gun control advocates once again are decrying how easy it is to acquire guns in the U.S., and especially in Virginia. Surely, they say, our lax gun laws are to blame for this monumental tragedy. Some even go as far as holding the persons who sold the guns to the shooter partially accountable. Gun thumpers, on the other hand, are pointing to the fact that guns are banned on college campuses in Virginia. They claim the students would have been able to defend themselves, and therefore there would have been fewer casualties, if not for that "awful" law.
However, I think everyone should just cool it on the guilt trips and finger-pointing. To correctly assess the blame in this matter, we must look to the principle of personal responsibility -- every individual is solely responsible for his or her actions. Cho Seung-Hui and only Cho Seung Hui bears the blame for this mass murder. As far as law enforcement officials can tell, it was his idea and nobody else's. There were no co-conspirators before, during, or after the fact. And despite all the second-guessing, there was no way his actions could have been predicted or prevented. Rushing him would have been foolhardy.
Yes, the guy was obviously a bit psychotic, but I dare say 99 out of 100 psychotic people would never have considered an act like he committed. And we can't lock up or otherwise detain every strange, goofy, or marginally psychotic person. It would be completely impractical. Besides, if it were attempted, most of us would be in big trouble anyway. How many of us don't act a little strange, at least once in while?
As far as security is concerned, no amount or level of it is going to stop someone who is intent on killing others and has no regard for his own life. That theme has been played out over and over again as the civilized world has attempted to thwart terrorism. And if Cho wanted to get some guns badly enough, no amount of gun control would have prevented him. I would also imagine that few, if any, Virginia Tech students would have had guns readily available to defend themselves, even had they been legally allowed to carry concealed weapons.
When students return to class next week at Virginia Tech, they will obviously have plenty on their hearts and minds. Two things they should not have to be concerned about are guilt and blame. Those emotions, in regard to this tragedy, should be buried with Mr. Cho Seung-Hui.
Terry Mitchell is a software engineer, freelance writer, amateur political analyst, and blogger from Virginia, USA. He posts a least one article a day to his blog - http://commenterry.blogs.com - on subjects such as current events, politics, technology, society and culture, religion, health and well-being, self improvement, personal finance, trivia, and sports. His commentaries offer a unique point of view that is not often found in mainstream media. His articles here on SearchWarp represent only a small portion of his work. All of it can be found on his blog. If you like his articles, you'll love his blog.
» left by robert melaccio sr. (1 year 216 days ago.)
Very good article. However, I look at what the killer stated and I look at some similar acts and it is very clear concerning what the catalyst was for him and them. They were outcasts of society. You call it choice. I wonder if they were given any? Of course it will fly right by even the most intelligent simply because they are part of the fuse which is the underlying aspects of our society today. Quite frankly, I think the answer is right before us and it always has been. However, as I state in my article, this world will never understand nor accept what drives some people to do these types of horrific acts. They will play it off as nonsense and that of itself proves the hypothesis. Now the act they performed can never be acceptable to decent people but to say we do not understand is a sin on us all. It is in my opinion because, and this is hard to accept, it is the very society we live in and the things we treat casually as norms that we do not see as having a major impact on some. Just why can’t they accept reality? However, it is the reality of our societies that we chose to ignore this and we accept these norms that drive some by nature to hurt, revenge and anger to do the deed of horror they do. Simply put, sensitive people, after years of abuse, finally may reach the point of no return. Some take their own life and some intend to take others with them. It just matters to say that “The World will never find a Solution” as long as we ignore that we are part of the cause
» left by james p krehbiel from scottsdale (1 year 214 days ago.)
Terry,
A well thought out article, but respectfully, I disagree. Insanity has been defined as doing the same self-defeating behaviors over and over again without change. We have had enough of these assaults to understand their nature. This murderer left all kinds of obvious signals and if anyone is responsible besides the killer, the administration of the university was at fault. Many college students are suspended from school in lieu of receiving psychiatric and psychological treatment. There was enough information to act on it and remove him from the university because he had a history of being of danger to himself or others as per his admission for psychiatric care. Thanks for your article Respond to this comment
Thanks for another thoughtful article. If I may wade in on this one, it is my opinion that no one is really at fault. The killer was obviously a sick, demented young man who was not in control of the forces within himself. The police and the university have legions of the mentally ill and emotionally disturbed to contend with in every single community in America. Virginia Tech alone probably has 100 students or more currently enrolled with histories of schizophrenia, bi-polar disorder, and other dibilitating illnesses in their backgrounds. Which of them is the next one to lose touch and go on a murderous rampage? Lock them all up? Suspend all of them? We know that is not possible or practical.
If anyone is to blame, it should be the lack of a connection between the medical community and state record keeping which allows people with well documented mental illnesses to legally purchase firearms. However, states only do what the legislatures compel them to do and politicians only do what is politically expedient to do.
The ability to purchase a gun is constitutionally guaranteed but should be balanced against the safety of the public. A man with a medical record like his should have never been allowed to purchase his handguns legally. In 2007, the technology is available to allow doctors to check one box on a form, which in turn is forwarded to gun purchase databases and shows up as a big red, flashing "Purchase Not Allowed" warning to gun sellers statewide. He could have turned to illegal street purchases but the state should have never aided and abetted his crime. Stopping this scenario is a matter of political will, which few politicians have for this issue. Respond to this comment
» left by Avis Ward(10,232) Avis Ward (1 year 211 days ago.)
A very good article. To answer the question this article asks, I am in total agreement with Joseph. No one is to blame BUT since we as a society like to cast blame, I again, agree with Joseph's comments. I ask, what corrective measures will now be taken, if everyone's correct about who is at fault? Respond to this comment
Was this article helpful to you? Leave a Public Comment or
Question:
Disclaimer: All information on this site is provided for informational purposes only! By no means is any
information presented herein intended to substitute for the advice provided to you by any health care or other professional
or organization.
