Virginia Tech Campus Shut Down - Shooting Incident

[Groundhog]

Originally Posted by Qwikshot

The problem was this guy was consistent with his stories, they had the same premise, therefore you have a red flag.

Yeah, and I don't disagree with that at all. But where do you draw the line? Will this discourage budding Stephen Kings?

[King of New York]

Originally Posted by wade moore

BTW -

Not a super close relationship, but discovered that the Speech Therapist at the elementry school my Fiance teaches at lost her Neice/Goddaughter in this incident yesterday.

I gotta get my kid in your fiance's class. That would rock.

On a sadder note--the VT alums are just crushed around here, understandably so. And the W&M undergrads are struggling too. Most every in-state W&M student (about two-thirds) knows a whole bunch of VT students from high school--some of those VT students are safe, but some of them did not make it.

[Groundhog]

Originally Posted by HiFiRevival

One can only hope!

LOL, I was waiting for that.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by Qwikshot

The problem was this guy was consistent with his stories, they had the same premise, therefore you have a red flag.

I don't know the whole story but a lot of it may depend upon the actual accuracy of his stories. If they always include replicas of his situation and the main character is an exact replica of the person writing the story than it should definitely be a red flag. If the stories include actual names, I would also red flag it immediately.

Hell, I went through problems in school before I learned to turn the situation to my favor but my thoughts never included more than beating up those giving me trouble (or the actual opposite, the hero that saves the day stories-- what better way to show someone up than to step up in a situation where they cower).


So basically the story now is that it was all one person and it wasn't exactly because of jealousy but that is what finally set him off?

I hated when I heard about this and there being two sets of shootings. As odd as it sounds, at least a shooting of a girlfriend (ex-girlfriend) and the person you found them with can have some sort of explanation to it (doesn;t make it right but the thought process can be somewhat understood) but then going on a spree against people that had nothing to do with that situation is completely illogical. Clarification: I would have hated hearing about it no matter what but the logic just bugged me.

[bhlloy]

This is nothing but pure speculation on my part, but wasn't the second guy killed in the dorm the RA who responded to the situation? So maybe he went looking for the current boyfriend or somebody who he thought was the current boyfriend who was in class at the time?

[Galaril]

The thing I don't get is if the guy was a loner borderline Charles Manson type what was he doing with a pretty attractive girlfriend? I am guessing when (if) the truth comes out we see he was pissed off at this girl after she refused his advances.

[eiskrap]

Originally Posted by Galaril

The thing I don't get is if the guy was a loner borderline Charles Manson type what was he doing with a pretty attractive girlfriend? I am guessing when (if) the truth comes out we see he was pissed off at this girl after she refused his advances.

Or maybe he wasn't quite the loner that the media is making him out to be?

[wade moore]

I put this in the ping: mods thread, but thought some people might miss it there..

This image has been floating around various sites I read and via e-mail...

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by eiskrap

Or maybe he wasn't quite the loner that the media is making him out to be?

That could be it. I even saw one of the networks (CNN?) saying the Parents also were loners as well since no one in the neighborhood really knew thema nd they kept to themselves. Doesn't the media think it could just be they are a quiet family like most asian people in that age group?

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by Galaril

The thing I don't get is if the guy was a loner borderline Charles Manson type what was he doing with a pretty attractive girlfriend? I am guessing when (if) the truth comes out we see he was pissed off at this girl after she refused his advances.

Has the fact that she even knew him been confirmed? I don't think so (I haven't hear "the latest" yet though). Early on, the rumor was that she was an ex-girlfriend, but since then, we've found out that this guy was a complete loner, never spoke a word, and that she had a long-term relationship. My guess is that it ranges from a possible stalking of a girl that never even knew the guy existed, or perhaps a brief encounter that wasn't really anything, but he blew up into some huge deal in his mind, to maybe a persistent level of contact from him that she knew about, but didn't really think was all that serious.

I'm more concerned about the fact that he had apparently set a dorm fire and been accused of previous stalkings. Even without the writings, those are 2 huge red flags that, if true, should have prompted action. I'm somewhat sympathetic to someone with mental issues, or depression and the like, but there comes a time when the line has to be drawn, for the safety of others, where it appears that either the treatment being given isn't effective, or the person is not following through on getting treatment or taking prescribed drugs, etc., such that it requires the intervention of authorities. And I think that's the case not just on a college campus, but in society as a whole. It's just that much worse when you allow someone like that to live in a dorm situation, on a college campus, away from whatever support structure that person has. It's hard enough for a well-adjusted kid to learn how to deal with college life; but for someone like this...I think we see how bad it can get.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by Galaril

That could be it. I even saw one of the networks (CNN?) saying the Parents also were loners as well since no one in the neighborhood really knew thema nd they kept to themselves. Doesn't the media think it could just be they are a quiet family like most asian people in that age group?

There a difference between "being a loner" and being anti-social. By all accounts of people who really didn't know him but tried to interact with him, he was the latter. He may have fed off of his family's quiet, keep-to-ourselves nature, but it turned into something more destructive (obviously).

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

There a difference between "being a loner" and being anti-social. By all accounts of people who really didn't know him but tried to interact with him, he was the latter. He may have fed off of his family's quiet, keep-to-ourselves nature, but it turned into something more destructive (obviously).

Judging from this article, I really doubt his parents ever saw this coming. Imagine being these people and having the rest of the world come down on you. They're victims of this as well.......

Killer's parents hospitalised 'with shock'
Wednesday Apr 18 13:00 AEST
By ninemsn staff

The parents of mass killer Cho Seung-hi were hospitalised with shock and had not attempted suicide, contrary to reports in Korean media.

Korea's Yonhap news agency reported that Cho's parents, who ran a dry cleaning shop in Centreville, Virginia, had been hospitalised after learning of ther son's killing rampage at Virginia Tech University.

Rumours earlier spread through Korean media sources that Cho's parents had attempted suicide.

The Korea Herald, quoting Radio Korea in Los Angeles, reported that Cho's father tried to slash his wrists. His mother had reportedly swallowed a toxic drug.

Cho was a permanent resident of the US, who came there to live there with his parents in 1992.

His sister was a graduate of Princeton University, according to the Korea Times.

[Ksyrup]

No one's parents ever see it coming. The parents of the Columbine kids were "shocked" as well. That doesn't surprise me. It's hard to be objective about your kids. But that's even more reason why the school should have intervened. I know he's not in grade school or anything, but I don't think it would be outside the school's bounds to bring the graphic writings, dorm fire, and stalkings (if true) to his parent's attention. If those things are true, and they knew about them, then this is less about shock and more about denial.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

No one's parents ever see it coming. The parents of the Columbine kids were "shocked" as well. That doesn't surprise me. It's hard to be objective about your kids. But that's even more reason why the school should have intervened. I know he's not in greade school or anything, but I don't think it would be outside the school's bounds to bring the graphic writings, dorm fire, and stalkings (if true) to his parent's attention. If those things are true, and they knew about them, then this is less about shock and more about denial.

He's of legal age at that point. They could talk to the parents, but there's not a whole lot that can probably be done by the parents with a kid like this. Dorm fires and stalkings should have been referenced to the campus police or city police. Both are crimes. Perhaps he would have been on the radar a bit more and this might have been avoided.

The parents raised a perfectly good girl who graduated from Princeton. Obviously, there was something triggered in this other kid. Referencing him to the authorities when the early signs took place probably was the only way to stop this.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Dorm fires and stalkings should have been referenced to the campus police or city police. Both are crimes. Perhaps he would have been on the radar a bit more and this might have been avoided.

According to the two former roomates who were interviewed by CNN, police investigated the stalkings & came to their apartment more than once. But, at least according to the ex-roomies, no charges were ever filed by any of the girls.

Not clear whether those were city cops or campus cops (I'm guessing the latter) but if no charges were ever filed, their hands would have been somewhat tied I imagine.

[Ksyrup]

I'm sorry, but this goes beyond what I thought we were going to find about this guy. There are warning signs, and then there are freaking flashing lights and loud buzzers going off, with neon signs pointing to the guy:




"It was not bad poetry. It was intimidating," poet Nikki Giovanni, one of his professors, told CNN Wednesday. "At first I thought, OK, he's trying to see what the parameters are. Kids curse and talk about a lot of different things. He stayed in that spot. I said, 'You can't do that.' He said, 'Yes, I can.' I said, 'No, not in my class.'"

Giovanni said her students were so unnerved by Cho's behavior that she had security check on her room and eventually had him taken out of her class. Some students had stopped coming to class, saying Cho was taking photos of them with his cell phone, she said.

[Subby]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Some students had stopped coming to class, saying Cho was taking photos of them with his cell phone, she said.

That's pretty chilling....

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

He's of legal age at that point. They could talk to the parents, but there's not a whole lot that can probably be done by the parents with a kid like this. Dorm fires and stalkings should have been referenced to the campus police or city police. Both are crimes. Perhaps he would have been on the radar a bit more and this might have been avoided.

The parents raised a perfectly good girl who graduated from Princeton. Obviously, there was something triggered in this other kid. Referencing him to the authorities when the early signs took place probably was the only way to stop this.

I understand that, but the point is that the criminal stuff is really just an outward signal of his issues. "Treating" this kid by finding a way to charge him with stalking, etc., isn't really going to stop what's coming. If anything, it would probably push him over the edge even quicker. From what I've read, this is someone who had some of the same issues other kids have, but they were made worse by depression or whatever other mental issues he might have had. So at that point, contacting people within his support structure makes more sense than trying to find a way to arrest him.

One way or the other, he needed to be out of that environment and in a situation where he could be monitored. And the only people with an incentive to do that were his family. The school could only do so much, and the police were only looking for chargeable offenses. People who cared about his well-being and who were likely knowledgeable about his past history should have been contacted. If they chose not to do anything, then so be it.

[RedKingGold]

I'd really like to get EF27's take on the whole issue (considering his background).

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I understand that, but the point is that the criminal stuff is really just an outward signal of his issues. "Treating" this kid by finding a way to charge him with stalking, etc., isn't really going to stop what's coming. If anything, it would probably push him over the edge even quicker. From what I've read, this is someone who had some of the same issues other kids have, but they were made worse by depression or whatever other mental issues he might have had. So at that point, contacting people within his support structure makes more sense than trying to find a way to arrest him.

One way or the other, he needed to be out of that environment and in a situation where he could be monitored. And the only people with an incentive to do that were his family. The school could only do so much, and the police were only looking for chargeable offenses. People who cared about his well-being and who were likely knowledgeable about his past history should have been contacted. If they chose not to do anything, then so be it.

I understand where you're coming from, but...

As a lawyer it surprises me that you are thinking this way...

All of these warning signs and "obvious" things are fine and good (although I would be willing to bet every large college has at LEAST one or two students with the same 'warning' signs)... but what could the school do? Yes, the kid was troubled... they tried to get him counseling... yes, the kid did suspicious things... they investigated and couldn't get anything concrete to charge him with...

So what do they do? If they kick him out, that's lawsuit city - civil rights violation...

This is an adult at a public university.. there's just only so much you can do...

[st.cronin]

I've known a lot of odd, anti-social people. None of them, to my knowledge, has ever gone on a killing spree.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I've known a lot of odd, anti-social people. None of them, to my knowledge, has ever gone on a killing spree.

Exactly.

[Ksyrup]

I'm not saying they had to do anything that affected his civil rights. You simply alert people who are in a position to do something for him. The university and the authorities have to treat him like an adult; the police are obviously even more restricted than the university in what they can do. His family/friends not only likely know about what could be setting him off, but have a relationship with him and care about him and are in the best position to at least attempt to do something.

In this particular case, it might not have changed anything, but it's unfortunate that it never got to that point (as far as we know), because rather than a suspension/expulsion or arrest (unless justified), what would have been most effective was people who cared about him making sure he got the help he needed. And precisely because the school and authorities can only do so much, that's when you get family involved. if they wash their hands of him, or can't get through to him, then the school/authorities have to decide if there is anything in his behavior that would justify taking those actions they are permitted to take. I think the school was actually doing something, and the authorities probably did everything they legally could up to that point. That's precisely the problem. Maybe if he had taken an interim step - crossed the line and directly threatened someone or a girl was willing to press charges on him - between his passive/aggressive behavior and killing 30 people, this would have been avoided (or pushed back). But I agree they probably did everything they could do - except try to get people who know him to help him. And I think that's a key missing piece here.

[st.cronin]

Everything is obvious in retrospect.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I've known a lot of odd, anti-social people. None of them, to my knowledge, has ever gone on a killing spree.

I can't say I've ever known an "odd, anti-social" person who writes intensely graphic and violent stories, has been accused of stalking women, is not just "anti-social" but seen even by educators as being angry and a complete loner, is potentially destructive (has the dorm fire thing been confirmed)...this guy was way over the line of simply being a mal-adjusted 20-something who people considered odd/bizarre.

And if you have known people like that...I hope someone got them some help.

[Blade6119]

I wont say anything in this thread other then god bless virginia tech and the poor families of the victims. I know i was really uplifted by all the banners and signs all over my campus here in arizona with well wishes for the VT folks, and ive tried to convey that to my friends that attend VT.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

Everything is obvious in retrospect.

No, I'd say if someone brought me the pieces of the puzzle the day before and asked what I thought, I'd say I wouldn't want to risk being anywhere near that dude.

Like I said earlier, I'm shocked that there was such visible evidence of what this guy was about to become - students talking about him possibly being a school shooter, students leaving class because he was talking pictures of them, being ac omplete loner who never spoke a word to anyone, including in class, instructors askign for security to monitor the classes he was in and removing him from class because of his writings and referring him to a counselor, the stalking and fire allegations, his roommates saying he talked about suicide...Come on.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I can't say I've ever known an "odd, anti-social" person who writes intensely graphic and violent stories, has been accused of stalking women, is not just "anti-social" but seen even by educators as being angry and a complete loner, is potentially destructive (has the dorm fire thing been confirmed)...this guy was way over the line of simply being a mal-adjusted 20-something who people considered odd/bizarre.

And if you have known people like that...I hope someone got them some help.

*shrug* We're all capable of incredible evil. When it actually happens that somebody does something like this, its probably natural to guess that somebody could have done something to prevent it. And maybe its true - I just think its absurd speculation.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I'm not saying they had to do anything that affected his civil rights. You simply alert people who are in a position to do something for him. The university and the authorities have to treat him like an adult; the police are obviously even more restricted than the university in what they can do. His family/friends not only likely know about what could be setting him off, but have a relationship with him and care about him and are in the best position to at least attempt to do something.

In this particular case, it might not have changed anything, but it's unfortunate that it never got to that point (as far as we know), because rather than a suspension/expulsion or arrest (unless justified), what would have been most effective was people who cared about him making sure he got the help he needed. And precisely because the school and authorities can only do so much, that's when you get family involved. if they wash their hands of him, or can't get through to him, then the school/authorities have to decide if there is anything in his behavior that would justify taking those actions they are permitted to take. I think the school was actually doing something, and the authorities probably did everything they legally could up to that point. That's precisely the problem. Maybe if he had taken an interim step - crossed the line and directly threatened someone or a girl was willing to press charges on him - between his passive/aggressive behavior and killing 30 people, this would have been avoided (or pushed back). But I agree they probably did everything they could do - except try to get people who know him to help him. And I think that's a key missing piece here.

There are some pretty specific regulations involving this stuff. For instance - Universities cannot even release grades to parents without the student's permission. I don't know that the university could just notify the parents that their child is derranged.

And, if they could, how do we know they didn't? It sure sounds like they did quite a bit to try and help/deal with this kid.

I just don't understand what you wanted them to do that you really think would have changed this event. I wouldn't be surprised if they did notify the parents 9if they could) and i'm not sure why you're assuming they didn't.

Idano.. I'm just very frustrated by so many people trying to apply logic to this insane situation and thinking that they could have prevented it if they were in the shoes of adminstration at VA Tech.


For instance - something I've heard now is that the kid went back to his dorm room before going to Norris. So if the school went into lockdown, he would have been locked in his dorm building along with all of the other kids. So what happens then? This Monday Morning Quarterbacking is just frustrating.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

No, I'd say if someone brought me the pieces of the puzzle the day before and asked what I thought, I'd say I wouldn't want to risk being anywhere near that dude.

Like I said earlier, I'm shocked that there was such visible evidence of what this guy was about to become - students talking about him possibly being a school shooter, students leaving class because he was talking pictures of them, being ac omplete loner who never spoke a word to anyone, including in class, instructors askign for security to monitor the classes he was in and removing him from class because of his writings and referring him to a counselor, the stalking and fire allegations, his roommates saying he talked about suicide...Come on.

So here's what I want to know.

What would you in this infinite wisdom have done to prevent this tragedy if you were a VT administrator?

[st.cronin]

If I had only thought to buy a lottery ticket with the numbers 5, 13, 24, 30, 32 and 49 on Saturday I would be a millionaire. I'm such an idiot.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

*shrug* We're all capable of incredible evil. When it actually happens that somebody does something like this, its probably natural to guess that somebody could have done something to prevent it. And maybe its true - I just think its absurd speculation.

I'm not saying it could be prevented. This all stemmed from the "parents are in shock" story. So my point is, this guy was far enough along a certain path that there is no way his parents (or whatever family a person in this position has) should not have been told about what was going on. I don't care if he was 10, 20 or 40 years old. What they could do for him is anyone's guess - maybe nothing, or maybe they're paying his way through school and decide he needs to come home to get help and be in the best support structure possible before he goes back to school. Don't confuse my comments with me thinking this could all have been avoided. But I think the most effective form of intervention/treatment he could have gotten would have been from family. In the end it might not have mattered, but it's unfortunate it never happened.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I'm not saying it could be prevented. This all stemmed from the "parents are in shock" story. So my point is, this guy was far enough along a certain path that there is no way his parents (or whatever family a person in this position has) should not have been told about what was going on. I don't care if he was 10, 20 or 40 years old. What they could do for him is anyone's guess - maybe nothing, or maybe they're paying his way through school and decide he needs to come home to get help and be in the best support structure possible before he goes back to school. Don't confuse my comments with me thinking this could all have been avoided. But I think the most effective form of intervention/treatment he could have gotten would have been from family. In the end it might not have mattered, but it's unfortunate it never happened.

My guess is that even if a team of doctors sat down with his parents and said "we believe your son will one day become a homicidal maniac" the parents would still be shocked by what happened.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

And if you have known people like that...I hope someone got them some help.

It's so much more complicated then you're making it sound.

We haven't figured out how to cure the "the crazies" yet. (Those Columbine kids were medded up like crazy, and subject to constant cousneling - all of which may or may not have been responsible for setting them over the edge).

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by wade moore

So here's what I want to know.

What would you in this infinite wisdom have done to prevent this tragedy if you were a VT administrator?

I think you're misconstruing my comments as some sort of attack on VT's administration. My comments are obviously tied to this specific situation, but are really general in nature - what is the most effective way of dealing with this? And it's disappointing to me to believe, from all appearances, that the family did not know about what was going on. I don't think any amount of authority invention of any nature, short of locking the guy up and throwing away the key (which might not have even been necessary if he was medically treated), would have stopped what happened. But that the best thing for someone like this - the most effective way to ensure that whatever program or treatment this person has gotten or needs to get happens - is to involve family.

I don't pretend to know what laws govern what universities or police can tell parents/family members - I'm not even saying they need to give medical information, so much as general information about what has occurred - but it's just my personal opinion that this is only effectively treated if the person wants treatment, is in a position to acknowledge that, and/or has people who care about him who are willing to try to assist with that process. That's all. Referring him to counseling, when he has no one making sure he even goes, just doesn't seem all that effective to me.

The bottom line for me is that leaving this kind of person ultimately responsible for making sure he gets treatment, when his mind may be such that he is unwilling or unable to take those steps needs to help himself, is crazy. In saying that, I absolutely acknowledge the limitations of the schools/authorities to do much else. But if this is SOP in our society for how we deal with mentally ill people, then we have a real problem.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by molson

It's so much more complicated then you're making it sound.

We haven't figured out how to cure the "the crazies" yet. (Those Columbine kids were medded up like crazy, and subject to constant cousneling - all of which may or may not have been responsible for setting them over the edge).

I'm not looking for a cure...just for as much to be done as could have been done. I think I've said it a couple of times, but I'll say it again...it may not ultimately prevent anything from happening, but it seems to me that we've left a pretty big hole in our attempts to prevent something like this is we don't try everything legal to see that this kind of person is treated.

[RedKingGold]

Originally Posted by wade moore

As a lawyer it surprises me that you are thinking this way...

Not me. You'd be surprised how many people around my law school are pretty closed minded.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

My guess is that even if a team of doctors sat down with his parents and said "we believe your son will one day become a homicidal maniac" the parents would still be shocked by what happened.

And quite frankly, I would hold them partially responsible for this, if that scenario (or something more likely to have occurred) actually happened and they ignored it or did nothing to at least make sure those people were wrong. All you can ask is that the proper people be informed and do whatever they can to help. After that, whatever happens, happens. And again, my point here is asking the person exhibiting the bizarre behavior to make sure he is treating himself doesn't really seem all that effective - or at least, has a strong likelihood of being absolutely ineffective. And then we're left with the potential consequences.

[st.cronin]

The family apparently had him committed at one point, according to msn.com.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by RedKingGold

Not me. You'd be surprised how many people around my law school are pretty closed minded.

How am I being close minded? If anything, I think I'm trying to think outside the box by recognizing that it doesn't appear that the way we deal with people like this is very effective, so what else can be done to help prevent something like this is the future?

I'm not a doctor, so I have no doubt I'm being more black and white than reality would allow, but I'm just pointing out what appears to be a big hole in how we deal with these types of situations. I'm actually more sympathetic to this guy than I would otherwise be, because it seems like his prior medical history undoubtedly factored into why this happened. So how do we deal with his downward spiral to try to prevent him from bottoming out? That's all I'm raising here.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

The family apparently had him committed at one point, according to msn.com.

And that's great, it shows they knew something (which I think we pretty much knew from the fact that he had a prior medical history that likely occurred while he was teen). Again, they might have done everything they could to help him, and this particular situation would have gone down just like it did. I would hope there is some way for a school or authorities to bring actions to a family member's attention, because knowing what they know, perhaps they would have come and taken him out of school if they were told about the writings, or the dorm fire, or the stalking criminal investigation. It sounds like they would have known he was going down that path again.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

How am I being close minded? If anything, I think I'm trying to think outside the box by recognizing that it doesn't appear that the way we deal with people like this is very effective, so what else can be done to help prevent something like this is the future?

I agree that as a society, we don't yet have a good handle on mental health issues (either scientificaly, culturally, legally, or medicaly). But it's not like we're not trying, we're certainly not ignoring it, and it certainly looks like this guy's issues were at least addressed to some extent.

I guess I do understand the "gotta do something" approach. But I'm not convinced in the slightest that the "something" we come up with is better than nothing in every case. We can and do make things worse. (Lobotomies came from the "gotta do something" view)

In other words, second-guessing the treatment of a crazy person is crazier than that crazy person in the first place.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by molson

I agree that as a society, we don't yet have a good handle on mental health issues (either scientificaly, culturally, legally, or medicaly). But it's not like we're not trying, we're certainly not ignoring it, and it certainly looks like this guy's issues were at least addressed to some extent.

I guess I do understand the "gotta do something" approach. But I'm not convinced in the slightest that the "something" we come up with is better than nothing in every case.

If it's true that schools/authorities are so legally restricted in what they can tell even family members, then I guess we, as a society, have already chosen to draw the line between an individual's right to privacy and what is in the best interests of the society as a whole. But I'm not talking about calling up the parents of a legal adult and giving them medical information (although it would be interesting to know whether he was still on his parents' health plan, because I'm entitled to discuss my kids' service with our health plan), I'm simply suggesting that they be told more general behavioral stuff, or even about the criminal investigation, which I think would be public record, if a complaint was filed (even if no charges were ultimately brought), right?

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by molson

In other words, second-guessing the treatment of a crazy person is crazier than that crazy person in the first place.

I'll admit that part of my issue here is that I've never quite understood the "you have a condition affecting your mind, so here are some pills we're trusting you to give yourself to make you feel better" approach to treating mental health problems. I had a distant family member with some issues, and they were never kept in check because this is how she was treated.

It's one thing for someone with a heart condition to make a conscious decision to ignore advice and refuse to take medicine that will help them. It's another to give someone with a condition that makes them susceptible to bizarre, extreme, irrational thoughts the authority to make sure they treat themselves. That has always been a question/concern of mine. And the only way I can see at least helping the process - again, short of institutionalizing someone - is to make sure, to the extent possible, someone is there to provide that support. It might be for nothing, but it would be better than what I see going on now, for the most part.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

You knew this would happen. It's now being linked to violent video games in the media. Jack Thompson will likely be riding into Blacksburg on a white horse at any moment.

http://dubiousquality.blogspot.com/2...s-descend.html

[st.cronin]

hxxp://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2059730,00.html

Teacher's bravery let students flee


Ewen MacAskill
Wednesday April 18, 2007
The Guardian


A survivor of the Holocaust died trying to save his students from the Virginia Tech gunman, it emerged yesterday.
Liviu Librescu, 76, who survived the Nazi killings, later escaped from communist Romania to become a respected aeronautics expert.

"My father blocked the doorway with his body and asked the students to flee," his son, Joe Librescu, said from his home outside Tel Aviv.

Student Alec Calhoun told the Guardian how Mr Librescu's bravery bought him precious seconds after the killer started shooting in the next room. "I thought I was going to die. I started to make a barricade of desks."


Article continues

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr Calhoun went to jump out of the window. It was then he saw Mr Librescu. "I hung on to the ledge. The professor was trying to hold the door closed. I was the last one out that was not wounded."
When he finally forced his way in, Mr Librescu threw himself in front of the attacker, a student told Israel's Army Radio. "He was killed but thanks to him his students lived," the student said. Messages were posted on the web praising the professor. "No act could be more selfless." one poster wrote.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

If it's true that schools/authorities are so legally restricted in what they can tell even family members, then I guess we, as a society, have already chosen to draw the line between an individual's right to privacy and what is in the best interests of the society as a whole. But I'm not talking about calling up the parents of a legal adult and giving them medical information (although it would be interesting to know whether he was still on his parents' health plan, because I'm entitled to discuss my kids' service with our health plan), I'm simply suggesting that they be told more general behavioral stuff, or even about the criminal investigation, which I think would be public record, if a complaint was filed (even if no charges were ultimately brought), right?

Picked this as it seemed to sum up what I wanted to talk about.

I understand better where you're coming from. But I still think you are underestimating what the university could/should tell the parents. Like I said, legally they have to have a signed form from the student to let the parents see their kids GRADES. You have to keep in mind, this guy was not a kid. He was a man. 23 years old. If you were doing similar things at 23 and your boss found out, should he tell your parents? I mean, this isn't a 15 year old kid here.

I respect where you're coming from. And I think it could be effective. But I think there are some bigger privacy issues that need to be considered.

[Ksyrup]

From what I'm reading in the latest articles, the outcome of an on-campus criminal compliant is a matter of privacy. That's unbelievable to me. I honestly had no idea that, in effect, our juvenile justice system extended into college. What would happen if I called the local (non-university) police for something? Would they defer to the university police's jurisdiction, and then I'd have to seek justice through the "Office of Judicial Affairs"? I can absolutely understand his medical/mental history being private (although apparently not private enough, since that info is out there), but a criminal matter?

I fully understand that what I've suggested implicates some tricky privacy issues, but I've always tended to draw the line where someone's actions create a dangerous situation for others. What falls on which side of the line is obviously something for debate, but this kind of thing does nothing to make me feel like, in certain situations, any one person's rights should outweigh society's interest in providing as safe an environment to live in as possible.

[Antmeister]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

hxxp://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2059730,00.html

Teacher's bravery let students flee


Ewen MacAskill
Wednesday April 18, 2007
The Guardian


A survivor of the Holocaust died trying to save his students from the Virginia Tech gunman, it emerged yesterday.
Liviu Librescu, 76, who survived the Nazi killings, later escaped from communist Romania to become a respected aeronautics expert.

"My father blocked the doorway with his body and asked the students to flee," his son, Joe Librescu, said from his home outside Tel Aviv.

Student Alec Calhoun told the Guardian how Mr Librescu's bravery bought him precious seconds after the killer started shooting in the next room. "I thought I was going to die. I started to make a barricade of desks."


Article continues

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr Calhoun went to jump out of the window. It was then he saw Mr Librescu. "I hung on to the ledge. The professor was trying to hold the door closed. I was the last one out that was not wounded."
When he finally forced his way in, Mr Librescu threw himself in front of the attacker, a student told Israel's Army Radio. "He was killed but thanks to him his students lived," the student said. Messages were posted on the web praising the professor. "No act could be more selfless." one poster wrote.

Man this story gives me chills. Knowing about his past and reading about his last action in life is just amazing.