After being advised to stay away from windows and such on April 16, many of the Career Services staff and students who were in our building at the time gathered together in an interior room (our staff lounge). As things were unfolding on campus around us we were watching the news and hearing what was unfolding. This photo was taken as we had just learned of the first seven fatalities in Norris Hall. Everyone was shocked. We couldn't believe what we were hearing. As the morning unfolded an we watched intently we were overwhelmed with grieve that this had happened. We had to be strong for the students who were among us. It was surreal. I took this photo, but it didn't even feel right taking a photo at this time. I only took three photos as it was too upsetting.
I was in college in the 1960s. During that wild decade, there were so many acts of violence that it felt like a time never experienced before and in many ways, it had never been known before. The assassinations, the war in far-off Viet Nam, the demonstrations against the war, the Kent State killings by National Guard troops, the murders on college campuses happened over and over like a horrible wave of increading disorder. With each event, we felt a sense of impending disaster build. On April 16, I had finished the very ordinary task of getting my hair cut and was paying at the desk when I noticed a silent tv screen behind the receptionist. Cutlines spilled across the images and I was so shocked that I had to ask the young woman if she knew what had happened. She reponded that there had been shootings at VA Tech. I was so stunned that I couldn't move, I wanted to watch and I wanted to leave, but I could only stand there transfixed and horrified. Because I am older and the mother of now grown daughters, I reminded myself that these were two young women the same age as those in peril on the campus in Blacksburg and I wanted to be reassuring. But shock overcame maternal instincts and I must have showed it. The other girl turned to her computer and quickly dialed up information. The other turned away from the screen and looked busy. It took me back to the shootings at the University of Texas and all of the other shocking events of the 1960s that came with less coverage but the same announcement on television...my first feelings were the same-- a sense of shock and disbelief --that I had felt then. I couldn't protect these two--or myself--from the television images and it made me deeply sad. Sad for the innocence of the students and faculty on the campus that day, sad for the parents who must have been in agony, and sad for all of us who remembered this cruelty from a time long ago. My sympathy to the Virginia Tech family. Claudia Smith
Wednesday, April 18, 2007 A nutcase shot 32 people and himself in Virginia tech. He was a loner, was obsessed with violence, and left some notes blaming "rich kids" and "debauchery" (that is, disapproved of other people having more money and getting laid more often than himself - which is a rather common human emotion, but most people don't go postal because of it). The university is being blamed for not acting fast enough on the day of the shooting. I don't know if they should be blamed for it - I am sure an investigation will find out, one way or another - but what I would like to know is how come the university did not do anything after the guy harassed a few women and set fire to the dorm. (Maybe there is some good answer to that, too.) The man has also written two plays that the readers found very violent and highly disturbing. Here they are. I have read them and have not found them particularly violent or disturbing: they are rather violent, but I and people I know have written worse without shooting anyone, and they are quite angry in a teenagery way, but nothing really out of ordinary. They would not have rung a warning bell with me. I wonder if that's just me being desensitized to violence, or the people did not really see anything scary about them earlier and are just having a flash of hindsight now, or do the creative writing teachers and students see warnings much more efficiently than ordinary people like myself. There was a lot of conversation of gun control after this. I have no strong opinion on gun control one way or the other, at least as long as it does not interfere with my pistol shooting hobby (and currently in Finland it doesn't), but after seeing several people in the US point out that the gunman could have been stopped earlier if any of the students or teachers had a gun on them, and several of my friends on IRC make fun of this argument, I must say that those people in the US really do have a point: I don't, generally speaking, believe that an armed society is a polite society. It's a tradeoff: on one hand, if you outlaw guns only outlaws will have them, on the other hand it might well be safer when only the serious outlaws have guns than when every teenage hooligan has them. However, if we already are in a state where people are allowed to buy and carry firearms freely, banning guns from a small area like a university campus really will lead to a situation where everyone who is up to no good can have a gun, and no law-abiding citizen will. The worst of both worlds. Posted by Vera at 4/18/2007 12:40:00 PM -- Original Source: Vera's log http://izrailit.blogspot.com/2007/04/virginia-tech-shooting.html This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.5 License.
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.5 License
Westborough grad, a Virginia Tech student, is safe
By Galen Moore/Daily News staff GHS Fri Apr 20, 2007, 12:55 AM EDT WESTBOROUGH - Andrew Dyche is safe, but for 30 terrifying minutes Monday his mother, Amy Belue, didn't know it. Dyche, a 2003 graduate of Westborough High School, will graduate from Virginia Tech in June. He was at home in his off-campus apartment the morning fellow student Cho Seung-Hui shot 32 people, then turned a gun on himself. On Monday, after learning of the killings from a co-worker over the Internet, it took Belue, who now lives in Colorado, 30 minutes of trying and re-trying jammed telephone circuits to reach her son. When they got through, the campus was already locked down, he told her. Dyche left Blacksburg, Va., on Wednesday to stay with high school friends at the University of Connecticut. The atmosphere at Virginia Tech, where both his mother and father also went to school, was too much to bear, he said. "Our campus is still swarmed with reporters, news media and cops," he said. "No one's really leaving their apartments." The university canceled classes for the week. Dyche, who first learned of the shootings when his roommate called him from a bus that had been stopped, didn't know any of the students who were killed or injured Monday. For that, he feels lucky. The week's events came as a shock, but they won't change his opinion of the school, he said. When he goes back, he will feel as safe as he could hope to feel anywhere, he said. Belue, who moved with her husband, Dyche's stepfather, to Colorado in 2004, said she still feels a strong bond with the college she attended 30 years ago. "We just love the community down there," she said. "It's so sad this is a part of the history now." Dyche said though he knows there will be questions, he hopes students won't turn to blaming authorities for what happened. "It's kind of difficult that (Cho) took his own life, because now it feels like we need to shift the blame somewhere else," Dyche said. "He's gone and you can't take it out on him." (Galen Moore can be reached at 508-490-7453 or gmoore@cnc.com.) -- Original Source: Milford, MA - The Milford Daily News http://www.milforddailynews.com/homepage/x663839027 Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0.
Galen Moore / The Milford Daily News staff
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0
By KEVIN FRISCH Messenger Post Columnist Posted: Apr 23, 01:00 PM EDT What a difference a weekend makes. Last Friday, the big story was brand new man of leisure Don Imus, who was ousted from his nationally syndicated radio program after making a disparaging remark about a women's basketball team. Since the comment was racist in nature, there were calls for a new discussion on the topic of race; a new dialogue on the parallel universes that are black and white America. By Sunday, this conversation was put on hold — along the East Coast, anyway — as attention turned to more immediate concerns. Namely, the weather. A full-fledged 'noreaster made an unwelcome April visit and, for some 36 hours, it snowed slush. Or slushed snow. Or rained snow and slush. Whatever, the result was inches and inches of precipitation leading to flooding, treacherous travel and widespread power outages. By late Monday morning, even those with cold homes and flooded basements were suddenly counting their blessings as they heard the first news reports from Blacksburg, Va. An unspeakably violent week in recent American history had another blood-soaked chapter. In the past 15 years, the week between April 15 and April 22 has seen the siege of the Branch Davidian Compound in Waco, Texas; the Oklahoma City bombing; the Columbine High School shootings and, now, the worst mass shooting in modern U.S. history: the massacre at Virginia Tech. Including the gunman, 33 souls were lost on the college's campus on April 16. Another 26 people were wounded. As the initial shock and confusion gave way to anguish and a search for likely-nonexistent answers, a few reflexive voices were raised. There was right-wing radio host Rush Limbaugh, who climbed onto his high horse to condemn the "drive-by media," whoever they are. (Apparently, Rush has a problem with news people showing up to cover what may well be the biggest story of the year.) There was the almost immediate debate over firearm rights, a customary echo when gun-related violence explodes. Have you ever head a loud crash in the next room, then run in to see Junior standing next to a broken lamp and the first words out of his mouth are "I didn't do it"? Then you've got some sense of the tone of a fax sent out the night of the slayings by Gun Owners of America. "When will we learn that being defenseless is a bad defense?" asked Larry Pratt, the group's executive director. "All the school shootings that have ended abruptly in the last ten years were stopped because a law-abiding citizen — a potential victim — had a gun." Actually, the Virginia Tech gunman took his own life, as did the two teens who wrought carnage at Columbine, but, oh well. On the other side of the argument were people like Josh Sugarmann, executive director of the Washington-based Violence Policy Center. "In the wake of these shootings, too many routinely search for any reason for the tragedy except for the most obvious — the easy access to increasingly lethal firearms that make mass killings possible," he told the Toronto Globe and Mail. It wasn't hard to side with Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine. "I think that people who want to take this within 24 hours of the event and make it their political hobby horse to ride ... I've got nothing but loathing for them," he said. Kaine's point is well taken; his revulsion understandable. An informal waiting period of at least a week before latching an agenda — any agenda — onto sad and painful events would be a welcome change in this country. The time will come for dissecting media coverage and debating the availability of firearms. In the meantime, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg and America as a whole have wounds to heal; tears to cry; losses to mourn. Whoever thought we would so quickly be nostalgic for the days when the big issue was the Don Imus controversy? Messenger managing editor and aspiring president Kevin Frisch's column, Funny Thing..., appears each Sunday in the Daily Messenger. Contact him at (585) 394-0770, Ext. 257, or via e-mail at KFrisch@MPNewspapers.com. -- Original Source: Rochester, NY - MPNnow http://www.mpnnow.com/news/view_story.php?articleId=8158 Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5.
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5
Guns Don't Kill People, Kids Who Play Video Games Kill People...
April 18, 2007 I apologize in advance for the tone of this piece. I thoroughly appreciate the devastating gravity of the situation, and I extend my heartfelt condolences to those families and friends affected. Blacksburg, Virginia. Less than a week ago, nothing would have sprung to mind. In fact, many would not even have known this small town existed. Now, for obvious reasons, it's on the map. The events of April 16 serve as a reminder - a reminder that society is imperfect; that society is unpredictable; and that society is unprepared. In fairness to those involved, the events at Virgina Tech could not have been predicted with any ease. What happened was not a commonplace, run-of-the-mill, every-day happening. I won't even go so far as to say that what happened could have been prevented - there is no reasonable way of knowing that. What I will do, however, is take a few quick shots at the aftermath. Everyone has their own concocted theory on how to respond to this type of situation. Pat Brown, for example, argues that whoever was the owner of the weapons used in the attack should be held accountable for the deaths of each and every student and professor on Monday. She believes that somehow, this would prevent a psychopath from acquiring the weapons they would choose to employ for such causes. The real world begs to differ, Pat. What we need to take away from the Virginia Tech Massacre is very simple - there are people out there that need help. Guns didn't kill those students; the Asian man didn't kill those professors; what transpired at Virginia Tech is exactly what happened at Columbine, Taber, Montreal, and every other mass shooting. These people were neglected. Do I believe in any way that whatever circumstances the shooter may have been put through justify his actions? No. Reciprocity, particularly when it involves violence, solves nothing. With that said, however, how do we take ownership of Monday's events? Do we pretend that this was an isolated incident - a single student lashing out at random? Did this man wake up on the wrong side of the bed, and decide that morning to take the lives of 32 innocent people? I don't think so. Society perpetuates the attitude and the atmosphere that leads these people to commit horrendous acts. If this young man had been cared for, appreciated, respected, and amongst friends, would there still be 32 innocent people dead? Would the thought ever have even crossed his mind that he could be capable of such an atrocity? These murderers are not the product of their own tendencies - they are products of society, as are we all. Maybe they needed medical attention, or maybe they had deep-rooted psychological issues; that could absolutely be a contributing factor. At the end of the day, however, someone pushed this young man over the edge, and was repaid in the most horrific kind. DO NOT fool yourself into believing that we are not responsible for what happened. Each and every one of us, through our thoughts, words, or actions, could spur or prevent the next Virginia Tech. We point fingers at the school's administration, the local police, the county flower... ultimately, we must all hold ourselves and one-another accountable for the citizens we are. Blacksburg, you have our thoughts and prayers. If nothing else, remember: This too shall pass. In mourning, this is BSPM, signing off. Posted by keh619 on April 18, 2007 05:08 PM -- Original Source: http://blogs.usask.ca/politics/2007/04/guns_dont_kill.html Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 1.0.
keh619 / Tales of a Back Seat Prime Minster (blog)
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 1.0
Justify it as you like, I cannot think of Cho Seung-Hui as anything other than a murderer. A lot has already been said about the subject, so apart from the links to his plays here[link], I won't be saying much. The content of his plays being sophomoric aside (in all honesty my high school freshmen have written richer and deeper material than this), I don't think the content of his plays immediately says that he "fits the profile of a school shooter." As a previous entry said, there is no such thing as a profile; each situation is born of unique circumstances mingling with the unique turmoil in each unique individual. However, it is a definite warning sign of a person being disturbed, coupled with his general attitudes and way of pushing others away. Help was offered, but he refused it and did what he wanted to do anyway. One can't help but feel powerless when confronted with a person like this. The other school shootings we had in the past were perpetrated by children who I think could have been talked to—just that insufficient attention was given to their behavior. However, this guy was already an adult—like many other instances of adults going on a rampage, they have already made up their minds and will no longer respond to reason. This is why it is imperative that schools should take events like this seriously. Sure, they are aberrations, but this implies that somewhere, something went wrong. The most immediate problem seems to be security, of course. Students will not be able to bring firearms (or poison, as in the case of Gelyn Fabro) if the security weren't so lax. Guards search bags, yes, but do they know what they're searching for? Of course, there's also the whole issue with of how the person is treated. The school can only do so much—personal and parental problems are already beyond the reach of guidance counselors—but still, the school can provide the student with an environment where he or she can express his or her frustrations in a harmless way. Cho's situation was different—this guy was already an adult, and that's why I believe that his problems were already beyond reasoning. He had to deal with them by himself, and he couldn't. He had to choose the worst possible option. But for high school students, I believe that something can be done. Of course, people are different. There are university students who might be receptive to counseling. Cho's case is indeed an aberration, but aberrations do not excuse the school from not taking any action. In his case, action was indeed taken. Schools just have to be sure that they've done everything in such cases. I've always believed that elementary students need a teacher who they could see as a parent. In high school, they need a teacher who they could see as a friend or elder sibling. In college, a student needs a teacher who he or she could see as a mentor. Thankfully I've had such teachers in all my years in the academe. On a less serious note: Another Mario parody[link] ~ by J. R. R. Flores on April 20, 2007. -- Original Source: http://aslancross.wordpress.com/2007/04/20/in-the-mind-of-a-murderer/ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License.
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License
17 April 2007 The talking heads keep talking about the "VT Massacre", not that it doesn't deserve attention, but this is too much attention. And VT is getting a bad wrap unfairly on one specific point: the notification of students on campus as to what was going on. The media seem obsessed with the 2-hour gap between the first shooting and the campus-wide email. They think the whole campus should have been told immediately. This is a short-sighted and impatient assumption, and is definitely not appropriate in a time like this when cooler heads should prevail. First, when the first shooting occurred, no one knew what the hell was going on! As with any incident like this, the police responded immediately, and their first priority was to figure out what happened. From what the VT police have said, they had reason to believe the shooter had left campus. So, what good would it have been to lock the campus down? And even if they had, how would that have stopped the assailant from coming back, as this may have only added police officers to the list of the dead. My point is VT authorities didn't notify anyone immediately because they didn't know what to tell them! In this age of information and 24-hour TV news, many have been spoiled into thinking they should have answers immediately, and that someone has failed them if they don't. Spoiled is definitely the best word for that outlook. Answers aren't always available right away, and rarely is the complete picture seen even days after an event like this, if ever. So, why are some in the media out to vilify the very people who were trying to protect the public and figure this whole thing out? I can see no reason other than lack of understanding and sensationalism, neither of which is an acceptable answer. --- On a different note about the incidents of yesterday: As a life member of Kappa Kappa Psi Honorary Band Fraternity, as was receiving updates on the status on members of our chapter at VT. All were accounted for by midday and none harmed. But we did get unfortunate news: One of the fallen was a member of the VT Band, a brother-in-arms, if you will. From the Marching Virginians website: The Marching Virginians are deeply sorrowed by the loss of fellow MV and friend, Ryan "Stack" Clark. He was a loved friend, mentor, and role model who will always hold a special place in the hearts of all the MVs as a true example of The Spirit Of Tech. Stack, we thank you for all the memories, and for sharing with us your true love of life. We will love and miss you always. Please continue to keep those up at Virginia Tech and their families in your thoughts and prayers. -the Progressive Conservative posted by Matt Collins at 4/17/2007 08:51:00 AM -- Original Source: http://conservativeprogress.blogspot.com/2007/04/on-vt-massacre.html This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License
I'd been thinking about starting this blog up again for a few weeks now. I didn't think I'd have something so tragic to write about. Probably it goes without saying that my thoughts and best wishes go out to the students, faculty, and staff at my alma mater, Virginia Tech, and especially to the families and friends of the victims. I was working from home today, heads down with all my external inputs (radio, TV, email, IRC, RSS feeds, etc.) turned off, so it wasn't until mid-afternoon that I became aware of what had happened. It has shaken me up, more than I would have expected it would. It's disconcerting to see a community that you've been part of suffer an event like this, especially when you see so many images on the news of places you're quite familiar with. When I was a student at Virginia Tech, I had friends who lived on the 4th floor Ambler-Johnston Hall, where the first shooting took place. I had classes in Norris Hall, where the second shooting occurred. I know these places. They were my places. It was my community. Even though I've been gone from Tech for a long time, it still hits close to home. Back in '88-'89 I was one of the editors of the Collegiate Times, Virginia Tech's student newspaper. I've thought a lot about the students working at the Collegiate Times today. What was the biggest story we dealt with back in '88-'89? I think a steroids scandal on one of the sports teams. Nothing to compare to what happened today. What a time it must be for those young, aspiring journalists. How difficult it must be to cover what will probably be the biggest story of your life when you are just twenty or twenty-one. Doubly difficult since it is the slaughter of your classmates that you have to cover. As young journalists they must feel a great deal of excitement at The Big Story . . . and, at the same time, a great deal of guilt and dread for being excited while their friends lay dead. I hope they sense the importance of their role of as the student voice of the Virginia Tech campus more than ever. (CollegiateTimes.com is down, and the server is re-directing to CollegeMedia.com, the parent site for the student media outlets at Tech. And I just noticed that the Collegiate Times Online Editor, who has been posting to http://www.collegemedia.com all afternoon is named Christopher Ritter. No relation, if you were wondering.) Besides my former professors, I only know a couple of people still at Virginia Tech. None of them were likely to have been in either of the buildings where the shootings took place, but I've dropped them emails anyway. And I've been contacted today by former classmates who I haven't heard from in years. When something like this happens, you start thinking about the people who shared your life then and you want to reach out to them, even if you've been silent for years, because their the only ones who are going to understand your loss in the same way. The news reports are saying that this is the worst shooting on a college campus in American history. Oddly, one of the other campus massacres that has been mentioned repeatedly was a 1991 shooting rampage by a physics grad student (who also killed himself) at the University of Iowa, where I went to graduate school. My other alma mater. That took place just three months after I left Iowa City, and, unlike today's tragedy at VT, I knew many people who were on campus at that time. Then a few years back, in the fall of 2000, a student murdered one of his classmates at Gallaudet University, and went un-apprehended for months until he killed again in February. I had worked at Gallaudet for three years and left just a bit more than a year before the murders there. Again, I was gone, but, again, I knew many people affected by this. It wasn't the kind of rampage like at Iowa or Virginia Tech, but it held the campus hostage to fear nonetheless. So this is the third time I've watched a campus where I have lived, studied, or worked be victimized by a murderer. It sucks. It sucks for me, it makes me cry to see a community -- my community -- ravaged, even after I've been absent from it for years And as miserable and helpless as I feel, I can't imagine how horrible it is for those living through it. Posted by Greg on April 16, 2007 10:48 PM -- Original Source: http://www.tenreasonswhy.com/weblog/archives/2007/04/thinking_about_1.html Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial 1.0.
Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial 1.0
In Memoriam: Virginia Tech, April 16, 2007
April 16th, 2007 As one who worked with school districts across the country, I know the issue of school shootings is every school official's nightmare. The apparent random nature of all the shootings only makes the nightmare more fearful, for after dozens of workshops at countless conventions, the only thing anyone can say for sure is that they do not know where the awful sounds of gunfire will next echo down the hallways and in the classrooms. But no one I knew or any of the workshops ever talked about the possibility of the equivalent of a Columbine occurring at a college. Every school district in the country has detailed policies in place if it ever happened to them. Their teachers, administrators and staff are trained in what to do and local law enforcement officials participate in the planning and the drills. Now that it has happened at a college they, too, will have to undergo similar training and create similar plans. Campuses will seem less safe, new rules and drills will need to be implemented and college officials and teachers will now understand the nightmares of their secondary colleagues. At the center of that nightmare lies a dark, bottomless pool. As with the Columbines of this country, people will stare into the pool seeking answers. Some will see reflections and try to generalize from them about the nature of the shooter and the victims, but the reflections they see will only be their own. Interest groups will look into the pool and see their causes, filling the talk shows with spokespersons who will say that if we had only done "x" the event would have never happened. Others will take a longer view trying to peer into the depths of the pool seeking confirmation of trends historical, social and psychological. They too will see only their own reflections. For those at the center of it all, the parents, relatives and friends of the victims and the shooter, those who witnessed it and lived, and those who somehow made a decision to not go to those places at that time the pool will seem more like a maelstrom in which they are caught and cannot get out. Spinning helplessly they will try to maintain some sort of equilibrium, some rationality to keep from drowning in it all. For some this may mean just focusing on the immediate, the details of that which has to be done and it is only days, weeks, even months after that a delayed reaction will overcome them. To help them survive the maelstrom the college will bring in the teams of counselors whose jobs are to somehow get everyone through this. Going in they know theirs represents a task akin to diving into that bottomless pool and seeking to build something solid. They will work miracles with some and experience heartache with others. Each case will be different, but will they will also hear the echoes of past times like this and try to somehow connect them with what now faces them. Our country will experience yet another crack in its marble-like structure. And it too will become part of that pool if we let it. But staring into the pool accomplishes nothing, breeding only frustration, despair and even anger. The dark pool will beckon us with its siren songs to stare into its depths or even dive in. Instead we need to turn away from the pool and remember that at least for a brief tick in time all of us will be as one, united with those Hokies at Virginia Tech into a collective version of Hokie Nation. For now is not a time for politics or debates or even business as usual. Instead families and communities need to realize how fleeting order and life can be and hug one another because that is all they can do. This time as with all those other times we will pledge to love one another a little more and show it. We will swear not to hate and to watch out for those stray souls who slip between the cracks only to emerge from those dark places with guns in their hands. Perhaps this time we can make that oneness last longer. Perhaps we can remember that kind words can conquer hate and vitriol. Perhaps we can remember to succor the meek, the powerless, the people who have been dealt a bum hand through no fault of their own. Perhaps we can remember that in situations like the Virginia Tech shootings that we are in fact all equal, that it could have been any one of us who died or knew someone who died and yes who knew the shooter, for death recognizes no classes, no races, no languages or cultures as superior. Most of all we can try to nurture that feeling that all of us struggle to feel right now, that feeling of empathy with other human beings we did not know before and whose friends and family we somehow each wish we could help. Posted by liberalamerican -- Original Source: http://thestrangedeathofliberalamerica.com/2007/04/16/in-memoriam-virginia-tech-april-16-2007/ Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported.
Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported
Published by Dave April 25th, 2007 I have been on the sidelines of quite a number of handgun deaths in my life. Thank God, I haven't really been in the crossfire, nor has any member of my family. But gun violence has come close enough to me to be very unsettling. In the late 1980s, when I was a graduate student in German at Vanderbilt, a German exchange student, Thomas Weser, was gunned down in a parking lot on campus in the very early morning hours. The murder seemed to be a robbery gone wrong. It became a murder because the mugger had a handgun. On Christmas Eve 1991, I was living in the Belmont Heights section of Nashville, a cozy suburban neighborhood near several university campuses. My kids were very young. We got along well with our neighbors. There were families all around us. Diagonally across the street from us lived two brothers. They got into an argument in the middle of the night after much alcohol had been drunk. One brother fetched a loaded handgun and killed the other. Without the loaded handgun in the house, this argument would probably have remained a drunken fistfight, maybe a stabbing. In February of 1997, our family accompanied my wife on a weekend trip to New York City. My wife had to attend an arts conference, and I was left to explore the city with the kids. On Sunday afternoon we wanted to go to the observation deck of the Empire State Building, but we weren't sure whether we should wait until Mom got finished with her afternoon meeting. We decided that I would go ahead and take the kids up to the top while Barbara was in her session. After we returned home to Northern Virginia, we learned that a man had opened fire with a handgun on the Empire State Building's observation deck later that afternoon. Seven people were shot; one was killed, in addition to the gunman, who committed suicide. If we had waited for Barbara, we might well have been there to experience the shooting firsthand. Republican Mayor Rudolph Giuliani blamed weak gun laws for the rampage. America's latest adventure in easily available firearms is, of course, the massacre at Virginia Tech. As I have mentioned, my wife and daughter, who had visited Blacksburg the day before, missed this one by about 18 hours. The world press paid close attention to this shooting for a long time. It was front-page news in just about all the newspapers of the world for four or five days. As I write this, nine days after the attack, major papers in Germany, Austria, France, and other countries are still reporting the aftermath. The one thing the world press has emphasized, without exception, is their absolute bafflement at the U.S. gun laws-or lack thereof. We are the laughingstock of the world in this department. People from civilized countries around the world look at the apparent American fascination with guns and cluck in disapproving astonishment. The unifying theme is something like this: how can a great country such as the U.S., the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave, continue to allow this to happen? After all these years and decades, I cannot come up with an answer. The National Rifle Association seems to have our congressional legislators in a deathgrip. One mass murder happens after another, all carried out with handguns or assault rifles, and yet nothing changes. The morning after the Virginia Tech shootings, I heard Washington Post sports reporter John Feinstein on WTWP. I wish I could find a transcript of his remarks. Essentially what he said was this: when gun owners and gun fans complain about the inconvenience or unfairness of having to register these deadly weapons, he is sick of hearing about it. Since 9/11 we have been subject to a series of ever more humiliating and inconvenient searches of our persons and property at airports. Nobody really complains, because that's just the way the world is. Well, the world is also selling deadly handguns on the Internet to psychotic young men, who then commit mass murder. Couldn't we endure just a little inconvenience to combat such madness? I am very angry now at our American stupidity. I am angry at the weak will of the majority of Americans who want stronger gun controls, yet who will not raise hell with their congressmen or senators about it. I am embarrassed to have to try to explain to my European friends and colleagues why Americans are still allowed to buy and carry handguns. The cartoonist Pat Oliphant has captured my sense of befuddlement and rage. -- Original Source: http://davesmidlife.com/2007/04/25/blacksburg-violence-and-america/ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.5 License.
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.5
Tuesday, April 17th, 2007 By now, I’m sure everybody has heard of the tragedy that took place yesterday, Monday April 16, at Virginia Tech University. Words cannot adequately convey the profound shock and sadness that I feel about this unthinkable human catastrophe. As an educator, a parent -- as a human being -- I am struggling to come to grips with the enormity of what happened but at the least, I want to convey my deepest, most sincere condolences to everyone affected by these killings. You may have also heard that gunman has been officially identified as an Asian American -- Seung-Hui Cho, a 23 year old senior English major at Virginia Tech who originally immigrated from South Korea in 1992. The Associated Press article cited above notes that he was referred to school counselors after his instructors found his creative writing rather disturbing. The Chicago Tribune also reports that he apparently left a rambling suicide note that railed against “‘rich kids,’ ‘debauchery’ and ‘deceitful charlatans’ on campus” and that he had committed several strange and violent acts in recent weeks. As a sociologist and Asian American Studies scholar, I will try to to put some sociological context into this horrific tragedy and several initial reactions come to mind: If the gunman were White, his racial identity would go virtually unnoticed and unmentioned. However, because he was a person of color, much will probably be made of his racial identity. Specifically, because he was Asian American, much of the nation’s attention will be turned to examining what kinds of cultural characteristics may have influenced his behavior. Also, inevitably, there will be some extreme reactions from xenophobes and people with anti-immigrant positions, perhaps along the lines of “This is what happens when we let in all kinds of immigrants, so we need to shut down our borders” or “We let in these damn foreigners and give them a chance at a better life and this is how they return the favor?” In addition, those who have anti-Asian sentiments are likely to say something like “Well, this just proves that Asians are so weird, foreign, and inscrutable --we just can’t trust them.” Unfortunately these sorts of opinions are a classic example of confounding individual traits with group traits. In other words, yes, this one particular immigrant was responsible for this tragedy, but that does not mean that all immigrants or all Asian Americans are ticking psychopathic timebombs just waiting to go on a murderous rampage. More likely, I think typical reactions will be along the lines of “Wow, I always thought Asian Americans were so quiet and passive” or “As an Asian, he must have been under a tremendous amount of pressure to do well in school.” Admittedly, these types of responses are a little harder to respond to because there are some kernels of truth to these particular sentiments. For example, some Asian Americans do tend to be quiet and unassuming, although that is changing and also, much of these perceptions are based on biased media portrayals and cultural stereotypes. Nonetheless, the perception -- whether it’s true or not -- of Asians being quiet does exist. Similarly, it is also true that many Asian Americans, particular students, do experience a lot of pressure to succeed. In fact, I’ve written about such examples before and other barriers many Asian American students regularly face. To this mix, we can also add other examples in which various social pressures or contentious incidents have pushed Asian Americans over the edge, causing them to snap and commit murder. But does that mean that Asians are more prone to psychotic episodes that result in them killing those around them? My answer is, absolutely not. If anything, I believe the opposite is true -- that despite having to frequently deal with various incidents of prejudice, hostility, and outright racism, the vast majority of Asian Americans react with dignity, courage, and perseverance. Perhaps too many still keep their emotions buried inside them and need to share their frustrations more openly in order to move beyond them, but as a group, I think that in the face of persistent examples of inequality and injustice, we do not react more violently than any other group. Did the Virginia Tech gunman’s reasons include having to deal with racism as an Asian American? At this point, I don’t know. But if that turns out to be the case, my reaction would be the same as it was in the case of Chai Soua Vang, the Hmong American convicted of killing six White hunters in Wisconsin after a hostile encounter that allegedly contained anti-Asian profanities. That is, many of us Asian Americans face racism as well, but we don’t go on murderous shooting rampages. In other words, my point is that ultimately, what Seung-Hui Cho did at Virginia Tech was an example of someone who was clearly emotionally unstable and that he just snapped for whatever reasons known only to him. I would not be a sociologist if I did not also point to the culture of violent masculinity that frames mass shootings like this. My UMass Amherst colleague Sut Jhully has produced several acclaimed documentaries that detail this phenomenon, most notably the video Tough Guise. For now, I will leave it up to him and others who have greater expertise in this particular sociological context to contribute their analysis. In the end, this entire episode is an opportunity to remind Asian Americans and anyone else out there who are facing emotional issues or challenging situations that there are resources out there for them to access in order to more constructively deal with those pressures before they get out of hand. Suffering in silence doesn’t help anyone. -- Original Source: C.N. Le / CNLe.net http://www.cnle.net/2007/04/asian-identity-of-virginia-tech-gunman/
Immigrant Status of VA Tech Gunman: Does it Matter?
Thursday, April 19th, 2007 Following up on my last post about Seung Hui Cho, the Virginia Tech gunman, the evidence that’s coming out seems to suggest that among other things, he felt ridiculed for his social class background (at least in comparison to the ‘rich’ kids that he railed against in his suicide note and video) and for being quiet -- but apparently not specifically for being Asian. In other words, it does not seem that he was lashing out in reaction to incidents of racial prejudice or discrimination. I personally feel somewhat relieved to know that prejudice can now be removed from the equation. Why is that comforting to know? Because to me, it means that Asians and Koreans on the one hand, will not have to engage in the “blame game” with non-Asians on the other (specifically those who would have been the perpetrators of prejudice against him). Nonetheless, a different aspect to the media’s coverage of his situation has gotten my attention and that of many others. Specifically, a lot of analysts, commentators, and observers have brought up the fact that he originally immigrated to the U.S. from Korea. One example of this is to refer to him in the traditional Asian way of using the surname first -- Cho Seung-Hui, instead of the American version-- Seung-Hui Cho. Does his immigrant status make a difference in trying to understand what he did? For many Asian Americans, the answer is no. First of all, even though he was originally from South Korea, he immigrated at a relatively early age -- 8. According to sociologists and demographers, that makes him part of the “1.5 generation” -- in between the first generation (that would be his parents) and the second generation (those born in the U.S.). The distinction of being 1.5 generation also includes being raised and socialized primarily as an American. In other words, most of his formative schooling took place in the U.S. and by all accounts, he was perfectly fluent in English. In fact, he was so Americanized that he majored in English, rather than majors normally associated with Asian immigrants such as engineering, math, the ‘hard’ sciences, etc. So why is it that so many people commented and even focused so intently on the fact that he originally immigrated from South Korea? I think the answer is that they were consciously or unconsciously trying to culturally distance themselves from him. In other words, by emphasizing that he was an immigrant, they were basically saying “He was a foreigner, an outsider -- he wasn’t one of us, he wasn’t a ‘real’ American. ‘Real’ Americans would never have done something like this.” That is, even though he was basically socialized as an American, much of America refuses to accept that he was in fact an American. And with underlying sentiments like that, they only function to reinforce notions of Korean Americans and Asian Americans as perpetual foreigners. In other words and unfortunately, many Asian Americans still need to overcome the perception that they are not “real” Americans. This particular stereotype exists even though many Asian American families have been in the U.S. several generations, even though we tend to be the most educated racial group in the U.S., even though we are the group most likely to have high-skilled jobs, and even though on the family level, we have the highest income of all racial groups. Of course, there are specific ethnic differences in this generalization, but the point is that in virtually all other respects of what it means to be an “American,” we meet or exceed those standards. But for various reasons, most of which have to do with our skin color and distinct physical appearance to be perfectly blunt, we’re more likely to be seen as foreigners. That is exactly what is going on in this instance, with the American media’s focus on Cho’s immigrant status. In trying to distance ‘real’ Americans from him, American society is only reinforcing the notion that Asian Americans are not ‘real’ Americans. In the end, even though we may grieve and cry just like the rest of American society, we still have to pay a price for what he did. -- Original Source: C.N. Le / CNLe.net http://www.cnle.net/2007/04/immigrant-status-of-va-tech-gunman-does-it-matter
Korean Reaction to VA Tech Shootings: Guilt vs. Solidarity
Sunday, April 22nd, 2007 At the risk of overanalyzing the events surrounding the shootings at Virginia Tech last week, I would like to offer one last set of observations. In my previous posts, I've acknowledged that certainly, there are many complicated emotions and reactions to these tragic events. This also applies to Koreans and Korean Americans, for whom this event stirs up additional feelings that include guilt, shame, and embarrassment based on the fact that the gunman was Korean American. As one article from New American Media describes, many Koreans felt that Cho's murderous rampage tarnished the image of Koreans and Korean Americans and that it would lead to a backlash against them. Korean government officials have also issued repeated apologies, perhaps fearing that an association with Cho would interfere with their diplomatic and/or economic relations with Americans. In talking about this particular issue with my Korean American colleagues, many of them observe that for whatever reasons, many Asian Americans in general, but Koreans in particular, are very quick to personalize and internalize the high-profile public failures of anyone identified as Korean or Korean American, and to therefore feel a deep and profound sense of humiliation and guilt about such events. The implication is that somehow, the entire Korean/Korean American community is "responsible" or "at fault" in some way for Cho's actions. In contrast, many Koreans/Korean Americans, particularly younger or more "Americanized" members, feel that while they obviously share in the shock, grief, and sorrow regarding the tragic events at Virginia Tech, their community should not have to feel that they are somehow responsible for what Cho did just because he was Korean American, in the same way that Whites as a collective group were not responsible for the shooting massacre at Columbine High School eight years ago, nor any of the other high-profile school shootings in recent American history. I happen to agree with that sentiment, but I think it's a more complicated issue than that. The question that comes to mind for me is, where do we as Asian Americans draw the line between shared guilt versus group solidarity? In other words, in most other respects, many Asian Americans including myself have consistently tried to encourage a sense of pan-Asian American unity and solidarity. This effort is based on the notion that in emphasizing our commonalities and uniting as a collective group, Asian Americans can speak with a louder and more powerful collective voice in American society, rather than as isolated individuals or ethnicities. But with that in mind, is it then a contradiction to disassociate ourselves from Seung-Hui Cho in this case, and basically say that he wasn't "one of us" and to reject any insinuation that his ethnicity had anything to do with his actions (which would also imply that some Asian American may share some of his feelings of alienation, etc.)? Ultimately, I don't think that it has to be an either-or proposition. That is, we can still say that ultimately Cho's actions should be understood as the aberrant behavior of an extremely troubled individual, while at the same time saying that his mental illness could have been made worse by feeling like an outsider and ridiculed for being different -- sentiments that inevitably do exist among many Asian Americans. Thankfully, even though many Asian Americans may have similar feelings of alienation, they do not react by going on a murderous rampage. Nonetheless, we as Asian Americans should recognize and advocate that (1) we be treated with respect and tolerance -- especially those who might be otherwise seen as outcasts, (2) members of our community who are emotionally troubled be actively encouraged to seek help, and (3) mental health services should be readily available and culturally-competent. These efforts would go a long way in preventing not just tragic incidents like this, but also in reducing the difficulties many Asian American face in the complicated process of finding our identity within the complicated American racial landscape. -- Original Source: C.N. Le / CNLe.net http://www.cnle.net/2007/04/korean-reaction-to-va-tech-shootings-guilt-vs-solidarity/
Broken heart's here at Virginia Tech
Apr 18th, 2007 by Ryan Lanham This day, two days after the shootings at Virginia Tech, is a day of broken hearts. The eyes of those who love the place realize it is now defined...like Kent State, like Columbine, as a tragic event, particularly for most people outside the immediate community. That set of moments will always be...a where were you when...time. It is now the historical event of tours and commentators fifty years hence. The shooter has ensured his fame as a parting shot of narcissism. My boss and mentor has given over 30 years to the campus from a time when it was a sleepy state school that charged $18 a credit hour, or something like that, to helping it grow into a research institution of international note. It breaks my heart to see the heartbreak in his eyes. His love of the place helps me help him in his work; his disappointment and sadness magnify my own. In some ways to see his disappointment is almost the worst of it for me. I was in his office, locked in behind two doors but near enough to open windows to hear gun shots, as the whole crisis unfolded. He was, as usual, fatherly and wise. I could not help but wonder if his leadership at the moment of crisis might have made a difference. But so far as I can tell there are no lessons in any of this. The whole thing appears startlingly random. Gun ownership is falling rather rapidly in the United States and it would be utterly impossible to achieve any legislative gain on the issue in the face of those who are its advocates and protectors. The student was a loner who had troubling fantasies, but that would only put him amongst maybe 15% of his peers (at least). I heard today at a press conference that 7-30% of the student body is seen for counselling in the course of a year. Mental health is a real issue, and this fellow wasn't even really in the system like 10s of thousands of other college students. The university probably didn't act perfectly, but who would have? And second guessing such a singular event seems work I am uninterested in...it was a windy, colder Monday morning at this huge institution with thousands of drivers and issues in play. Mishandled? Well, in such an environment everything is probably mishandled in one way or another. I can't see great error from what I have heard. The flow of better information seems to be the best and consistent lesson learned from most crises I have been involved with (including this one). Could there have been some sort of electronic locking system or metal doors on each classroom? Should we have had a texting system? Who can say? The press has been omnipresent but mostly respectful, I'd judge. Only some of them seem to be the ghoulish dirty laundry sorts. Still, mourning is difficult in their presence. Consequently, the environment is more surreal than mournful so far. The husk of the Norris building sits nearby to where I write this. Police come and go wiping the sweat from their heads. They too seem distressed at the magnitude of the crime scene. The one Virginia Tech police officer I spoke briefly to...in order to thank him...had a sort of look as if he were ashamed not more could be done. I don't think I was misreading him...something combining shame and fatigue ran over his face. To my mind there is no need for shame...far from it. I know of no one who expected more from these folks. They did not resolve the crisis, but they acted and responded doing their best. That alone took great courage especially after two security/police deaths in this small town within the year. The young son of the Blacksburg Rescue Squad chief came briefly to my house to play with my children yesterday. The woman watching him said his parents "needed a break." I know the father fairly well and went camping with him once. He's a tough and internalized guy. I have thought about his cleaning up those bodies several times. How do you absorb that? I find my mind drifting to questions of who will have to clean up the floors and the walls. Will janitors face that? How long will blood drops be found here or there...under a desk. It seems to me you have to sort of start afresh with it. Empty it. Maybe even close the building. Why do I think about those things? I also cannot help but think of other disaster sites. There was a movie on HBO not long ago on the Tsunami in Thailand that touched on these unspeakable topics. It was engaging because those human issues...not the usual press garbage, was addressed. Many families are about on campus. I'm not sure how people are staying here. The hotels must be packed. There must be tens of thousands of people who aren't from here milling around. The camera crews and reporters alone must be into the thousands. Less than $1,000 worth of guns and bullets. A few chains and locks. And maybe 3 hours of insanity. Not only many lives changed or destroyed, but a place defined and branded. The only sense is one of heartbreak. -- Original Source: http://ryanlanham.wordpress.com/2007/04/18/broken-heart/ Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported.
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported
Monday, April 16, 2007 Thirty-one... now 32 killed at Virginia Tech. Initial "breaking news" headlines emailed and forwarded to my BlackBerry from the New York Times, then the Washington Post and finally the Sacramento Bee reported the number dead at 20 or 21. I received these reports while sitting in a classroom at Sacramento State University - peeking at the screen of my personal digital assistant, surreptitiously answering its silent vibrations. Now, more than two hours later, I finally have occasion to open my laptop to read the full story and it's worse than I imagined. It could have gone either way. Initial reports in instances such as this are often inaccurate. When news like this breaks, details are often sketchy; new and updated information is constantly becoming available. I was hoping that the initial reports were wrong - that the death count was too high. As we now know, it went the other way. There are many questions yet to be answered, but the resounding senselessness of it all couldn't possibly be more pronounced. Although I haven't yet reported on a tragedy of this magnitude, I have covered other breaking news and experienced the singleness of purpose that getting the information to print as quickly as possible represents. While in the midst of the event, whether it's a fire, an accident or a shooting, getting the information out is the reporter's only job. The gravity of the event, at least for me, doesn't come into play until after I've had a chance to decompress - after the deadlines have been met. While reporting, I simply don't have time to make any judgments about what it all means, only to report on what it is. In this instance, I am a news consumer like most everyone else hearing about this calamity today. I am shocked, disgusted, dismayed... and distracted. If I were assigned to this story, all of those emotions would have to be put on hold - it's all about getting the story out. Like nurses, firefighters, emergency medical technicians and many other professions where a level dispassionate decorum is essential, reporters must be able to disassociate themselves from their story or risk becoming part of it. There is no time to think. The irony of where I was when I received this terrible news is not lost on me. It could happen anywhere. It did happen anywhere - this time at Virginia Tech. No one is immune to this kind of idiotic violence and there is no defense. Sure the debate regarding gun control and a hundred other acts of second-guessing will shortly ensue, but at the end of the day, we can't shield ourselves from every nut-case in the great big world. Unfortunately, this sort of insanity will likely be repeated again somewhere, someday. And there will be reporters there to cover it. The moral? Perhaps there is none. Perhaps it's as simple as appreciating each day like it could be your last. For at least 31 at Virginia Tech, it was. Posted by Mr. Althouse at 1:04 PM -- Original Source: http://25yearplan.blogspot.com/2007/04/dispassionate-reporting.html Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5.
by J Lee | April 19, 2007 When I was growing up in the 80s, it often seemed that the world was holding its breath, keeping its fingers crossed to prevent some sort of nuclear disaster. The apocalypse that I imagined then had to do with the world going up in a mushroom cloud, because of polarization along national and political lines. But this next generation's experiences (as E Wesp pointed out in his comment) have been punctuated by violence of a different type, enacted by one or a few individuals and relatively low technology. I want to pick up a few threads of conversation, starting with the comment by ms which addresses the idea of narrative and also points out that we have started this conversation with race. In our discussion and in many of the blog comments I have been reading on this side of the world, the use of the label "Korean" has been hotly debated, some arguing that the shooter's ethnicity may offer clues to his motivations, others charging that to invoke the term is racist. I am curious about how this label "Korean" gets deployed and what meaning it has. In other words, does it matter that he was Korean? What are the conditions under which someone's ethnicity becomes "visible" and how it gets worked into the stories we tell about why something happened, about who is responsible, and about our emotional relationships to the subject? In a basic way, the label "Korean" subverts the popular stereotype of the angry white middle class male shooter. It provides a potentially different kind of explanatory factor, complicating questions about Cho's mental health, his upbringing, ideas about the expression of masculine anger, etc. What I find interesting from our own discussion as well as other articles is how minorities have reacted. Personally, I heard "Korean," "parents own a dry-cleaning business," "sister at Princeton," and "Centreville, VA" and unconsciously began constructing my own narrative of Cho's life, filling in the blanks with my own experiences growing up not far from Centreville (in a similar kind of suburb) and the experiences of friends. Parents sacrifice themselves for their children's education, teaching their kids to value educational success above all other types and in doing so lower their own status in their children's eyes. Cultural divides open between the generations. The children don't quite fit into mainstream American life but have lost touch with and respect for their parents' culture. The alienation I imagine him to have felt confirms and strengthens my sense of my own alienation and my distance from what I see as the cultural center (however imaginary that notion of a cultural center may be). And on and on... In trying to understand his actions I construct for him an entirely fictitious reality which makes me feel (as he has become an extension of myself, my brothers, my sons, etc.) empathetic, invested, responsible, and guilty about the whole thing. I think there's a certain extent to which these incidents become cautionary tales to support our individual and cultural fears: video games inducing violence, fears about repressed male emotion, xenophobia, education without moral center, etc. We all explain the world in the terms we understand, I suppose. But, for the more difficult task... how does the label of "Korean" function on a cultural level, particularly here in Korea? This is a hard question to address, and I am a little hesitant to try to answer it, to (by virtue of having my little soapbox and being in Korea) seem like I have the answers. But, as E Hayot says (sorry to quote you here, E) "pontificating wildly about stuff you barely understand is what the internet is all about!" So here goes, my attempt to create context for you all out there. Kids, don't try this at home. Why the ownership of this man as Korean by those here in Korea? Why not the urge to dismiss him as Americanized, or as a deranged individual, why the urge to place him within the boundaries of the label "Korean"? I'll throw out three contexts here. Context 1: Koreans abroad (read: anyone with Korean blood), on the international stage, function in the popular imagination here in Korea in a way that Americans may find surprising. The average American probably doesn't know who Park Chan-ho, Hines Ward, Hwang Woo Suk, or Ban Ki-moon are, but they are important figures in the public imagination here, evidence of Korea's place in the global order, for better or for worse. I was in the bookstore a few months ago, shortly after Ban Ki-moon was named the new UN Secretary General, and there was already a biography of him written for children, using his life as an inspirational example of what kids could achieve. Where does this mentality come from? From a genre of history writing in which Korea is the passive victim of stronger foreign powers (China, Japan, the U.S.)? From some Park Chung-hee era idea of self-reliance? From some notion of the purity and homogeneity of Korean culture and language? From media which constantly rate Korea's performance in any number of arenas to other world powers? From the strength of the notion of blood? From a sense of social responsibility? Context 2: The educational system here is under a lot of fire for various reasons which I won't go into. Many parents feel they have no option but to send their kids abroad, often alone or with only one parent. There has been a lot of discussion recently on the various pressures these families and kids have to face at a young age. Cho came to the U.S. in elementary school, with both his parents. Any speculation about the pressures on him as a foreigner, on difficulties adapting to life in the U.S., and about the potential reasons for his mental breakdown and feelings of alienation are going to flow towards the grooves already cut by the larger social worry about educational pressures and the education diaspora. Context 3: I think the fear of reprisals against Koreans and Korean-Americans in the U.S. has to be read against the incidents of U.S. military personnel violence against Koreans in Korea. Every time a U.S. soldier is involved in an act of violence (rape, murder) there are protests and reprisals here (not widespread, from my experience, but I don't live near the army base). When an English teacher is caught using drugs or sexually assaulting a student, it is big news here, followed by calls for more regulation of foreign teachers. I think there's a kind of logic that is created by the way these cases have been treated here that would shape the expectation of what will happen to Koreans in the U.S. Thus Koreans may imagine, consciously or subconsciously, that Americans will similarly judge/ demand/protest against Koreans as Koreans do against Americans, if not in action then in belief and idea. When it comes down to it, we have to accept that something about Cho was an aberration, an anomaly; we have to talk about his mental health. Mental health itself is, I think, inseparable from environment and personal history, but the fact is that very few people ever do something this horrendous. But an act like this, like the boogeyman in the closet, has a way of heightening and illuminating our fears and discomforts. And, to go back to the question ms asked: What kind of story will we make him a part of? And how does the label "Korean" play into that story? -- Original Source: http://www.printculture.com/index.php?itemid=1365 Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0.
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0
by S L Kim | April 17, 2007 1. Race Shame As soon as I saw the shooter's name--Cho Seung-Hui--in the NYT this morning, I knew he was Korean. Crap. Ever since I got home last night after teaching, and my husband told me about the deadly shooting spree at Virginia Tech, I'd been wondering, like everyone else, about the gunman. Knowing he was a "young Asian man" made me maybe slightly more curious than I normally might have been, and finding out his name made my heart sink a little more. He's being described in the NYT as a "South Korean who was a resident alien in the United States," a 23-year-old senior English major. At first I imagined one of those Korean students who are sent to the US by themselves, as high school or college students, by families eager for them to get an American education at whatever cost. These students, with varying levels of English-speaking skills, are sent all over, to far-flung corners of the US. But it turns out that this "resident alien" came to the states with his family in 1992, when he was 7 or 8 years old. Wouldn't that make him, culturally speaking, an American? It's not so much that I'm afraid of outbreaks of violence against Koreans or Asians in general, but I worry about the generalizations and pop psychology pablum that will reinforce ugly stereotypes and perpetuate tacit forms of racism in the name of "understanding what happened." You know, looking for things in his culture or his upbringing that might have contributed, all the while the implicit message is: watch out for the quiet Asian guys, because they might just go crazy. 2. Media Rhetoric Already, the shooter is described as a "loner," already the profiles emerge about these killers on a rampage. The photos of him are now circulating, and he's described as expressionless. Apparently, he left a note with a list of grievances and he wrote disturbing stories in his creative writing class. It seems too easy to map the symptoms of pathology onto the stereotypical features of racial and ethnic identity. For a while last night, no one wanted to say whether the shooter was a student at VT, but it seemed pretty apparent to me that whoever did it was affiliated with the school in some significant way. But there's a strong impulse to distance ourselves from the killer among us, to imagine that it might have been random, unpredictable, even as we try to fit him into a knowable pattern. A student interviewed said he can't believe he used to say hi to such a "monster." Meanwhile, as we slowly learn more about the victims, the media can't help but paint the stark contrast between the happy, accomplished, and well-integrated students on one side and the angry loner who hated them on the other. I don't think I can stand to watch the TV coverage of this event. 3. Stupid Politics According to Slate and other sources, the blogs on the left and right are abuzz about what could have been different in the gun laws to have prevented or at least curtailed the violence. There are people who actually believe that the answer to preventing this kind of gun violence is for more people to be able to carry concealed weapons. Fight force with equal force, they say. If law-abiding citizens were able to arm themselves, the idea goes, they'd be able to step in and play the hero. I just don't buy it. I wouldn't want to be on a campus where I know some of those around me are packing heat. 4. Campus Life I worry about what this event will do to the climate and conditions of university life. I worry that this will be used as an excuse by the state, the right, the short-sighted, self-interested politicians to meddle in university life in the name of "security." We know how well that's going on the national level. 5. Across the Ocean I wonder how this event is being portrayed and talked about in the Korean media. Any thoughts, J Lee? -- Original Source: http://www.printculture.com/index.php?itemid=1363 Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0.
The following is a short piece by myself, published in the Irish Sunday Business Post. ~NiK ------------------- http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2007/04/22/story22922.asp Gun-control debate rages on 22 April 2007 By Nicholas Kiersey Six days have passed since the horrific events at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, during which 32 people were shot dead by a lone gunman, Cho Seung-Hui, before he killed himself. It is hardly enough time for students and staff to begin to reflect upon the scale of the event and how it is already provoking what will probably turn out to be a major round in the US gun-control debate. Of course, the human dimension to the story is being played out this weekend in the homes of the families and friends of the victims. Memorials are taking place around the state. Funerals are being arranged for tomorrow or Tuesday, depending on how soon the police release the bodies. The university administration wants students back at school for resumption of classes tomorrow. Professors and teaching assistants are being briefed in the coming days. The regular curriculum will be suspended for tomorrow's classes, in favour of discussions on the events from a variety of perspectives. Elsewhere, the nation's media are already turning to eager 'talking heads' and pundits for their commentary on the killer, his psychological state and how campuses might better prepare themselves to ward off similar attacks. Conspicuous by its absence in this dialogue, however, is a meaningful engagement by US politicians with the question of gun control. On the left and right alike, US politicians have long considered the issue of gun control to be very tricky. Analysts have attributed John Kerry's defeat in the 2000 election to his stance on the banning of assault weapons. The news networks are affording the pro-gun movement ample space to express its views. The views of Susanna Hupp, herself a survivor of a shoot-out in a Texas cafe in 1991, are not atypical. As she put it in a debate on CBS last week, the most heinous of all mass killings in the US, like those at Columbine and Virginia Tech, have all taken place in 'gun-free zones', places where even basic side arms are banned. Such views are popular in America and are not uncommon even among students and alumni of Virginia Tech. As one friend of mine, a former tech student currently deployed in Iraq with a private security firm, said a couple of days ago: ''If one of the victims had been carrying [a gun] and had reacted properly, a lot of lives could had been saved." Others at Virginia Tech are perplexed by such opinions. The idea that weapons-bearing students might somehow have averted last week's massacre seems to ignore the likely complexities that such a situation would produce. How, for example, would students in separate classrooms have been able to distinguish friend from foe? Would such a scenario not make the job of law enforcement officers extremely difficult? President George W Bush last week asserted his support for the second amendment, the instrument of the US constitution that grants the right to bear arms to all citizens. The day before his speech at the Virginia Tech memorial convocation, his press secretary, Dana Perino, said: ''The president believes that there is a right for people to bear arms, but that all laws must be followed." However, the second amendment was written when the US nation was still insecure about foreign invasion. Its sole instrumental purpose was to ensure citizens were equipped to form a militia in the absence of a standing army. Meanwhile, news is breaking about the sheer quantity of ammunition expended by the Virginia Tech killer. Among the inventory he carried on the day were hollow-point shells and ammunition clips capable of holding up to 30 bullets. Protagonists on both sides of the gun debate in the US tend to stereotype their opponents, yet the pro-gun movement seems incapable of articulating a balanced view on the sorts of weapons required by the average citizen. The fact remains high-powered guns are too easy to get in Virginia. Second-hand weapons may be purchased with no background check, and there are no state restrictions on the sale of military-style semiautomatic assault weapons, such as the AK47. As we learned last week, a Virginia judicial officer certified in 2005 that Cho presented ''an imminent danger to himself as a result of mental illness''. As such, Cho probably fell within the category of ''adjudicated as a mental incompetent'' used in the Federal Gun Control Act of 1968. However, none of this showed up in his background checks on the day he purchased his weapons. My gun-advocate friends often argue it would be impossible to fully regulate the ownership of guns. Better then to let everyone carry a weapon so that they might defend themselves and thereby create a deterrent. Yet they ignore the experience of many Europeans, such as myself, who have grown up in countries where gun ownership is regulated quite successfully. This weekend, most Virginia Tech students will be envious of the sort of peace and security that such regulation can provide. Nicholas Kiersey, who is from Blessington, Co Wicklow, is a PhD student at Virginia Tech
The following article was originally published at HokieHaven.com: http://virginiatech.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=664661 It is also available at TechSportBlog.com: http://www.techsportsblog.com/2007/04/17/virginia-tech-tragedy/ -- It's been awhile since my last blog post. Nearly a month, in fact. As a fan, I put a lot of time and energy rooting for my Virginia Hokies on the football field, then on the basketball court, and I needed a break. To get things going again, I was planning on a blog post title "The Off-Season" about how Hokie fans spend their time during the spring and summer before football starts anew in the fall. Instead of writing about our fans and our football team, I am instead attempting to write about the tragedy that occurred yesterday on the campus of Virginia Tech. This is just a mere attempt, because it is very difficult to find the words to describe the feelings I have experienced since I learned of the magnitude of yesterday's events. When I learned of the first shooting, and only one person was reported to have died, my initial thought was that some one got mad at his girlfriend. I was surprised, because shootings just don't happen in Blacksburg, but I wasn't shocked, because domestic violence happens all too often. When the death toll went from 1 to over 20, I am not exactly sure what I felt. I was shocked, but I was also numb. During the early and mid-afternoon hours, it was a very surreal experience watching the story unfold on the internet. It was unfathomable to think that Virginia Tech would be the site of the deadliest shooting in U.S. history. I went home from work at about 4pm, and I turned on the television. When I saw the images and heard the sounds of yesterday's events, it started to sink in. One image in particular hit home - it was a picture showing shocked students standing behind the glass doors of one of the entrances of McBryde Hall. I used to work for the Department of Computer Science at Virginia Tech, and my office was on the first floor of McBryde. I used to walk in and out of those doors on a daily basis. It was disheartening to see students watching the tragedy unfold from behind those very same doors. Last night, my thoughts began to drift back to my days at Virginia Tech, both as a student and as a staff member. There was never a time where I felt unsafe walking around campus or around town. There was never a time where I felt unsafe inside a classroom. For today's students, they will not feel safe anywhere they go for a long time. I simply cannot imagine what it is like to be a student, faculty, or staff at Virginia Tech right now, let alone to be one of the wounded or one who knows a victim. College campuses are special places. I like to think that the campus of Virginia Tech is extra special, but everyone feels that way about their alma mater. When I walked around Virginia Tech and Blacksburg during football or basketball weekends, I was reminded of so many good times I experienced during my time there, and I felt a disconnect from the strife of the "real world". There is a youthful innocence that pervades college campuses. It touches everyone there, from the 17 and 18 year old freshmen, to the 60 year old professors who only know life in academia. Yesterday, that innocence was ripped from the hearts of every Hokie, and it was stolen away from anyone who has spent more than a minute on a college campus. Since the hours that innocence was taken from us, the Hokie Nation has experienced disbelief, deep sadness, and anger. Many of us are still in shock, and it has started to sink in for others. For too many Hokies, a friend or loved one has fallen. However, in every cloud there is a silver lining. We have seen an overwhelming outpouring of support from members and fans of other universities and colleges. I have been deeply moved by the well wishes I have seen on our Rivals.com HokieHaven board, TechSideline.com's Lounge board, as well as TheSabre.com's The Corner board. I am sure there are many other internet message boards that have similar threads voicing support for the Virginia Tech community. On behalf of Virginia Tech and the Hokie Nation, I'd like to say "thank you" for keeping our community in your thoughts and prayers. It is comforting to see the kinder and gentler side of the human spirit after such a horrific event.